LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador
which may cause, I dont know, life. So, you cannot just tell her I
cannot give you advice, I cannot counsel, there is conflict of interest,
what is mandated under the rule is for you to give immediate advice to
afford a client an opportunity. Tell her, okay maam, if you think your
husband is capable of hurting you, go to the baranggay, secure a
protection order, and tomorrow consult a lawyer in order for you to be
advice on the legal remedy, the legal course of action.

Canon 2 A LAWYER SHALL MAKE HIS LEGAL SERVICES

AVAILABLE IN AN EFFICIENT AND CONVENIENT MANNER
COMPATIBLE WITH THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY AND
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROFESSION.
-This canon requires legal services should not only be efficient
(interuption:Velasco exit in Abreeza, landownder demanding 60M after
all the improvements) but it should also be accessible to those who
need them in manner compatible with the ethics of the profession.
- A lawyer who accepts a professional employment or who accepts a
case should be efficient or should be in a position to effectively render
legal assistance or legal advice.
- There are instances, once you practice that, a particular case of that
particular client involves a specialize field of law not very common or
not very ordinary. In our firm, it is the personal principle of our partners
to refuse clients who has drugs and immigration related cases: Drugs,
because it has been the principle of Atty. Batacan, not to involve
himself or the firm in drugs cases; Immigration, because we admit that
we are not knowledgeable in this particular field of law.
- Accessibility, a lawyer who is qualified to provide efficient legal
services shall also make available such services to those who are in
need thereof.
- The IBP committee who drafted the code of professional responsibility
admits that legal services in the Philippines is not accessible especially
to the poor segment to the community. Primarily because of 2 reasons:
1) because of poverty or inability of the litigant or of a party to a case
to pay or afford the services of the private counsel; And 2) of where to
find a competent and dependable lawyer.

- So even, if their exist a valid reason that you cannot accept the case
of a client, your under obligation to render legal advice, only to the
extent necessary to safeguard his or her rights, thats rule 2.02.
Rule 2.03 A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed
primarily to solicit legal business.
- This is an important rule providing for the prohibition of improper
solicitation of legal business.
-Now we go back to the basic principles we have discussed early on:
practice of law is noble profession, it is not a money making venture,
practice of law being a noble profession, you must advertise your
services, not in a manner that you can be liken to an ordinary
merchant or like an ordinary businessman advertising his products.
Generally, according to the Supreme Court, for a solicitation of legal
services to be proper it must be consistent with the dignity of the
profession, it must be modest, it must be respectable in order not to
injure the lawyer as well as the profession.
- Now we ask, what are the permissible manners of advertisement as
provided or allowed by law or by the Supreme Court in its cases?
First, simple signs or signages usually located outside the office of the
lawyer providing for a brief information: the name of counsel, if its a
law firm or a law office composed of several lawyers, the name of
partners or associates if there is any, telephone and address, that is
permissible.

Rule2.01 provides that A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid
reasons, the cause of the defenseless or the oppressed.
- Who are the defenseless? Those who are not in position to defend
themselves, according to the Supreme Court, by reason of their
weakness, ignorance or poverty.
- Who are those oppressed? The oppressed are those persons who are
victims of acts of cruelty, unlawful exaction, domination or excessive
use of authority.

Second, the giving out of business cards or calling cards containing the
name of a lawyer, the law firm, the address, the phone number and the
email address. In fact now, it is also permissible that the business card,
if the business card or calling cards contain a formal photo daw of the
face of the lawyer. What if, in the signage or in the business card, there
is a catchy phrase, this is true, I dont know, you must have seen it,
medyo naka daan na siguro kayo sa harap ng office. There is this
lawyer may signage siya, sa labas, parang nakalagay, atty. Pedro Juan
(not his real name) mabilis, maaasahan, epektibo. Merong ganun, to
make the matter worst, sa baba, there are icons of credit cards (visa
cards, master card, we accept all kinds of cards), and of course
sanctions will not be automatic, it will be dependent upon the filling of
the complaint of a member of the IBP but according to the Supreme
Court, the inclusion of a self laudatory or a self praising, words or
sentence in the calling card or in a signage makes that advertisement
improper.
[3rd]Publication of your law firm or your law office in a reputable law list
or in a directory, in Davao city, IBP has an IBP directory. It is updated
annually, I think. It contains the complete list of all practicing lawyers
in Davao City including the office address and the phone numbers but
publication in this law list is permissible.
[4th] Legal aid programs as a public service is allowable. Legal aids in
schools, legal aids in the IBP of course, there are instances, however,
that big law firms, may be in celebration of their founding anniversary
will organize for short period of time, free legal aid, and legal and
medical clinics. So, according to the Supreme Court, it is pursuant to
an intent to serve the public which is also a function of the bar, so it is
permissible.
[5th] Advertisements in news papers

- The duty of the lawyer to accept the cause of the defenseless and the
oppressed. The purpose of this particular provision in mandating from a
lawyer to take-up cases of the defenseless and the oppressed is to
empower the courts to demand from counsels even if these lawyers
are appointed de officio or rendering their service pro bono, to be
efficient, to exert every effort necessary because in the absence of a
mandate provided under Rule 2.01, the lawyers will remain
complacent, not understanding or admitting that they were not hired
for a fee, they will just give a token defense or token.
- So in this particular case, empowers the court now, empowers the IBP
to require from lawyers even they are appointed merely de officio to
exact diligence and efficiency in rendering legal services.
- Also, under Rule 2.01, in compliance to the mandate, the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines Bar of the Philippines and its local chapter has
been establishing legal aid offices.
- Legal aid offices to render free legal aid services in the forms of
consultations and in some cases representations before the courts to
the indigence or to the poor segment of the community.
- One good thing declared by the Supreme Court in align of cases, is
the establishment of a legal aid by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
is not a matter of charity that the IBP will only gave to the community
rather it is a means of correction for the social imbalance that may
often lead to injustice. Hence, the establishment of a legal aid system
by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines is your responsibility as
member of the Bar.

-Would it be a proper solicitation of legal business? As a general rule, is

not, if you merely advertise your skill or your legal talent or your legal
service, it is prohibited. It is an improper solicitation. The exception,
according to the Supreme Court, is a modest announcement in a
newspaper with respect to may be an opening of a law office or a law
firm. There is a modest announcement that your law office will open
this particular date provided is the address, the phone number, the
email address and the lawyers who are member of the firm, that is the
exception that is allowed. So because advertisements in newspaper
are prohibited, more so, according to the Supreme Court
advertisements through the televisions and radios, these are improper
advertisements. Radio programs, diba uso ngayon, you maintain a
radio program, you will take calls and take messages and you will
render legal advice answering this questions post by the viewers or the
listeners: Are these permissible? Actually, this is a grey area, Supreme
Court is yet to decide on this particular issue.

Rule 2.02 In such cases, even if the lawyer does not accept a case, he
shall not refuse to render legal advice to the person concerned if only
to the extent necessary to safeguard the latter's rights.
- If a lawyer for valid reasons cannot handle the case of a particular
client, he is still under the obligation to render legal advice, in this
case, immediate legal advice just in order to afford the client an
opportunity to protect his interest. For example, we have a client,
spouses, the husband and the wife, we have businesses, we are also
the lawyer for their personal concerns, they quarreled, the quarrel
escalated and we were informed that the husband discharge a firearm
inside their family home. So, the wife called us, (shaking) attorney
anong gagawin ko? Baka patayin ako ng aking husband.
Yes, there exists conflict of interest because again you cannot
represent one client against another client even if there were your
client in different instances or in different cases. You cannot invoke
conflict of interest in that case because it may escalate into violence

However, we can answer the question, in maybe analyzing the rational

behind the prohibition, so may be if a radio program serves no other

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

purpose but to advertise your legal services or legal skill it could be

prohibited. For example, a lawyer buys an airtime that could be an
improper advertisement. However, there are instances were certain
public service provides programs for example DZNN, in Davao IBP
maintains a radio program where every now and then, they invite
lawyers, they invite government representatives from government
offices to answer questions from listeners, they invite even doctors and
members from other professions it could be considered permissible
as its intention to a public service intention of that particular program.
So, if you take this all together, in simple terms, it could be concluded
that a solicitation for legal service or an advertisement is improper if
there is a brazen or blatant or obvious advertisement of your legal skill.
Yun bang you announce to the public that youre a lawyer, you
specialize in this, you offer notarial services, you offer consultation for
free. However, mere publication of your name, your address, your
phone numbers, these are permissible.

- That is the general rule, you cannot charge rates lower than that
prescribe. There are 3 allowable exceptions:
1.
If a client is a member of your family or close friend magpa
buhat imong mama ug affidavit, ma 250 kay ingon sa IBP
250 gyud daw, this is an exception.
2.
If your client is an indigent. If he/she is too poor, it is
inhumane for you to charge the prescribe rates. Ccording to
the supreme court, if your client is indigent and you charge a
fee lower than those prescribe or no fee at all, you can be
commended.
3.
If your client is a co-lawyer. There is a consensus among the
legal community that if mangangailangan ng legal services
is a fellow lawyer, it is permissible that you offer your
services for free or a lower amount.
CANON 3 A LAWYER IN MAKING KNOWN HIS LEGAL SERVICES
SHALL USE ONLY TRUE, HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED AND
OBJECTIVE INFORMATION OR STATEMENT OF FACTS.

- In this case In re Tagorda, 53 Phil Reports 37: Atty. Tagorda advertise

that as a notary public, he can execute for you a deed of sale for the
purchase of land as required by the cadastral office, can renew laws,
documents for your animals, can make your applications and final
requisites for your home stead, and execute any kind of affidavit, as a
lawyer he can help you collect your loans long overdue, as well as any
complaints for or against you, he offers free consultation and is willing
to help the poor. Gipa iwitan pa ug help the poor, basin man lang.
According to the Supreme court, not improper, Atty. Tagorda was in fact
suspended. It is highly unethical for an atty to advertise his talent or
skill as a merchant advertises his wares.
-[story] Atty. Batacan and Montejo served in the legal aid after passing
the bar, they are compensated nominally compared to lawyers in
private practice. Sometimes sila pa mismo maghatag ug pamasahe.
Atty. Dela Banda, a very small thin man, already a judge, one time
walang pambayad ang client, so gibigayn siya ng goat so naglisod
gyud daw siya sa gate kay dili gyud daw mo sunod sa iyaha pagsakay
sa sakyanan, if you have seen Atty. Dela Banda, you really can imagine
how awkward that situation. Now during their stint with the legal aids,
they have been representing the employees against the big
companies, rich employers. They were representing ng mga naga
shoplift against malls and shopping centers. They been representing
poor people accused of theft or robbery filed by rich powerful
individuals. Nang nawala na ang funding, they were constraint[?] to
move to private practice, and among their first clients are yung mga
kalaban nila sa previous cases: the malls, the shopping centers, the
rich and big employers, the rich companies.
- According to the Supreme Court, the best advertisement a lawyer
could have are competence, honesty and fidelity. So there is no need
for us to stoop down and resort to these lowly modes of advertising our
businesses because constituent competence, honesty and fidelity to
the cause of your clients can establish a reputation that could be your
best advertisement. So according to the Supreme Court, a lawyers
best advertisement is his well deserve reputation for competence,
honesty and fidelity.

- Because law practice is a noble profession, it is not an ordinary

business or in money making venture, the usual exaggerations in trade
which are allowed in business or ordinary business is not allowed in
legal services.
- A lawyer in making known his legal services must not resort to false
or misleading information.
Rule 3.01 A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any false,
fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or unfair
statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services.
-It is not proper for a lawyer in attempt to get a contract or to close a
contract with a prospective client, to represent that he is an expert in
this particular field of law or in this particular law when in fact he never
prosecuted or tried a case with this particular law. He cannot
misrepresent to a client or to prospective client that he havent loss a
case when in fact havent won a case may be due to his negligence or
lack of skills. And ang very common, it is improper for a lawyer to
represent to his prospective client that he knows the judge who tries or
who sala for that particular case that is pending, he knows a very high
person occupying with a very high position in the government or he
knows a particular person who can know the cause of a particular
client because this representations are unfair and undignified.
Rule 3.02 In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or
assumed name shall be used. The continued use of the name of a
deceased partner is permissible provided that the firm indicates in all
its communications that said partner is deceased.
- In the matter, the petition of Sycip, the doctrine lay down in this case,
with respect of prohibition of including the name of the deceased
partner in a lawfirm is actually abandoned by this Rule 3.02.
- Under Rule 3.02, a group of lawyers who desires to establish a firm to
engage in a general practice of law may adopt a firm name. However,
no name belonging to the parties r associates may be used in the firm
name for any prurpose.
- The second part of Rule 3.02 allows that when a partners dies, they
can countinue the use of his name but it must indicated that, that
partner is already deceased. And as held by the Supreme Court, the
placement of the cross at the end of the name deceased partner is a
sufficient indication but the fact that, that particular partner is
deceased must also also be shown in all communications by the firm.
And it is also advisable that it is indicated the year when that particular
partner died.
- The Supreme Court allow the inclusion or placement of the name of
the partner even he/she is already deceased in the firm because the
Supreme Court admits or acknowledge the fact that the good will a
particular firm at present is due to the efforts of all partners who
established the firm. And every change in the firm name will affect or
dilute this good will enjoyed by the firm. And in directly, it will also
cause loss in the good will of the remaining partners.
So in order to promote the good will of the firm or maintain the clients
the clients having served by the firm in the past, the Supreme Court
allows the inclusion of the name of a partner even if he/she is already
deceased.

Rule 2.04 A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those
customarily prescribed unless the circumstances so warrant
- In the Philippines, all IBP local chapters approve of schedules of
attorneys fees, the schedule of attorneys fees would contain the
minimum amount a lawyer could charge for a particular service r for a
particular document. For example in Davao City, the schedule of fees
provide for that standard affidavit like affidavit of loss, a lawyer should
charge a minimum of 150php and under this rule 2.04, lawyers are
requested to charge rates not lower than those prescribe by custom or
tradition or if there is a schedule of fees by the IBP in their particular
locality.
- Why is there such prohibition? According to the Supreme Court, the
prohibition not to charge rates lower to that prescribe will protect the
integrity afforded by the public to legal documents because imagine
one can procure from herself an affidavit or legal document which has
legal ramification which can affect the rights of the parties for a
meager amount for 50php. And also, this prohibition is for the purpose
of avoiding degrading competition.
Degrading competition, according to the Supreme Court, of course
people will approach lawyers who offer lower years than lawyers who
can show more competence, skills and knowledge. Dito sa Davao, as
the law mandates/prohibits as charging of fees lower than those
proscribe, there is no prohibition to charge higher. So the schedule of
fees just provides for the minimum. For example in Davao, 150 ang
affidavit, in our office we charge 250. And masyadong masakit
pakinggan may pumunta sayo, magpapagawa ng affidavit of loss and
will ask you how much, and will say, okay 250, murag ingnan ka na
atty 50 ra man gani to sa iyaha, didto na pud ka sa iyaha.

- Cambalisa v. Atty.Crystal Tenoro (July 14, 2004)

[chismis na part, expropriate and build and overpass, still negotiating
the amount tong sa may abreeza]
In the letter head of Crystal Tenoro law ofice, included 2 names of
individuals who were discovered not member of the Bar, Felicisimo
Tenoro and Tambulan. According to Atty. Crystal, she included this two
individuals though they are not lawyers but merely paralegals because
they have substantial investment in her law firm. Ccording to the
Supreme Court, that is not proper, that is misrepresentation, false and

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

misleading, you mislead the public in believing that these individuals

are lawyers. So, atty. Crystal Tenoro, I think suspended in this case.

Respondent Gonzales attributed to the SC acts of dismissing Judges

quote without right and reason in disbarring lawyers without due
process. According to Gonzales, I cannot be penalized in this code as I
was merely expressing my opinion and I was merely exercising my
right of free speech if I will be censored, you will be violating these
rights. According to the SC, okay respondent Gonzales is entitled to his
constitutional guaranty of his right of free speech and no one, not even
the SC wants to deny him that right. However, respondent must also
be aware that freedom of speech and expression, like all other
constitutional freedom is not absolute and that freedom of expression
needs in some occasion be adjusted to accommodate the requirements
of equally important public interest. And one of the fundamental public
interest is the maintenance of integrity and orderly functioning of the
administration of justice. In fact, according to the SC, a lawyers right
to free expression may have to be more limited than that of a layman
to prevent and to control professional misconducts on the part of
lawyers who are first and foremost indispensable in rendering justice.
Lawyers right to free expression is more limited. The instant
proceeding is not addressed to the fact that respondent has criticized
the court. The court is not saying that you cannot criticize us. It is
address rather to the nature of that criticism or comment and the
manner which it was carried out.

Rule 3.03 Where a partner accepts public office, he shall withdrawal

from the firm and his name shall be dropped from the firm name
unless the law allows him to practice law currently.
- We discussed already those public officials who are prohibited t
practice law: president, members of ConCOm, the mayors of cities and
municipalities, the governor, prosecutors, those working in the office of
the solicitor general.
- We have also discussed, public officer, once they comply with certain
requirements while they satisfy certain requirements, allowed to said
practice. And those public officers who are allowed to practice law
concurrently, whether elected or appointed positions in the
government.
- If a person is appointed or elected in such government office and
such government office or such position prohibits him from currently
engaging in practice of law, his name must be drop from the law firm,
the name of the firm. However, those allowed by law concurrently,
their names is allowed to remain in the firm name.
Rule 3.04 A lawyer shall not pay or give anything of value to
representatives of the mass media in anticipation of, or in return for,
publicity to attract legal business.
- What is prohibited under Rule 3.04, is indirect advertisement. What
you cannot do directly, you cannot do indirectly. The purpose is to
prevent those rich lawyers to gain unfair advantage over others who
cannot afford these advertisements.

What if the lawyer say Ay mali, kadali lang. I do not intend to injure
nor have an intention to insult. I made those remarks in my pleading in
good faith. Is that a defense? Is that a valid justification? A lawyer
cannot escape responsibility by pleading then he has no intention to
insult. Lack or want of intention is not an excuse to use disrespectful
language use by the lawyer. But there is this one exception provided by
the SC in the case of Fernandez v. Tenio. April 13, 1960.

CANON 4 A LAWYER SHALL PARTICIPATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT

OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM BY INITIATING OR SUPPORTING
EFFORTS IN LAW REFORM AND IN THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.

When the use of strong language by a lawyer has been impelled by the
same language used by the judge, the lawyer cannot be (inaudible). In
this case, the lawyer makes an insulting remarks in his quarter
pertaining to the lawyer. He provoke the petitioner. The judge has no
one to blame but himself according to the SC. If a Judge desires not to
be insulted, he should start using temperate language himself.

- By reason of lawyers education and expertise, and may be

experience, they are actually expected to be the ones who can point
deficiencies in our legal system and who can point ways or manners by
which we can improve administration of justice.
- A lawyer who are member of the academe, who teaches in a law
school is expected to write thesis or dissertations or published books
intended to improve our legal system and administration of justice.
- Those lawyers who are members of congress or in government offices
are expected to initiate bills who can improve the administration of
justice, law association such as the IBP are expected to promote
continuing education program, hence, the Bar Matter 850 establishing
mandatory continuing legal education programs.
- Lawyers being officers of the court are expected to assist in the
administration of justice.

3 Important Points with respect to the Canons under the Code of

Professional Responsibility
1.
2.
3.

CANON 5 A LAWYER SHALL KEEP ABREAST OF LEGAL

DEVELOPMENTS,
PARTICIPATE
IN
CONTINUING
LEGAL
EDUCATION PROGRAMS, SUPPORT EFFORTS TO ACHIEVE HIGH
STANDARDS IN LAW SCHOOLS AS WELL AS IN THE PRACTICAL
TRAINING OF LAW STUDENTS AND ASSIST IN DISSEMINATING
THE LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE.

A particular case may give rise to several applications of

different canons such as
Overlapping of the application illustrative of another case
Not every case is the same, there are circumstances present
in one case not attendant in another case (using of the
actual case or doctrine laid down)
It is indispensable to memorize the canons but there is no
way for you to effectively apply these canons considering
that they have overlapping applications

Duties of Lawyers towards the Society

Solicitation for legal business is improper and there are several
examples

- Provides 3 fold obligation on the part of the lawyer:

1.
A lawyer shall kept abreast of legal developments, participate in
continuing legal education program the lawyer has the
obligation to continue improving his knowledge and skills and to
be updated to legal developments and updates and
jurisprudence because according to the Supreme Court if you
failed to update yourselves with the update with laws and
jurisprudence, you are not expected to effectively and efficiently
discharge your function as a member of the Bar.
2.
Support efforts to achieve high standard on law school the
lawyers obligation to the bar or to his profession to, take active
interest or maintenance of high standard in legal education.
3.
Assist in disseminating information regarding the law and
jurisprudence. The obligation of a lawyer: to the public or to the
community, to make the law apart of their social consciousness,
to make the services and the law accessible to all segment of
the community.

ATTY TAN JR. V SENTILLO

The paid advertisement appearing in the newspaper reads annulment
of marriage specialist to just a short brief phrase. The SC held it as
improper.
DIR. OF RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS V BAYOT
The advertisement appearing reads marriage license be secured
through our assistance and the annoyance of delay be avoided if
desired and marriage to wishes of parties. The SC held the
advertisement invalid.
TABORDA CASE
The pamphlets distributed to the public reads that if the people in your
locality have not as yet ___ the services of other lawyers in connection
to their registration of their land titles, I would be willing to handle the
work in court and I would charge P3.00 for every registration. The SC
held it as invalid.
It could be surmised that generally an advertisement may be
considered improper or in violation of the lawyers code of ethics and
there is an obvious advertisement of services or of legal services. You
volunteer your services to the public. In that case you can deny it
again no ordinary businessman which should not be in the case of the
legal profession.

One prohibits in its essence unjustified strong language in our

pleadings when we argue in an open court so this does not collide to
the constitutional right to freedom of speech. This issue was raised in
Zaldivar v. Gonzales.

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

CANON 6- THESE CANONS SHALL APPLY TO LAWYERS IN

GOVERNMENT SERVICES IN THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR TASKS.
For example a public official or public employee (lawyer) was held
liable under RA 6713 (Code of Ethical Conduct of Public Official
or Employees).

He may retire, even judges or justices after retiring still engage in

private practice of law but there are special restrictions.
This rule prohibits lawyers accepting engagement or employment with
respect to any matter which he had intervened while he was still in
government service.

Can they be sanctioned under the Code of Professional

Responsibility?
A lawyer employed in the goverment held liable 6713 or in any
administrative law for that matter, should they be liable?

PNB V CEDO
The former PNB Officer by this rule 6.03., handled and accepted a case
against his previous employer that is the PNB in transactions which he
formally handled while he was officer of the bank. A lawyers violation
of this Rule 6.03 is tantamount to represent __ of litigations which is
also prohibited by different canons.

ANS: Not necessarily, violations of RA6713 or any administrative law

for that matter are not subject to disciplinary under the Code of
Professional Responsibility unless such act or misconduct also
violates a CANON or the lawyers oath or under Sec 20 of RULE
138. If they are administratively sanctioned not in his capacity as a
government employee but as a member of the Bar.

CHAPTER 2. The Lawyer and the Legal Profession

CANON 7 - A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD THE
INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND
SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INTEGRATED BAR.

Rule 6.01 - The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public

prosecution is not to convict but to see that justice is done.
The suppression of facts or the concealment of witnesses
capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is highly
reprehensible and is cause for disciplinary action.
Under our law, prosecution for all crimes fall under the the direct
control of public prosecutors meaning, their possibility is to make sure
that necessary complaints be filed against the law offenders. The law
offenders will be held liable for violating particular laws and that they
will be incarcerated for committing those particular crimes.
As mandated by Rule 6.01, the interest of a government prosecutor in
all criminal cases should not only be to win the case meaning but to
see to it that justice is served to the parties. You should present every
evidence in their due and proper significance.

The IBP is the official organization of all the lawyers in the Philippines.
The integration of the Philippine Bar which means the establishment of
the IBP is an official unification of the entire population. It is expected
to foster unity and mission among the members of the legal profession
because the SC expected that this integration, the members of the
BAR will promote the objectives of the legal profession. IBP is the
national official organization.
Does the establishment of the IBP prohibits the establishment of any
other voluntary lawyers association?
SC: There is no such prohibition. Lawyers can join and establish other
voluntary associations and such may be actually be organized and
established for different causes and different purposes.
At present there are 2 lawyers organizations established to further the
specific fields in law like

Intellectual Association Property of the Philiipines

Trial Lawyers Association of the Philippines.

For General Purposes:

The Bar Association of the Philippines

Lawyer Association of the Philippines

There is no prohibition but there is only one limitation. Youre allowed
to form a voluntary association but you are subject to the limited
provided in the by laws of the IBP.
Section 16 of the By-Laws of the IBP provides
All voluntary bar associations now existing or which may hereafter be
formed may co-exist with the Integrated Bar but shall not operate at
cross purposes therewith nor against any policy nor after resolution
and decision thereof.
They may exist but their programs, their purpose, existence, rules and
operations must never run counter or be inconsistent with the IBP.

Why is this particular rule relevant? Because promotions and

bonuses of public prosecutors are based primarily, if not solely on their
conviction rate. Evaluating the performance of a public prosecutor is
based on their conviction rate. Aging (Gaano sila katagal magresolve
ng case for preliminary investigation.) Under the law they are
MANDATED for their PI 60 days from the filing of the last pleading.
Conviction rate is an important factor. It will be reprehensible for a
public prosecutor to may be suppress a fact which could prove the
innocence of the accused or to seal a witness which could similarly
prove such innocence.
This rule prohibits
any act or misconduct of the government
prosecutor that could resolve to a lawful conviction.
TRIENTE SR V SANDIGANBAYAN
The accused was convicted and he elevated his case on appeal and
while the case is pending appeal, new facts came to the attention of
the public prosecutor and per assessment of the public prosecutor of
their facts and per evaluation of the law, the public prosecutor came to
a conclusion that the conviction should not be sustained.
There is no categorical declaration that the accused was innocent but
he came over some facts which told him that the conviction cannot be
sustained or upheld.
He filed a recommendation to set aside the petitions and to reverse the
convictions

IN RE MATTER: IBP
The Supreme Court actually answered 3 questions raised against the
bar integration.
1. Does the SC have the power to integrate the Bar?
Yes, pursuant to the authority power granted by the Constitution
(Sec. 13 of Art. 8), given the authority to promulgate rules,
regulations to a certain practice and procedure in all courts. In
essence, it has the power to regulate the Bar which also includes
the power to integrate the Bar.

HELD: The SC convicted the prosecutor because such act manifests

that the prosecutor abridged his true role in the administration of
justice and is also to protect the innocent and that duty to protect the
innocent from malicious prosecution is as equally important that the
guilty party will be incarcerated.
Rule 6.02 - A lawyer in the government service shall not use
his public position to promote or advance his private interests,
nor allow the latter to interfere with his public duties.
Hence if a lawyer is allowed under the law to concurrently engaged in
practice of the law, he must refrain from using his public office/
position to benefit his private practice of law.
Also under this rule it is unethical that a lawyer now connected with
the government secretly solicits clients using his public office/ position
and refers to the client his own firm and receives a referral fee or a
retainers fee.
It is Unethical, absolutely prohibiting private practice of law to secretly
maintain his own office, just placing a lawyer there, to man the office
but still handling cases not publicly

2.

Would the establishment violate the Constitution

specifically the freedom of expression and freedom of
speech and freedom of association?
a.
Freedom of Association- the right to associate and not to
associate. Lawyers are compelled and they have no choice
but to register membership in the IBP.
They are compelled to be a member of the IBP and well in
fact, if they fail to pay the IBP dues they could be stricken off
to the roll of the attorneys.
SC: Our integration does not compel a lawyer to be a
member of the organization of which he is not already a
member. The moment you pass the Bar, takes his oath and
sign the roll of attorneys automatically he becomes a
member of the IBP. Hence, it is established to a more
organized association and well defined but very unorganized
and in cohesive group of all the lawyers in the Phil.

Rule 6.03 - A lawyer shall not, after leaving government

service, accept engagement or employment in connection with
any matter in which he had intervened while in said service.

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

It is organized to which is already an existing group however,

such group is in cohesive at that point. So there is no issue
for voluntary membership.

This case involves a lawyer who is charged with slight physical injuries
against him when he applied to take the Bar. Eventually he passed the
bar and it was discovered that the case is still pending.
In defense, he argued that it is a crime not involving moral turpitude.
SC: The disciplinary action is not actually because the crime involves
moral turpitude. It is the fact of concealment and not the commission
of the crime itself that makes him morally unfit.

SC: Bar Integration does not compel any member or any

lawyer to attend any meeting. IBP Elections: lawyers are not
compelled to vote. Ang important lang you pay your IBP
dues. The IBP dues are for administrative expenses.

Rule 7.02 - A lawyer shall not support the application for

admission to the bar of any person known by him to be
unqualified in respect to character, education, or other
relevant attribute.

Just for the sake of the argument , IBP does compel a lawyer
to be a member of the IBP Organization na hindi niya gusto
but it is still a justifiable compulsion because for how many
years it has been established which must be regulated
through a legislative measure considering of the importance
in their functions in the administration of justice. So it is a
justifiable compulsion in the valid exercise of police power of
the State.

b.

1.
2.

REQUIREMENT OF GMC
3 certificates of good moral character that must be issued by members
of the Bar in good standing
The premise of the requirement is that I will inform the SC that they
made something objectionable in the application of this particular
person.
The applicant must be personally known by the one who made the
certificate and can certify that the applicant is of good moral character.
There has been no crime charged and pending against him.
Determination whether a crime involving moral turpitude is a question
of fact In the case of Ramon Galang, there is a question of fact to
disclose any crime pending against him.

The doctrine is that there is no involuntary membership or

compulsion to be a member of the IBP, as the mandate once
you pass the exam.
Freedom of Speech- The lawyer is still free to voice in any
subject, in any manner or even such use is in opposition with
the IBP, so there is no violation in the Constitution.
SANTOS V LEAMAS
The issue in this case is the payment of the IBP dues. In this
case, the lawyer failed to pay the IBP dues for several years
and now gustong tanggalin ang name niya sa Roll of
Attorneys. Ang sabi niya Im not obligated to pay because
Im engaged to limited practice
Im a senior citizen
So he invoked RA 7432, exempting his payment of income
tax
SC cited Sec. 9 and 10 of Rule 139-A which is the rule
on payment of IBP dues
Section 9. Membership dues. Every member of the
Integrated Bar shall pay such annual dues as the Board of
Governors shall determine with the approval of the Supreme
Court. A fixed sum equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the
collection from each Chapter shall be set aside as a Welfare
Fund for disabled members of the Chapter and the
compulsory heirs of deceased members thereof.

Question of Fact- It is determined by the court through case to case

basis so thats why you should present to court all the facts necessary
for it to decide judiciously of that particular issue except those crimes
where the SC already declared as crimes involving moral turpitude.

Rule 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely

reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he whether in
public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the
discredit of the legal profession.
2 Points
1.
Continuing Requirement of Good Moral Character
2.
A lawyer can be disciplined for any matter even involving his
private life.

CANON 8 - A LAWYER SHALL CONDUCT HIMSELF WITH

COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND CANDOR TOWARDS HIS
PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES, AND SHALL AVOID HARASSING
TACTICS AGAINST OPPOSING COUNSEL.

Section 10. Effect of non-payment of dues. Subject to the

provisions of Section 12 of this Rule, default in the payment
of annual dues for six months shall warrant suspension of
membership in the Integrated Bar, and default in such
payment for one year shall be a ground for the removal of
the name of the delinquent member from the Roll of
Attorneys.

Rule 8.01 - A lawyer shall not, in his professional dealings, use

language which is abusive, offensive or otherwise improper.

The respondent can engage in the practice of law only by

paying his IBP dues and it does not matter if it qualifies his
practice limited ni nature.
While it is true that RA 7432 grants senior citizens exempts
payment of income tax, it does not include payment of IBP
membership and assiociation dues. IBP dues is not a tax, and
it is collected as a revenue measure and as a part as
regulatory measure just to pay administrative expenses.

Surigao Mineral V Floridel

This case emphasizes that a lawyers language must always be forceful
but dignified, emphatic but respectful as fitting with officers of the
court and in keeping with the dignity of the legal profession.
Consequences when a lawyer uses offensive or improper language
verbally through his pleadings or in open court
1) (not so serious case) The court may order that it may be
expunged in the reference of the case.
Expunge- court will order the words uttered to be excluded
or omitted from the transcript of stenographic notes.
2) Stenographic notes- official document of the court (more
serious case)If the offensive language is directed towards the
judge, the judge can hold the lawyer in contempt and citing
with contempt entitles him of imprisonment or fine (depends
on the circumstances of the case) in the discretion of the
judge.
3) (extreme cases) You can be suspended even disbarred.

Rule 7.01 - A lawyer shall be answerable for knowingly making

a false statement or suppressing a material fact in connection
with his application for admission to the bar.
1) False Statement/ Suppression Before Taking the Bar
If the false statement or suppression of a material fact is
discovered during the time the applicant is still processing
his application before taking the bar exam , he will face the
consequence of being denied and will not be allowed to take
the Bar and in extreme cases he will be perpetually denied
admission to the Bar.
2)

False Statement/ Suppression After Taking the Bar

He will not be allowed to take the Lawyers Oath.

3)

False Statement/ Suppression After Taking the Lawyers Oath

He can be disciplined and stricken in the Roll of Attorneys.

IN RE VELASQUEZ
The lawyer stated, the decision of the lower court if allowed to stand
affirmed by this honorable court means only one thing that before our
courts of justice a man reputation of Atty. Claro M. Recto can do no
wrong, can commit no error. He has but to allow his name and
signature to be used in a case make inexcusable excuses of his
failure to attend any ___ and the case is won.
SC: The lawyer means that the case is being judge not on the merits
but the courts is in favor of Atty. Claro M. Recto who happened to be a

IN RE RAMON GALANG

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

seasoned and admired lawyer. All he needed to do is put his name in

the pleading. He is plotting seeds of doubt and controversy.

abet activities in defiance of the law or at lessening confidence in the

legal system.
CANON 9. A LAWYER SHALL NOT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY,
ASSIST IN THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW.

IN RE ALMACEN
The lawyer pictures his client as a sacrificial victim at the altar of
hypocrisy and categorically renounces the justice administered by the
SC to be won, that they are deaf and dumb to be included to the court
the perpetration of silent injustices and shortcut justice and branding
its members as callous__of justice.
These kinds of words will lessen the confidence in the legal system.

Rule 9.01 A lawyer shall not delegate to any unqualified person the
performance of any task which by law may only be performed by a
member of the Bar in good standing.
TAPAY V. BANCULO (MARCH 20, 2013).
There was an allegation that the secretary of Atty. Banculo is the one
who is signing the pleadings. During the course of the trial, Atty.
Banculo even admitted that his name was that it was his secretary who
signed his name in the pleadings filed in the court, before the Office of
the Ombudsman. He even admitted that because of the
communication lapses, the pleadings filed against the complainant in
this case were signed by his secretary even without his consent or his
knowledge. According to the SC, Atty. Banculos authority and duty to
sign the pleadings are personal to him. These cannot be delegated to
another person even by the fellow lawyers, much more those the
persons who are not members of the Bar. Under the Rules of Court, the
counsels signature served as a certification that: 1) the lawyer has
read the pleadings; 2) to the best of the knowledge of the lawyer,
information and belief there is a good ground to support the case; and
3) it is not interpose for delay. So the signature of the lawyer is not
placed in the pleadings for a minor reason. This is a proof that the
lawyer has read the pleading, that the lawyer believe in good faith that
there is a proper cause of action and that the lawyer believe that it is a
valid case and not merely intended for delay. Thus by affixing ones
signature to a pleading, it is the counsel alone who has the power and
who has the responsibility to certify to these matters and give legal
effect to the document. Atty. Banculo has meted the penalty of
suspension from the practice of law for one year.

BIARE V ELARDE
The SC noted the improper and unethical language employed by the
lawyer of the counsel of the private respondent. The lawyer in his
pleading said that: a mad fury who speaks in slang english to conceal
her poor __.
SC: He does not but merely to obscure the case and his reliance to ___.
There is no place for these words in lega; proceedings and legal
documents
When you file a motion for reconsideration assailing an adverse
decision, it is necessary for you to point out the errors in the decision
of the court. The decision of the court is not contrary to law and to
jurisprudence. But you must temper your language in a way that it will
still be respectable.
You put respectfully and humbly all the time in your pleadings.
Rule 8.02. A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach upon the
professional employment of another lawyer; however, it is the right of
the lawyer, without fear or favor, to give proper advice and assistance
to those seeking relief against unfaithful or neglectful counsel.
In essence, a lawyer should not steal anothers client it is high and
unethical to a lawyer to exert efforts to procure the contract with a
client who has a retained counsel. This effort may constitute maybe in
the form of a promise for better service than what he/she is giving you
or a promise for a lower attorneys fees or degrading the ability or
qualifications of the previous lawyer. These are very unethical. As soon
as a client already has a retained counsel, he is no longer a legitimate
prospective client, otherwise you will be encroaching on the
professional employment of another lawyer. So it follows that the first
lawyer was already dismiss or his services already dispense with by the
client, the entry or appearance by another lawyer is can no longer be
considered as encroachment. This happens almost everytime the
relationship between the client and the previous counsel has already
been terminated and as a matter of fact, there is already an agreement
that I am no longer my client and you are no longer my lawyer.
However, the previous lawyer is yet to file a formal motion to withdraw
his appearances as counsel in court. And now, the new lawyer has
already filed his motion or notice of his entry of appearance and with
his motion, the lawyer is now considered the new layer of the client. So
in this case, this must not be considered as an encroachment because
the attorney-client relationship between the client and the previous
lawyer has already been terminated as a matter of fact. So there could
be no encroachment. Corollary to this Rule 80.2, which prohibits
encroachment on the professional employment of a lawyer, a lawyer
should not also negotiate or communicate with opposite party whos
lawyer without the knowledge and permission and without even the
presence of the representing lawyer. This is the case of Camacho v.
Pangulayan.

Cambanisa v. Atty. Tristan Tenorio, we discuss this last night when Atty.
Tenorio allowed to be written to the letters of the firm the name of two
persons who are not members of the bar. Reasoning that these two
individuals have sufficient capitalizations or investments in his law
firm. According to the SC, holding oneself as a lawyer may be shown as
an indicative of that purpose that identifying oneself as attorney
appearing in court, presenting into a client associating oneself as
partner of the law. In this case, Tenorio is not a lawyer but he hold
himself as one and Atty. Tenorio abetted and aided him in the
unauthorized practice of the legal profession.
RULE 9.02- rule 9.02. a lawyer shall not divide or stipulate a fee for
legal service with persons not licensed to practice law, except:
a. where there is a pre-existing agreement with the partner or
associate that, upon the latters death, money shall be paid over a
reasonable period of time to his estate or to persons specified in the
agreement; or
b. where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished legal business of
a deceased lawyer; or
c. where the lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer employees in a
retirement plan, even if the plan is based in whole as in part, on a
profit-sharing arrangement.

Atty. Pangulayan was suspended from the practice of law. There was a
pending case, Atty. Pangulayan represents the defendant. There is a
lawyer representing the plaintiffs. Now Atty. Pangulayan directly
negotiated with the plaintiffs themselves without the knowledge and
without the permission of their representing counsel. So Atty.
Pangulayan directly talk to the plaintiffs. Negotiate settlement, made
the plaintiffs withdraw their complaint the case they filed in court in
consideration of the settlement. So na dismiss ang case without the
knowledge and permission of the counsel representing the plaintiffs.
According to the SC, that is improper, that is prohibited under rule
8.02. He was suspended from practice of law for a period of three
months.

I require you to memorize the exceptions!

What is the reason for the prohibition?
You are paying someone legal fees but these non lawyers are not
amenable to be bound by disciplinary measures governing legitimate
members of the bar. Also according to the SC, it will cause confusion to
the public. They do not know to whom to consult in case of necessity
and it will lead the bar in a chaotic situation. So there is a prohibition to
divide your attorneys fees in favour of a person who is not license to
practice law.

However the second sentence of rule 8.02, while prohibiting a lawyer

to meddle into a professional employment of another lawyer, the
second sentence now, mandates lawyers to advice and assist victims
of unfaithful and neglectful counsel. Any advice and assistance
extended is not encroaching to the business of another lawyer for
some act justified under the rules an circumstances and if you want to
defend the act of the counsel in assisting or giving advice to a client
with a neglectful lawyer, you can always make mention of another rule
or another canon we have already discussed that a lawyer shall not

PCGG v. SANDIGANBAYAN During the martial law period, Atty.

Estelito Mendoza served as a Solicitor General. As we all know, as OSG,
he is the counsel of the govt and the instrumentalities. Gen Bank was
undergoing financial difficulties, a loan was granted by Central Bank.
However, they still failed to recover and Central Bank declared them as
insolvent and after the declaration of insolvency Central Bank
approached the Solicitor General:These are the facts, ano ang dapat
naming gawin? What is the remedy or recourse provided by law? OSG

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

informed the central bank, based on the circumstances, declared it

insolvent and ordered for the liquidation of the assets of the bank. The
assets were liquidated, there was a public bidding, the winning bidder
was Lucio Tan and others. Further, as SG was reminded under the law,
Atty. Estelito Mendoza initiated, filed, and signed a complaint before
the RTC praying that the Court supervise the liquidation proceedings.
Fast forward, 1986, EDSA I happened and after the downfall of Marcos,
Aquino assumed and made PCGG to recover the ill-gotten wealth of the
previous administration and its cronies. A complaint was filed against
Lucio Tan et al alleging that their properties were irregularly acquired,
part of the ill-gotten wealth. In these cases before the Sandiganbayan,
Atty. Mendoza represented Lucio Tan and others. Now, the PCGG filed
motions for disqualification of Atty. Mendoza in representing Lucio Tan
alleging that Mendoza actively intervened in the closure of the Gen.
Bank, in the liquidation of its assets and actively intervened in the
acquisition by Lucio Tan group of Gen Bank during the Marcos period.
the Sandiganbayan and SC denied the disqualification.

relatively higher and more competent and exchange that for

experience. So it is not unusual for a lawyer who work in the BIR, for
example, once he move to private sector will specialize in taxation or
estate. For example you worked with the SEC, it is understandable that
later on in private practice, you will specialize in corporate law. Those
who work with the prosecution in the DOJ, they specialize in criminal
law practice.
You are offering experience in the government but you are preventing
a legal (?) when it is already the private sector to practice his
profession, specialization which he acquired through years of training
in the govt. You are depriving him from freely practicing his profession.
If we apply 6.03 indiscriminately, we will also be depriving the client of
his own choice of counsel or his competent counsel to whom he has full
trust and confidence. Thats why it can only be applied when the
circumstances meet the requisites are met.
MAYOR CUNETAS CASE There was a lawyer who was part of a
committee investigating him of graft and malversation charges. When
a formal complaint was filed in the Sandiganbayan. That particular
lawyer
represented
him
the
accused.
There
is
proper
application=adverse conflict of interest.

SC: Rationale of Rule 6.03. when the BAR Associations were

contemplating the rule that must apply to lawyers who left the govt.
service and is now engaged in the private practice, several concerns
arose, and these concerns particularly on conflict of interest can be
classified into two:
1.
Adverse = when the matter in which the lawyer is
representing a client in private practice is essentially and
substantially connected with a matter in which he intervened
when he was still in the government and the interest of this
new client and that of the govt is adverse and is conflicting.
2.
Congruent Conflict= there is No adverse conflicting interest,
but it presupposes that the act of the lawyer when he was
still in the govt practice in any way gives him or deems to
give advantage to a client which he is now representing.

CANON 10: A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS, AND GOOD

FAITH TO THE COURT.
A lawyer being an officer of the court is just like a court, an agent, an
instrument in the administration of justice. His duties to the Court are
more significant than his duties to his clients. His duties to his client
must always be subordinate to his duty or obligation to the Court in the
administration of justice. With this requirement of candor, fairness, and
good faith, what are the specific acts expected from a lawyer. A lawyer
is actually expected not to suppress any fact or any document/info
from the court which can aid the court to resolve a particular case (?).
A lawyer is even expected to come to the court if he comes upon any
fact which can help the court in resolving a particular case even if such
fact, document, or information, would mean that he would lose the
case or his client.

The use of the word INTERVENE in Rule 6.03 contemplates both

adverse interest and congruent interest tests. In this case, there is no
conflicting interest.
W/N there is congruent interest which necessitates the disqualification
of Mendoza as counsel for Lucio Tan et. al? SC: MATTER in 6.03 :
AmBarAssoc: any discrete, (?) act as well as identifiable transaction or
conduct involving a particular situation and specific part and not
merely an act of drafting, enforcing, or interpreting of any
administrative procedures(?), regulations, or laws.

Rule 10.01: a lawyer shall not do any falsehood nor consent to the
doing of any in court; nor shall he mislead or allow the court to be
misled by any artifice.

In this case, Mendoza advised for the liquidation of the Gen. Bank, 2 nd
he advised how to go about the liquidation procedure. The legality of
the liquidation and the procedure are all provided under the law. Black
and White, it is there. In filing of the complaint, again, the definition
(MATTER) does not contemplate the drafting or mere invocation of a
particular rule or procedure. When Mendoza advised the Central Bank
who underwent liquidation and insolvency proceedings, he did not
have in mind giving advantage to Lucio Tan, in the expectation that he
will represent this group later on in a proceeding.

What is actually contemplated here is the introduction of false

witnesses, who to the instruction of the lawyer, perjure themselves just
in order to pursue a case; introduction of false witness, introduction of
false documents. In fact in addition to the administrative liability under
Rule 10.01, a lawyer or a witness may even be criminally prosecuted
under the RPC for False Testimony/Perjury or Offering in evidence false
witness or testimony in any judicial or official proceeding.
Some Cases of Falsehoods which Merited Discipline
1.
Lawyers falsely stating in a deed of sale that property is free
from all liens and encumbrances when it is not so
2.
Lawyer making it appear that a person, long dead, executed
a deed of sale in his favor
3.
Lawyer concealing the fact that he was charged with, or
convicted of a crime, in an information sheet required by law
in connection with his employment; lawyer concealed his
lack of required pre-legal education
4.
Lawyer, encashing a check payable to a deceased cousin by
signing the latters name on the check
5.
Lawyer falsifying a power of attorney and used it in
collecting the money due to the principal and appropriating
money for his own benefit.
6.
Lawyer alleging in one pleading that his clients were merely
lessees of the property involved, and alleged in a later
pleading that the same clients were the owners of the same
property where there are false allegations in the pleadings.
7.
Lawyer uttering falsehood In Motion to Dismiss
8.
Lawyer denying having received the notice to file brief which
denial is belied by the return card
9.
Lawyer presenting falsified documents in court which he
knows to be false; or introducing false evidence
10. Lawyer filing false charges or groundless suits
11. Lawyer falsifying Sheriffs return and seeking the default of
the defendant
12. Using in pleadings the IBP number of another lawyer
13. Use of fictitious residence certificate by a notary public

But assuming that these services rendered by Mendoza fall under the
definition of matter, it is still beyond the application of rule 6. 03. Why?
Because the MATTER in which Mendoza intervened and the matter he
is now helping the client with are entirely different things. In liquidation
proceedings, the issue is merely the legality and propriety of the
liquidation. In this particular case, we have to discover whether the
properties were improperly acquired by the respondents in order for
the govt to sequester and to revert the possession to the govt of RP.
INTERVENTION: 2 interpretations: 1 st- intervention may refer to any
act in any proceedings performed by any official regardless of whether
such act of the official has something to do with the outcome of the
proceedings or regardless of the fact that such official has power or
influence to affect the proceedings. 2nd is the more proper meaning
which we can give to Rule 6. 03: is an act substantial enough which is
performed by an employee or an official which has power or influence
to affect a particular proceeding.
The acts performed by Atty. Mendoza is not sufficient and substantial
enough. He merely gave advise, invoked the law, invoked the
procedure, he filed the complaint, merely indicatory of the records of
the case will not disclose to the extent of the participation of Mendoza
in the subsequent proceedings. He merely performed the functions of
the SG under the law. He filed and signed the case because under the
law, the person who will file the case and must sign the pleading is the
SG.
Lastly, policy considerations were made. The only way the govt can
recruit a lawyer, an able lawyer at that, to join the govt is to tell him to
sacrifice the salary he can get from the private sector which is

The laymans conception of litigation, oral arguments, and pleadings, is

for a lawyer to defend the side of his client to assure that his client will
win the case. However, under the Code of Professional Responsibility,

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

the purpose of judicial proceedings: oral arguments, and pleadings, is

for the lawyer to inform the Court about all facts attendant in the case
which are relevant, and to inform the court, about all laws and cases
applicable to the particular circumstances in order for the court to
resolve the case in a just manner. So the lawyer is expected to disclose
everything, every fact, every law applicable even if he may lose the
case or his client.

THE LAWYER AND THE COURTS

CANONS 10-13
CANON 10. A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND GOOD
FAITH TO THE COURT.
The duties of the lawyer to the court are more significant than those
which he owes to his client. His first duty is not to his client but to the
administration of justice; to that end, his clients success is wholly
subordinate.

RULE 10.02 a lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or misrepresent

the contents of a paper, the language or the argument of opposing
counsel, or the text of a decision or authority, or knowingly cite as a
law a provision already rendered inoperative by repeal or amendment,
or assert as a fact that which has not been proved.

What are the requirements of candor? Candor contemplates

truthfulness, honesty and sincerity.

Three acts prohibited

1.
Knowingly misquoting
a.
Contents of paper
b.
Language or argument of opposing counsel
c.
Text of a decision or authority
2.
Knowingly citing as a law a provision already rendered
inoperative by repeal or amendment, or
3.
Assert as a fact that which has not been proved
In the pleadings, you always back you arguments up with a law, rule,
or decision of the SC. You always cite a particular decision to support
your argument. What is the rule in citing SC decisions?
1.
If you quote or cite a particular decision of the SC, there is an
obligation on your part to include a copy of said decision or
more practically, to cite the particular portion of decision
applicable to that argument.
2.
In citing a decision, you are required to quote verbatim: word
for word, punctuation mark for punctuation mark. Why? Art.
8 of the CC provide that decisions interpreting the law or the
constitution forms part of the law of the land. The decisions
referred therein are only those made by the SC. It must be
done accurately because there is a tendency to lose the real
meaning of the SC decision if you do not quote the decision
accurately and properly.

1.

A lawyer shall not suppress material and vital facts which

bear on the merit or lack of merit of a case.

2.

A lawyer shall volunteer to the court any development of the

case which has rendered the issue raised moot or academic.

3.

Disclosure to the court of any decision adverse to his

position of which opposing counsel is apparently ignorant
and which court should consider in deciding a case.

Rule 10.01 A lawyer shall not do any falsehood; nor consent to

the doing of any in court; nor shall he mislead or allow the
court to be misled by any artifice.
He should bear in mind that as an officer of the court his high vocation
is to correctly inform the court upon the law and the facts of the case
and to aid it in doing justice and arriving at correct conclusion.
Aside from violations of the CPR, the lawyer may also be held guilty of
a crime under Art. 184, Revised Penal Code, which states that any
person who shall knowingly offer in evidence a false witness or
testimony in any judicial or official proceeding, shall be punished as
guilty of false testimony and shall suffer the respective penalties duly
provided.

VINUYA v. EXECUTIVE SEC Japanese comfort women filed a case for

relief. In MR, the ponente was J. del Castillo. The petitioners allege that
the latter committed plagiarism because J. del Castillo in defending the
ruling of the SC, lifted portions in toto and omitted the citations or did
not cite properly. Of course, you would not expect the SC to admit that
he committed plagiarism. CJ Corona actually wrote a decision
explaining that the strict rules of plagiarism do not apply to judges and
justices like del Castillo. According to CJ Corona, the common and
ordinary notion of plagiarism as it applies in the literature and
academe, do not strictly apply to legal writing specially judicial writing.
The high-esteem accorded to originality in the academe and literature
of course is expected considering that in the academe for example,
you write thesis or dissertation to get a degree, distinctions,
scholarships, awards, accolades. In legal and judicial writing however,
these are not possible. While in the former, you write to get an award,
in the latter, you write in order to resolve a dispute or controversy, to
help and inform the court to resolve a dispute or controversy. SC
decision: Because of the need to be precise and correct, judges and
practitioners alike by practice and tradition, usually lift passages from
such precedents of writings, at times omitting without malicious intent
attributions to the originators. The tendency to copy in law is readily
understandable. In law, accuracy of the words is everything. Legal
disputes often center around the way in which obligations have been
expressed in legal documents, and how the facts of the real world fill
the meaning of the words in which the obligation is contained. In a
sense therefore, the community of the lawyers have to get (?)
contributed to this body of knowledge language and expression which
is common property and may be utilized, develop, and (?) for
everyone Originality in law is imbued with criticism. It is only the
arrogant fool or the truly gifted who will depart entirely from the
established template and reformulate an existing idea in the belief that
in doing so, they will improve it.

What are the cases of Falsehoods which merited discipline by

the Supreme Court?

But of course, in writing your pleadings, and other documents

pleading before a particular court, nothing prevents you from offering
your own interpretation of a particular provision or your own
interpretation of a particular portion of a decision. In fact, your
volunteering of your own interpretation is necessary if such
interpretation is offered in considering the attendant circumstances of
the case. If it is not acceptable, the court rendering the decision will
just tell that the interpretation offered by the counsel of the plaintiffs is
mistaken and all. But with respect to the decision, it must not be
misquoted, in fact, it must be quoted, in toto, word for word.

1.

Lawyers falsely stating in a deed of sale that property is free

from all liens and encumbrances when it is not so. (Sevilla v.
Zoleta, A.C. No. 31, March 28, 1955)

2.

Lawyers making it appear that a person, long dead, executed

a deed of sale, in his favor. (Monterey v. Arayata, Per. Rec.
Nos 3527, 3408, August 23, 1935)

3.

Lawyer, encashing a check payable to a deceased cousin by

signing the latters name on the check. (In re: Samaniego,
A.C. No. 74, November 20, 1959)

4.

Lawyer falsifying a power of attorney and used it in

collecting the money due to the principal and appropriating
the money for his own benefit. (In re: Rusina, A.C. No. 270,
May 29, 1959)

5.

Lawyer alleging in one pleading that his clients were merely

lessees of the property involved, and alleged in a later
pleading that the same clients were the owners of the same
property where there are false allegations in the pleadings.
(Chavez v. Viola, GR No. 2152, 19 April 1991)

6.

Lawyer uttering falsehood in a Motion to Dismiss. (Martin v.

Moreno, A.C. No. 1432, May 21, 1984)

7.

Lawyer denying having received the notice to file brief which

is belied by the return card. (Ragasajo v. IAC, G.R. No. L69129, August 31, 1987)

8.

Lawyer presenting falsified documents in court wich he

knows to be false. (Berenguer v. Carranza, A.C. No. 716,
January 30, 1969)

9.

Lawyer filing false charges or groundless suits. (Retuya v.

Gorduiz, A.C. No. 1388, March 28, 1980)

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

Rule 10.02 A lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or

misrepresent the contents of a paper, the language or the
argument of opposing counsel, or the text of a decision or
authority, or knowingly cite as a law a provision already
rendered inoperative by repeal or amendment, or assert as a
fact that which has not been proved.

CANON 11. A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND MAINTAIN THE

RESPECT DUE TO THE COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND
SHOULD INSIST ON SIMILAR CONDUCT BY OTHERS

The respect demanded by the canons is not only toward the Judges
and Justices but also to other officers of the courts like the Clerks of
Court, Sherrifs and other judicial officers who take part in the judicial
work. Lawyers must also exert efforst that others, including their own
clients and witnesses, shall deal with the courts and their judicial
officers with respect.

Digesting Rule 10.02, what are the 3 things prohibited:

1.

Knowingly misquoting or misrepresenting

a)
b)
c)

Contents of a paper;
Language or argument of opposing counsel; and
Text of a decision or authority.

2.

Knowingly citing as law, a provision already rendered

inoperative by repeal or amendment; and

3.

Asserting as a fact that which has not been proved.

Issue: Judicial Criticism v. Free Speech;

Case:
IN RE: PETITION TO DISQUALIFY ATTY. LEONARD DE VERA, ON
LEGAL AND MORAL GROUNDS, FROM BEING ELECTED IBP
GOVERNOR FOR EASTERN MINDANAO IN THE MAY 31, IBP
ELECTIONS; A.C. No. 6052. December 11, 2003

Rule in the quotation of a decision: When a lawyer makes a

quotation of a decision in his pleadings, he should quote the same
verbatim to avoid misleading the court. Cite case of Insular Life
Assurance Co. Employees Assn v. Insular life Assurance Co., 37 S 244.
In citing the courts decisions and rulings, it is the bounden duty of
courts, judges and lawyers to reproduce or copy the same word-forword and punctuation mark-for-punctuation mark.

Pobre v. Senator Santiago, A.C. No. 7399, Aug. 25, 2009

Rule 11.01 A lawyer shall appear in court properly attired.

Rule 11.02 A lawyer shall punctually appear at court hearings.

There is the danger that if not faithfully and exactly quoted,

the decisions and rulings of this Court may lose their proper
and correct meaning, to the detriment of other courts, lawyers
and the public who may thereby be misled.

It Is the duty of the lawyer not only to the courts, but also to his client,
opposing counsel and the public to be punctual in attendance. IN any
case, he is further demanded to delay no man for money or malice.
Lack of punctuality interferes in the speedy administration of justice.

Read the ff case:

Rule 11.03 A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous offensive or

menacing language or behavior before the courts.

Allied Banking Corp vs. CA, G.R. No. 144412. November 18, 2003
Muoz vs. CA and Delia Sutton
Adez Realty, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals

Lawyers language and behavior before the courts should be dignified.

The rule has similar objectives as Rule 8.01, which states that A
lawyer shall not, in his professional dealings, use language which is
abusive, offensive or otherwise improper. Rule 8.01 is general while
this Rule 11.03 specifies language and behavior before the courts.

Rule 10.03 A lawyer shall observe the rules of procedure and

shall not misuse them to defeat the ends of justice.
A litigation is not a game of technicalities in which one, more deeply
schooled and skilled in the subtle art of movement and position,
entraps and destroys the other. It is, rather, a contest in which each
contending party fully and fairly lays before the court the facts in issue
and then, brushing aside as wholly trivial and indecisive all
imperfections of form and technicalities of procedure, asks that justice
be done upon the merits.

The duty to observe and maintain respect is not a one-way duty from a
lawyer to a judge. A judge should also be courteous to counsel,
especially those who are young and inexperienced and to all those
appearing or concerned in the administration of justice.
Case:

Case:

Rheem v. Ferrer, G.R. L-22979, 26 June 1967

Judge Manahan v. Atty. Flores

Eternal Gardens Memorial Park v. CA, GR 123698, 5 Aug 1998

Rule 11.04 A lawyer shall not attribute to a Judge motives not

supported by the record or have no materiality to the case.

Rule 10.04 A lawyer shall, when filing a pleading, furnish the

opposing party with a copy thereof, together with all the
documents annexed thereto. Unless a motion is ex parte, he
should set it for hearing, with sufficient notice to the other
party.

The rule does not preclude a lawyer from criticizing judicial conduct.
The rule allows such criticism so long as it is supported by the record or
is material to the case. His right to criticize the acts of courts and
judges in a proper and respectful way and through legitimate channels
is well recognized.

The reason for the rule is to prevent unfairness, to avoid surprises and
back-stabbing. Cards of the lawyers must be laid on the table for
openness and transparency. Parties must also furnish the adverse party
copies of all documents attached to their pleadings, this is no matter
how thick the annexes to the pleadings are.

In Re: Almacen, G.R. No. L-27654, Feb. 18, 1970

Note: As citizen and officer of the court, every lawyer is expected not
only to exercise the right, but also to consider it his duty to expose the
shortcomings and indiscretions of courts and judges. But it is the
cardinal condition of all such criticism that it shall be bona fide, and
shall not spill over the walls of decency and propriety.

Motions must be set for hearing. Motions must be in writing except

those made in open court or in the course of a hearing or trial. They
must be set for hearing by the movant, that is on a specific date and
time for their consideration by the court and generally in the presence
of the adverse party unless the latter does not appear despite notice.
The adverse party must be notified at least 3 days before the date
fixed in the Motion to give him opportunity to be heard.

Lawyer can demand that the misbehavior of a Judge be placed

on record. In this case, the lawyers act is not contemptuous.
There are times when it is the judge who misbehaved during a court
proceeding. The affected lawyer may demand that the incident be
made of record.

Motions which do not prejudice the rights of the adverse party may be
heard and considered ex parte such as harmless motions for extension
of time to file pleadings to reset hearing, to cancel hearing.
Issue: Can you file through facsimile?
124893, 18 April 1997)

No. (Garvida v. Sales, GR

Rule 11.05 A lawyer shall not criticize the personal or official

conduct of a judge in an insulting and intemperate language.

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

Case:

Test: The test to determine whether a party has violated the rule
against forum shopping is whether the elements of litispendentia are
present or whether a final judgment in one case will amount to res
judicata in the other.

Re: Letter of the UP Faculty

Effect of forum shopping: dismissal of all actions pending in the

different courts without prejudice to the taking of appropriate actions
against the counsel or party concerned.

Rule 11.06 A lawyer shall submit grievances against a Judge to

the proper authorities only
Proper authority: Supreme Court (Thru the Office of the Court
Administrator)

Applies only to pending cases involving the same parties,

causes of action, and reliefs prayed for. If one case had already
been litigated before (the decision therein having become final and
executor) and it is refilled by the same party, the defense of the
defendant should be res judicata and not forum shopping.

An administrative complaint is not an appropriate remedy where

judicial recourse is still available, such as a motion for reconsideration,
an appeal, or a petition for certiorari, unless the assailed order or
decision is tainted with fraud, malice, or dishonesty. (Santiago III v.
Justice Enriquez, Jr. A.M. No. CA-09-47-J, February 13, 2009)

Why is forum shopping detrimental to the administration of

justice?

What about criminal cases? If cognizable by the Ombudsman, must be

referred to the Supreme Court for determination as to whether an
administrative aspect is involved. In the meantime that the
administrative matter is pending before the SC, the Ombudsman must
defer action of the criminal complaint against the judge or court
personnel. (Caoibes v. Ombudsman, 361 SCRA 395)

Litigation must end and terminate sometime and somewhere, and it is

essential to an effective and efficient administration of justice that
once a judgment has become final the winning party be not, through
subterfuge, and misuse of legal process, deprived of that verdict.
For just as a losing party has the right to file an appeal within the
prescribed period, the winning party also has the correlative right to
enjoy the finality of the resolution of his case by the execution and
satisfaction of the judgment, which is the life of the law.

This, however, does not apply to the Department of Justice which may
proceed with its investigation of and consequent filing of information
against a judge.

Access to the courts is guaranteed. But there must be a limit thereto.

Once a litigant's rights have been adjudicated in a valid final judgment
of a competent court, he should not be granted an unbridled license to
come back for another try. The prevailing party should not be harassed
by subsequent suits. For, if endless litigations were to be encouraged,
then unscrupulous litigants will multiply in number to the detriment of
the administration of justice.

CANON 12 A LAWYER SHALL EXERT EVERY EFFORT AND

CONSIDER IT HIS DUTY TO ASSIST IN THE SPEEDY AND
EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
This Canon contemplates the act of lawyers in delaying the disposition
of cases, more often than not, with the use of technicalities. All persons
shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all
judicial, quasi-judicial or administrative bodies. A lawyer shall exert
every effort and consider it his duty to assist in the speedy and
efficient administration of justice.

Sanctions for violation:

The plaintiff or principal party shall certify under oath in the complaint
or other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief, or in a sworn
certification annexed thereto and simultaneously filed therewith: (a)
that he has not theretofore commenced any action or filed any claim
involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency
and, to the best of his knowledge, no such other action or claim is
pending therein; (b) if there is such other pending action or claim, a
complete statement of the present status thereof; and (c) if he should
thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed
or is pending, he shall report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to
the court wherein his aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has
been filed.

The dilatory tactics of the defense counsel and the failure of both the
judge and the fiscal to take effective counter measures to obviate the
delaying acts constitute obstruction of justice. (People v. Jardin, G.R.
Nos. L-33037-42, Aug. 17, 1983)
Q: What are acts which amount to obstruction of justice?
A: Instructing a complaining witness not to appear at trial, asking a
client to plead guilty to a crime he did not commit, advising a client to
escape from prison, employing dilatory tactics, prosecuting clearly
frivolous cases or appeals, filing multiple actions.

Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall not be curable

by mere amendment of the complaint or other initiatory pleading but
shall be cause for the dismissal of the case without prejudice, unless
otherwise provided, upon motion and after hearing. The submission of
a false certification or non-compliance with any of the undertakings
therein shall constitute indirect contempt of court, without prejudice to
the corresponding administrative and criminal actions. If the acts of the
party or his counsel clearly constitute willful and deliberate forum
shopping, the same shall be ground for summary dismissal with
prejudice and shall constitute direct contempt, as well as a cause for
administrative sanctions.

Rule 12.01 A lawyer shall not appear for trial unless he has
adequately prepared himself with the law and the facts of his
case, the evidence he will adduce and the order of its
profference. He should also be ready with the original
documents for comparison with the copies.

Rule 12.02 A lawyer shall not file multiple actions arising from
the same cause.
Forum Shopping: There is forum shopping when as a result of an
adverse opinion in one forum, a party seeks a favorable opinion (other
than by appeal or certiorari) in another or when he institutes two or
more actions or proceedings grounded on the same cause, on the
gamble that one or the other court would make a favorable disposition.

Rule 12.03 A lawyer shall not, after obtaining extension of time

to file pleadings, memoranda or briefs, let the period lapse
without submitting the same or offering an explanation for his
failure to do so.

The most important factor in determining the existence of forum

shopping is the vexation caused the courts and parties-litigants by a
party who asks different courts to rule on the same or related causes
or grant the same or substantially the same reliefs.

Note: The court censures the practice of counsels who secures

repeated extensions of time to file their pleadings and thereafter
simply let the period lapse without submitting the pleading or even an
explanation or manifestation of their failure to do so. (Achacoso v. CA,
G.R. No. L-35867, June 28, 1973).

Elements: The elements of forum shopping are: (a) identity of parties

or at least such parties as represent the same interests in both actions;
(b) identity of the rights asserted and the reliefs prayed for, the relief
being founded on the same facts; and (c) the identity of the two
preceding particulars, such that any judgment rendered in the other
action will, regardless of which party is successful, amount to res
judicata in the action under consideration.

Asking for extension of time must be in good faith. Otherwise, it is an

obstruction of justice and the lawyer is subject to discipline. (CPR
Annotated, PhilJA)
The same rule applies more forcefully to motion for continuance.
Postponement is not a matter of right but of sound judicial discretion.
(Edrial v. Quilat-Quilat, G.R. No. 133625, Sept. 6, 2000)

10

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

Note: It is understandable for a party to make full use of every

conceivable legal defense the law allows it. However, of such attempts
to evade liability to which a party should respond, it must ever be kept
in mind that procedural rules are intended as an aid to justice, not as
means for its frustration.

1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions and

from harsh or insulting demeanor;
2. Not to be detained longer than the interest of justice requires;
3. Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue;
4. Not to give any answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty
for an offense unless otherwise provided by law; or
5. Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his reputation,
unless it be the very fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact in
issue would be presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact of his
previous and final conviction for an offense. (Sec. 3, Rule 132 of RRC)

Once a judgment becomes final and executory, the prevailing party

should not be denied the fruits of his victory by some subterfuge
devised by the losing party. Unjustified delay in the enforcement in the
enforcement of a judgment sets at naught the role of the courts in
disposing justiciable controversies with finality. (Aguilar v. Manila
Banking Corporation, GR No. 157911, September 19, 2006)

Rule 12.08 A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf of his

client, except: (a) on formal matters, such as the mailing,
authentication or custody of an instrument and the like; or (b)
on substantial matters, in cases where his testimony is
essential to the end of justice, in which event he must, during
his testimony, entrust the trial of the case to another counsel.

Lawyers should not resort to nor abet the resort of their clients, to a
series of actions and petitions for the purpose of thwarting the
execution of a judgment that has long become final and executory.
(Cobb-Perez v. Lantin, No. L-22320, May 22, 1968)

Rationale: The underlying reason for the impropriety of a lawyer acting

in that dual capacity lies in the difference between the respective
functions of a witness and an advocate. The function of a witness is to
tell the facts as he recalls them in answer to questions (objective).
The function of an advocate is that of a partisan. It is difficult to
distinguish between the zeal of an advocate and the fairness and
impartiality of a disinterested witness.

Rule 12.04 A lawyer shall not unduly delay a case, impede the
execution of a judgment or misuse court processes.
Relate to Rule 10.03 and case of Eternal Gardens.

Rule 12.05 A lawyer shall refrain from talking to his witness

during a break or recess in the trial, while the witness is still
under examination.

Q: What are the instances when a lawyer may not testify as a

witness in a case which he is handling for a client?

Rationale: This is to prevent the lawyer from coaching or teaching the

witness to answer in a certain way, or to rectify certain statements
damaging to his cause at the resumption of the trial. The rationale
therefore of this rule is to uphold and maintain fair play with the other
party and to prevent the examining lawyer from being tempted to
coach his own witness to suit his purposes.

A: TARCC
1. When as an attorney, he is to Testify on the theory of the case
2. When such would Adversely affect any lawful interest of the client
with respect to which confidence has been reposed on him
3. Having accepted a Retainer, he cannot be a witness against his
client;
4. He cannot serve Conflicting interests
5. When he is to violate the Confidence of his client

Note: A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf of his client. The

function of a witness is to tell the facts as he recalls them in answer to
questions while the function of an advocate is that of a partisan. It is
difficult to distinguish between the zeal of an advocate and the fairness
and impartiality of a disinterested witness.

Q: What are the instances when a lawyer may testify as a

witness in a case which he is handling for a client?

Although the law does not forbid an attorney to be a witness and at the
same time an attorney in a cause, the courts prefer that counsel
should not testify as a witness unless it is necessary and that they
should withdraw from the active management of the case. (PNB v. Uy
Teng Piao, G.R. No. L- 35252, Oct. 21, 1932) (

A: FETAD
1. On Formal matters, such as the mailing, authentication or custody of
instrument and the like;
2. Acting as an Expert on his fee;
3. On substantial matters in cases where his Testimony is essential to
the ends of justice, in which event he must, during his testimony,
entrust the trial of the case to another counsel;
4. Acting as an Arbitrator;
5. Deposition.

Rule 12.06 A lawyer shall not knowingly assist a witness to

misrepresent himself or to impersonate another.
The lawyer who presents a witness knowing him to be a false witness is
criminally liable for Offering False Testimony in Evidence, as defined
and penalized under Article 184 of the RPC.

CANON 13 A LAWYER SHALL RELY UPON THE MERITS OF HIS

CAUSE AND REFRAIN FROM ANY IMPROPRIETY WHICH TENDS
TO INFLUENCE, OR GIVES THE APPEARANCE OF INFLUENCING
THE COURT

Q: What are the sanctions on a lawyer who shall knowingly

assist a witness to misrepresent himself or to impersonate
another?

In prosecuting or defending cases, the lawyer must be guided by the

principles of justice. He must rely on the merits of his cases and should
avoid using influence and connections to win his cases. His cases must
be won because they are meritorious and not because of connections,
clout, dominance or influence. To do so, the lawyer breaks the basic
principles of justice which is highly condemnable.

A: Art. 184, Revised Penal Code provides: The lawyer who presented a
witness knowing him to be a false witness is criminally liable for
Offering False Testimony in Evidence.
Note: The lawyer who is guilty of the above is both criminally and
administratively liable.
Q: Is the witness
criminally liable?

Rule 13.01 A lawyer shall not extend extraordinary attention or

hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for cultivating familiarity
with judges.

who committed the misrepresentation

A: Yes. The witness who commits the misrepresentation is criminally

liable for False Testimony either under Art. 181, 182 or 183, Revised
Penal Code, depending upon the nature of the case.

Rule 13.02 A lawyer shall not make public statements in the

media regarding a pending case tending to arouse public
opinion for or against a party.

Note: The lawyer who induces a witness to commit false testimony is

equally guilty as the witness.

In re: Suspension of Atty. Rogelio Z. Bagabuyo, 535 SCRA 201:

Respondent caused the holding of a press conference where he made
statements against the Order allowing the accused to be released on
bail. Respondent also stated that the judge was displaying judicial
arrogance in the article entitled,Senior prosecutor lambasts Surigao
judge for allowing murder suspect to bail out, which appeared in the
Mindanao Gold Star Daily.

Rule 12.07 A lawyer shall not abuse, browbeat or harass a

witness nor needlessly inconvenience him.
Q: What are the rights of a witness?
A:

Respondents statements in the article, which were made while the

case was still pending in court violated Rule 13.02 of Canon 13. In

11

LEGAL ETHICS TSN II

Lectures of :

Atty. Casador

regard to the radio interview given to Tony Consing, respondent

violated Rule 11.05 of Canon 11 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility for not resorting to the proper authorities only for
redress of his grievances against the judge. Respondent was
suspended.

Preparing witnesses helps put them at ease and allows them to

understand the parameters of their testimony and the proper
procedures. Coaching an unsophisticated witness may make the
testimony appear contrived, rehearsed and unreliable.

Once a litigation is concluded, the judge who decided it is subject to

the same criticism as any other public official because then his ruling
becomes public property and is thrown open to public consumption.

Can you rehearse cross-examination? The attorney may want to

pose difficult questions to witnesses that they are likely to be
confronted with during their testimony. If the case and testimony
warrant such attention, a mock examination and cross-examination
may help put the witness at ease.

Rule 13.03A lawyer shall not brook or invite interference by

another branch or agency of the government in the normal
course of judicial proceedings.

But counsel should not tell the witness what must be stated in order for
a successful resolution. This may put an undue influence on the
witness to provide false, fraudulent or misleading testimony.

When a case is already within the jurisdiction of a court, the lawyer

should not cause or seek the interference of another agency of the
Government in the normal course of judicial proceedings.

SUB JUDICE RULE:

Sub Judice under judicial consideration

Illustrative case: Bumanglag v. Esteban Bumanglag, A.C. No.

188. November 29, 1976: In the Courts decision of September 24,
1973, the Court found respondent guilty of gross immoral conduct and
ordered his suspension from the practice of law for a period of two (2)
years. Respondent filed several motions for reconsideration, all of
which were denied per the Courts Resolutions of November 20, 1973,
December 19, 1973, January 9, 1974 and October 30, 1974.

The sub judice rule governs what public statements, whether orally or
in published writings, can be made about matters pending in legal
proceedings before the courts. The basis for the sub judice rule is that
the courts must be allowed to deal with the legal issues that are before
it free from undue interference and influences. The courts duty should
not be usurped by others making public statements about how these
issues should be dealt with.

On March 31, 1975, the Clerk of Court received a 1st Indorsement

dated February 21, 1975 from then Assistant Executive Secretary
Ronaldo B. Zamora "requesting comment and/or appropriate action" on
the therewith enclosed petition of respondent to the President of the
Philippines that he "promulgate(s) a decree that the order of
suspension by the Supreme Court be set aside and that your humble
self be allowed to become an active member of the New Society."

Application: the rule is not limited to parties in a case or their

lawyers. It applies as well to the public and public officials including
legislators.
Purpose: It is not only intended to shield judges but also witnesses, as
well, from prejudicial effects. Public statements may sway a witness to
change his or her account of the relevant events that he or she
witnessed.

Respondent is hereby administered a reprimand for gross ignorance of

the law and of the Constitution in having asked the President to set
aside by decree the Courts decision which suspended him for two
years from the practice of law, with warning that the commission of
any transgression in the future of his oath and duties as a member of
the bar will be severely dealt with.

PRINCIPLE OF OPEN JUSTICE: refers to the public right to scrutinize

and criticize courts and court proceedings. The principle assists in
preventing judicial arbitrariness or idiosyncrasy and maintaining public
confidence in the administration of justice. The principle of open justice
is just as fundamental to a democratic society as freedom of speech. In
the same way that every citizen has the right to criticize the actuations
of public officers, every citizen has the right to criticize the actuation of
judicial authorities.

Additional Notes (Canons 10-13):

Question: In relation to abusive and offensive language, is authorship a
necessary element to establish disciplinary liability?

Post-litigation criticisms: The right to criticize is recognized in

concluded litigations because then the courts actuations are thrown
open to public consumption and discussion. It has, in fact, been called
a duty of a lawyer to criticize. As a citizen and officer of the court,
every lawyer is expected not only to exercise the right, but also to
consider it his duty to expose the shortcomings and indiscretions of
courts and judges. (In re: Almacen, 31 S 562)

No. A lawyer cannot simply raise the defense that he was merely asked
to sign the pleadings. Section 3, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court: The
signature of counsel constitutes a certificate by him that he has read
the pleading, that to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief
there is good ground to support it, and that it is not interposed for
delay.
DISTINGUISH WITNESS PREPARATION FROM WITNESS COACHING:

Like the executive and legislative, the judiciary is rooted in the soil of
democratic society, nourished by the periodic appraisal of the citizens
whom it is expected to serve.

Purpose of witness preparation: helps the attorney evaluate the

witness and the testimony. The lawyer is then better equipped to
advise the client of the intended testimony and the witnesses ability
to convey the information and advocate the strengths of the testimony.

Examples of effective and allowable criticisms:

1. In appeals, a lawyer points out the errors of lower courts;
2.In articles written for law journals, he dissects with detachment the
doctrinal pronouncements of courts and fearlessly lays bare for all to
see the flaws and inconsistencies of the doctrines.

It is also important for the attorney to inform the unsophisticated

witness regarding what to expect, how to act properly and the
procedures that will be encountered for smith and effective
communication during the testimony. This will assist the witness by
providing a reasonable expectation as to what will be encountered and
should provide some security during the stressful and unaccustomed
experience of testifying.
Distinctions: Witness preparation is properly done when the attorney
is helping the witness communicate the truth. Witness coaching, on the
other hand, is perceived as obfuscating the truth or instructing the
witness to lie.

12