1

CASE/TOPIC
Honorable Peculiarities of
Filipino English
By
Lisandro Claudio

The Legal Profession

In the matter of the
integration of the IBP

Cayetano v Monsod

Ulep v Legal Clinic

SECRET MARRIAGE?
P560.00 for a valid marriage.
Info on DIVORCE. ABSENCE.
ANNULMENT. VISA.

FACTS
It is an article telling how fond we Filipinos are of using honorifics or the
titles we are attaching to our names signifying our educational attainment
such as Atty., Engr. and Arch. The author mentions of her mom who says
that those are not proper honorifics and is one invented by title-obsessed
Pinoys
A resolution on the prayer for the court to Integrate the Philippine Bar the
official unification of the entire lawyer population which requires
membership and financial support of all lawyers.
Christian Monsod was nominated and held as the Chairman of COMELEC.
One if his qualifications to the position was, however, challenged as
questions of his being engaged in the practice of law for at least 10 years
was being questioned.

The Legal Clinic (TLC) claims they render legal support services through
paralegals. They post a rather
misleading, unethical and immoral
GUAM DIVORCE.
advertisement.
DON PARKINSON
an Attorney in Guam, is giving
FREE BOOKS on Guam
Divorce through The Legal
Clinic

Rules of Court Rule 13,

Section 1

In re: Almacen

Petitioner contend that the

advertisements are champterous,
demeaning of the law profession, and
destructive of the confidence of the
community in the integrity of the
members of the bar and that, as a
member of the legal profession, he is
ashamed and offended by the said
advertisements.

Guam divorce. Annulment of

Marriage. Immigration Problems,
Visa Ext. Quota/Non-quota Res.
& Special Retiree's Visa.
TLC contends that what they do is
Declaration of Absence.
not a practice of law.
Remarriage to Filipina Fiancees.
Adoption. Investment in the Phil.
US/Foreign
Filipinaas a member of the bar or hereafter admitted as
Any personVisa
dulyfor
admitted
Spouse/Children.
Callwith
Marivic.
such in accordance
the provisions of this rule and who is in good and
regular standing is entitled to practice law.
THE Almacen
7F Victoria
Bldg.
429 UN
Atty.
was
counsel
for the defendant in the case of Yaptichay v.
Ave., LEGAL Ermita, Manila nr.
US Embassy CLINIC, INC. 1

ISSUE
WON these should
be titles are proper
honorifics.

HELD
No. Miss Manners (Judith Martin) guide to proper etiquette does
not include these three in her list of accepted English honorifics.
And even if you look through Oxford and Merriam Webster, you
will note the absence of these words.

WON Monsods
activities for the past
10 years would
qualify him as to
being in the practice
of law

YES. Practice of law is defined as any activity in and out of court

which requires the application of law, legal procedure knowledge,
training and experience or render any kind of service which also
requires the use in any degree of legal knowledge and skill.
Monsod was able to show upon enumeration of his previous
experience that he was able to practice law.
However, in Justice padillas dissent it was mentioned that:
teaching law or writing law books is not practice of law
YES. Giving advice for compensation regarding the legal status
and right of another and for ones conduct with respect thereto
constitutes practice of law.

WON the services

offered by
respondent, The
Legal Clinic, Inc., as
advertised by it
constitutes practice
of law.

WON Atty, Almacen

YES. It is the right of a lawyer, both as an officer of the court and

Calero, in which the trial court rendered judgment against his client. And
upon motion for reconsideration which the court denied (2X) by the CA,
Vicente Raul Almacens filed his Petition to Surrender Lawyers Certificate
of Title, in protest against what he asserts is a great injustice committed
against his client by Supreme Court. He ridicules the members of the Court
in such petition
7

In re Cunanan
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 972 : AN ACT TO FIX THE PASSING MARKS FOR
BAR EXAMINATIONS FROM 1946-1955, The Bar Flunkers Act of 1953.
It has for its object, to admit to the Bar those candidates who suffered from
insufficiency of reading materials and inadequate preparations due to the
war (Japanese Occupation). By and large, the law is contrary to public
interest since it qualifies 1,094 law graduates who had inadequate
preparation for the practice of law profession, as evidenced by their failure
in the exams.

should be suspended
from the practice of
law.

as citizen, to criticize but in PROPERLY RESPECTFUL TERMS

and through LEGITIMATE CHANNELS, the acts of courts and
judges. Atty. Almacen is suspended from the practice of law until
further orders.

WON the admission

to the Bar of those
who were covered
prior to the passing
of RA 972 (19461952) should be
admitted to the legal
profession.

NO. The public interest demands of legal profession adequate

preparation and efficiency, precisely more so as legal problem
evolved by the times become more difficult. An adequate legal
preparation is one of the vital requisites for the practice of law that
should be developed constantly and maintained firmly. To the legal
profession is entrusted the protection of property, life, honor and
civil liberties. To approve officially of those inadequately prepared
individuals to dedicate themselves to such a delicate mission is to
create a serious social danger.

Believing themselves as fully qualified to practice law as those

reconsidered and passed by this court, and feeling conscious of having
been discriminated against (See Explanatory Note to R.A. No. 972),
unsuccessful candidates who obtained averages of a few percentage
lower than those admitted to the Bar agitated in Congress for, and
secured in 1951 the passage of Senate Bill No. 12 which, among
others, reduced the passing general average in bar examinations to 70
per cent effective since 1946.

: "They are officers of the court, admitted as such by its order,

upon evidence of their possessing sufficient legal learning and
fair private character. It has always been the general practice
in this country to obtain this evidence by an examination of the
parties. In this court the fact of the admission of such officers in
the highest court of the states to which they, respectively,
belong for, three years preceding their application, is regarded
as sufficient evidence of the possession of the requisite legal
learning, and the statement of counsel moving their admission
sufficient evidence that their private and professional character
is fair. (Ex parte Garland, 4 Wall, 333, 18 L. Ed. 366)

BAR MATTER NO. 702

(In the Matter of Petition to
authorize Sharia'h District
Court Judges to Appoint
Shari'a Lawyers as Notaries
Public, Atty. Royo M.
Gampong, petitioner)

Petitioner Royo M. Gampong, a Bachelor of Laws (LIB) graduate of Notre

Dame University who was admitted to the Philippine Shari'a Bar on October
7, 1991, filed the instant petition praying that this Court, after due notice and
hearing, issue an order authorizing all Shari'a District Court Judges to
appoint Shari'a Lawyers who possess the qualifications and none of the
disqualifications as notaries public within their respective jurisdictions.

WON a Sharia
Lawyer can be
appointed as a
notary public.

As a general rule, a Shari'a Lawyer is not possessed of the basic

requisite of "practice of law" in order to be appointed as a notary
public under Section 233 of the Notarial Law in relation to Section
1, Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court.

Alawi v Alauya

Ashari M. Alauya is the incumbent executive clerk of court of the 4th Judicial
Shari'a District in Marawi City, purchased a housing unit from Villarosa CO.,
to which Sophia Alawi was a sales representative. They were former
classmates and friends. However, Alauya later decided to withdraw the

WON Alauya is
entitled to use the
title of Attorney
being a Sharia

No. The Court has already had occasion to declare that persons
who pass the Shari'a Bar are not full-fledged members of the
Philippine Bar, hence may only practice law before Shari'a courts.
The title of "attorney" is reserved to those who, having obtained

10

CUI V CUI

contract including the housing loan incriminating Alawi on the grounds that
Alawi maliciously and fraudulently manipulated said contract and unlawfully
secured and pursued the housing loan without her authority and against her
will.
Alawi filed a case against Alauya, one of the grounds which would be:
Usurpation of the title of "attorney," which only regular members of the
Philippine Bar may properly use. Alauya, in his letters, signed as "Atty.
Ashary M. Alauya".
Alauya asserted that "attorney," is "lexically synonymous" with "Counsellorsat-law." a title to which Shari'a lawyers have a rightful claim, adding that he
prefers the title of "attorney" because "counsellor" is often mistaken for
"councilor," "konsehal" or the Maranao term "consial," connoting a local
legislator beholden to the mayor. Withal, he does not consider himself a
lawyer.
The Hospicio is a charitable institution established by the spouses Don
Pedro Cui and Doa Benigna Cui, now deceased.
In the line of succeeding administrators for said institutions were brothers
Plaintiff Jesus Ma. Cui and defendant Antonio Ma. Cui, being the sons of
Mariano Cui, one of the nephews of the spouses Don Pedro Cui and Doa
Benigna Cui. Jesus already had taken over the administration of said
institution when Dr, Mariano cui, in an agreement passed onto him. This
was the one being disputed by Antonio contending that he was more
qualified as he is the older among them. However, one of the qualification
as administrator was if not a lawyer, the administrator should be a doctor or
a civil engineer or a pharmacist, in that order; or failing all these, should be
the one who pays the highest taxes among those otherwise qualified.
Antonio possesses a degree in law but is not a bar passer. Jesus is a
lawyer who was disbarred but was reinstated prior to his appointment as
admin

lawyer or counsellor.

the necessary degree in the study of law and successfully taken

the Bar Examinations, have been admitted to the Integrated Bar of
the Philippines and remain members thereof in good standing;
and it is they only who are authorized to practice law in this
jurisdiction. More so, his disinclination to use the title of
"counsellor" does not warrant his use of the title of attorney.

ISSUE: WON
Antonio Ma. Cui is
qualified to the
position of
administrator as
required by the
position.

HELD: YES. Whether taken alone or in context the term "titulo de

abogado" means not mere possession of the academic degree of
Bachelor of Laws but membership in the Bar after due admission
thereto, qualifying one for the practice of law.
As regard his disbarment, his reinstatement is a recognition of his
moral rehabilitation, upon proof no less than that required for his
admission to the Bar in the first place.