SAN BEDA COLLEGE

COLLEGE OF LAW

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

I. PRACTICE OF LAW (Rule 138)

1. Concept
a) Privilege
b) Profession, not business

2. Qualifications

a) Requirement of Good Moral Character

1. Rolly Pentecostes vs Atty. Hermenegildo Marasigan, A.M. No. P-07-

2337, August 03, 2007

2. Father Ranhilio C. Aquino et al vs. Atty. Edwin Pascua A.C.

No.5095, November 28, 2007

3. Administrative case filed against Judge Jaime V. Quitain,

JBC No.013, August 22, 2007

4. Rodolfo M. Bernardo vs. Atty Ismael F. Mejia, Adm Case No.2984,

August 31, 2007

5. GSIS vs. Hon. Vicente A. Pacquing, AM No. RTJ-04-1831,February

2, 2007

6. Velez vs. Atty. De Vera A.C. No. 6697, July 25, 2006

7. Cynthia Advincula vs. Atty. Ernesto M. Macabata, AC

No. 7204,March 07, 2007

b) Rehabilitation from criminal conduct and good moral character

8. In re: Petition to disqualify Atty. Leonardo De Vera, AC No.6052,

December 11, 2003

9. IRRI vs NLRC, GR No. 97239, May 12, 199312

10. Roberto Soriano vs. Atty Manuel Dizon, AC 6792, January 25,2006

c) Passing the bar and the practice of law

11. Cayetano vs. Monsod, GR No. 100113, September 3, 1991

12. Cruz vs Atty. Cabrera, AC No. 5737, October 25, 2004

13. Ruthie Lim-Santiago vs Atty. Carlos B. Sagucio, AC No. 6705,

March 31, 2006

d) What is practice of law?

1
 14. Aguirre vs Rana, BM 1036, June 10, 2003

e) Membership in the IBP

15. In re: Atty. Marcial Edillion, AM 1928, August 3, 1978

f) Exemption from payment of IBP dues

16. Letter of Atty. Cecilio Y. Arevalo Jr. BM 1370, May 9, 2005

17. Santos Jr vs Llamas, AC 4749, January 20, 2001

g) Citizenship Requirement
18. Petition for Leave to Resume Practice of Law, B.M. 1678,
December 17, 2007
*1987 Philippine Constitution, Art. 12, par 1
3. Appearance of non-lawyers

a) Law student practice (Rule 138-A)

*Revised Rules of Court, Rule 138-A, Section 34
19. Cruz vs. Mina, GR No. 154207, April 27, 2007

b) Non-lawyers in courts
c) Non-lawyers in administrative tribunals
d) Proceedings where lawyers are prohibited from appearing

4. Sanctions for practice or appearance without authority

a) Lawyers without authority

b) Persons not lawyers

5. Public officials and practice of law

a) Prohibition or disqualification of former government attorneys

b) Public officials who cannot practice law or with restrictions

6. Lawyers authorized to represent the government

7. Lawyer’s oath

8. Why is a lawyer “an Officer of the Court?

II. CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

a. Chapter 1 – The Lawyer and the Society

a) RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL PROCESSES

i. Canon 1 – Duty to Uphold the Constitution and the Laws

 Rule 1.01 – Duty of Honesty and Morality

20. Tapucar vs Atty. Tapucar, AC No. 4148, July 30, 1998
21. Acejas III vs PP, GR No. 156643, June 27, 2006

 Rule 1.02 – Duty to Obey the Laws and to Support the Legal System

2
 22. Donton vs. Dr. Tansingco, AC No. 6057, June 27, 200625.
23. Velez vs. Atty. De Vera, AC No. 6697, July 25, 2006

 Rule 1.03 – Duty against Barratry and Duty Not to Delay Any Man’s Cause
24. Linsangan vs. Atty. Tolentino, AC No. 6672, September 4, 2009
25. Atty. Vitriolo et al vs Atty Dasig, AC No. 4984, April 01, 2003

 Rule 1.04 - Duty to Promote Amicable Settlement

26. Sa Si III vs NLRC, GR No. 104599, March 11, 1994

b) EFFICIENT AND CONVENIENT LEGAL SERVICES

ii. Canon 2 – Duty to be an Efficient Lawyer

 Rule 2.01 – Duty to the Defenseless and the Oppressed

 Rule 2.02 – Duty to Give Legal Advise on the right of the Defenseless and
the Oppressed
27. Santiago vs. Atty. Rafanan, AC No. 6252, October 5, 2004

 Rule 2.03 – Duty to Shun Vulgar Solicitation

 Rule 2.04 – Duty to Shun Cut-Throat Rates

c) TRUE, HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED AND OBJECTIVE INFORMATION

ON LEGAL SERVICES

iii. Canon 3 – Duty of Honest and Dignified Pronouncement of Legal

Services

28. Atty. Khan Jr. vs Atty. Simbillo AC No. 5299, August 19, 2003

 Rule 3.01 – Duty Not to Use Fraudulent or Misleading Pronouncement of his

Qualifications
29. Linsangan vs. Atty. Tolentino, (AC No. 6672, September 4, 2009
30. Atty. Khan Jr. vs Atty. Simbillo AC No. 5299, August 19, 2003

 Rule 3.02 – Duty of Honesty in the Firm Name

31. BR Sebastian Enterprises, Inc. vs CA GR No. L-41862, February7,
1992

 Rule 3.03 – Duty of a Law Partner to Withdraw from the Firm when he
accepts Public Office

 Rule 3.04 – Duty not to pay media for publicity

d) PARTICIPATION IN THE IMPROVEMENT AND REFORMS IN THE

LEGAL SYSTEM

iv. Canon 4 – Duty to support the improvement of legal system

e) PARTICIPATION IN LEGAL EDUCATION PROGRAM

v. Canon 5 – Duty to keep abreast of Legal Developments

vi. Canon 6 – The same duties apply to lawyers in government service

3
 32. Diana Ramos vs. Atty. Jose R. Imbang, AC No. 6788, August23,
2007.
33. Gisela Huyssen vs Atty. Fred L. Gutierrez, AC No. 6707, March 24,
2006
34. Ruthie Lim-Santiago vs Atty. Carlos B. Sagucio AC No. 6705,
March 31, 2006

 Rule 6.01 – Duty of a Public Prosecutor to see that justice is done

35. Cuenca vs CA, GR No. 109870, December 1, 1995

 Rule 6.02 – Duty to separate public duties from private interests

36. Ali vs Atty. Bubong, AC No. 4018, March 8, 2005
37. Olazo vs. Justice Tinga, AM No. 10-5-7-SC, December 07, 2010

 Rule 6.03 – Duty to Avoid Conflict of Interest after leaving government

service
38. Gisela Huyssen vs Atty. Fred L. Gutierrez AC No. 6707, March 24,
2006
39. Olazo vs. Justice Tinga AM No. 10-5-7-SC, December 07, 2010

b. Chapter II – The Lawyer and the Legal Profession

a) INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES (RULE 139-A)

*Membership and dues

b) UPHOLDING THE DIGNITY AND INTEGRITY OF THE PROFESSION

i. Canon 7 – Duty to Uphold the Dignity of the Legal Profession

 Rule 7.01 – Duty to be Honest in Applying for Admission to the Bar

40. Rodolfo M. Bernardo vs Atty. Ismael F. Mejia, Adm. Case

No.2984, August 31, 2007

 Rule 7.02 – Duty to Support only those qualified to be admitted to the Bar

 Rule 7.03 - Duty to be professional and dignified.

c) COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND CANDOR TOWARDS PROFESSIONAL

COLLEAGUES

ii. Canon 8 – Duty of Professional Courtesy

41. Que vs. Atty. Revilla Jr. AC No. 7054,December 4, 2009

 Rule 8.01 – Duty to be Professional in Language

 Rule 8.02 – Duty to Refrain from Professional Encroachment

d) NO ASSISTANCE IN UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW

iii. Canon 9 – Duty to Shun Unauthorized Practice of Law

4
  Rule 9.01 – Duty to keep a Lawyer’s work limited to lawyers of good
standing
42. PP vs. Hon. Maceda, GR No. 89591-96, January 24, 2000
43. Zeta vs. Malinao, AM No. P-220, December 20, 197839
44. Tan and Pagayokan vs. Balajadia, GR No. 169517, March 14,2006

 Rule 9.02 – Duty to maintain the integrity of the Lawyer’s Fees

45. Lijauco vs. Atty. Terrado AC No. 6317, August 31, 2006
46. Plus Builders Inc. vs. Atty. Revilla Jr. AC No. 7056, September 13,
2006

c. Chapter III – The Lawyers and the Courts

a) CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH TOWARDS THE COURTS

i. Canon 10 – Duty of Candor to the Courts

 Rule 10.01 – Duty of Fidelity to the Courts

47. Pangan vs. Ramos, A.C. No. 1053, Sept. 7, 1979
48. Artiaga vs. Villanueva, A.C. No. 1892, July 29, 1988

 Rule 10.02 – Duty to Give Accurate Citations

 Rule 10.03 – Duty of Fidelity to the Rules of Procedures

49. Garvoda vs. Sales, Jr. G.R. No. 124893, April 18, 1997

b) RESPECT FOR COURTS AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS

ii. Canon 11 – Duty to Give Respect to the Courts

50. Re: Suspension of Atty. Rogelio Bagabuyo, A.C. No. 006, October
9, 2007
51. Tiongco vs. Aguilar, G.R. No. 115932, January 25, 1995
 Rule 11.01 – Duty to be properly attired

 Rule 11.02 – Duty to Be Punctual at Hearings

 Rule 11.03 – Duty of Proper Language and Behavior
 Rule 11.04 – Duty not to attribute unfounded ill-motives to a judge
 Rule 11.05 – Duty to Observe Proper Grievance Mechanism

c) ASSISTANCE IN THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF

JUSTICE

iii. Canon 12 – Duty to Assist in the Speedy and Efficient Administration of

Justice

52. Banogon vs. Zerna, G.R. No. L-35469, October 9, 1987

53. Medina vs. Yan, G.R. No. 30978, Sept. 30, 1974
54. Javellana vs. Lutero, G.R. No. L-23956, July 21, 1967
55. Achacoso vs. CA, No. L-35867, June 28, 1973
56. Sambajon et.al. vs. Suing, AC No. 7062, Sept. 26, 2006

 Rule 12.01 – Duty to be Prepared for Trial

 Rule 12.02 – Duty not to engage in forum shopping
 Rule 12.03 – Duty to file pleadings seasonably
 Rule 12.04 – Duty against dilatory moves and misuse of court processes

5
  Rule 12.05 – Duty not to coach a witness under examination
 Rule 12.06 – Duty no to present a false witness
 Rule 12.07 – Duty to Respect Witnesses
 Rule 12.08 – Duty not to be a witness and counsel at the same time

d) RELIANCE ON MERITS OF HIS CAUSE AND AVOIDANCE OF ANY

IMPROPRIETY WHICH TENDS TO INFLUENCE OR GIVES THE
APPEARANCE OF INFLUENCE UPON THE COURTS

iv. Canon 13 - Duty not to influence judge

 Rule 13.01 – Duty of Non-Fraternization with Judges

 Rule 13.02 – Duty Not to Resort to the Bar of Public Opinion during
pendency of a case
 Rule 13.03 – Duty to Respect Judicial Independence from the Other
Branches of Government

iv. Chapter IV – The Lawyer and the Client

a) AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE WITHOUT DISCRIMINATION

 Services regardless of a person’s status

 Services as counsel de officio

 Valid grounds for refusal

i. Canon 14 – Duty to Render Legal Service to the Needy

57. Villafuerte vs. Cortez, AC No. 3455, April 14, 1998

58. Endaya vs. Oca, AC No. 3967, September 3, 2003

 Rule 14.01 - Duty not to prejudiced in accepting clients

 Rule 14.02 – Duty to accept appointment as counsel de officio or amicus
curiae and duty to render free legal aid
 Rule 14.03 – Duty to Render Legal Service to the Indigent
 Rule 14.04 – Duty to Treat Paying and Non-paying clients with the same
standard

b) CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY TO CLIENTS

 Confidentiality rule
 Privileged communications
 Conflict of interest
 Candid and honest advice to clients
 Compliance with laws
 Concurrent practice of another profession

ii. Canon 15 – Duty of candor to the client

59. Paz vs. Sanchez, A.C. No. 6125, September 19, 2006
60. Gamilla et.al. vs. Mariño, Jr., A.C. No. 4763, March 20, 2003
61. Pasay Law and Conscience Union, Inc. Vs. Paz, 95 SCRA 24

6
  Rule 15.01 - Duty to ascertain conflict of interest as soon as practicable

 Rule 15.02 – Duty of Confidentiality

 Rule 15.03 – Duty to Avoid Conflict of Interests
 Rule 15.04 – Duty to act as mediator or conciliator when given written
consent by all concerned
 Rule 15.05 – Duty of candor in advising the client
 Rule 15.06 – Duty to not to engage in influence peddling
 Rule 15.07 – Duty to advice the client on the Rule of Law
 Rule 15.08 – Duty to make clear with the client his capacity as a lawyer when
the lawyer is also engaged in business or another profession

c) CLIENT’S MONEYS AND PROPERTIES

 Fiduciary relationship
 Commingling of funds
 Delivery of funds
 Borrowing or lending

iii. Canon 16 – Duty to be a trustee of client’s moneys and properties

 Rule 16.01 - Duty of Accountability

 Rule 16.02 – Duty not to commingle funds and properties
 Rule 16.03 – Duty to deliver funds and property upon demand; retaining lien;
attorney’s lien
 Rule 16.04 – Duty to avoid the debtor-creditor relationship with the client

d) FIDELITY TO CLIENT’S CAUSE

iv. Canon 17 – Duty of fidelity to the cause of the client

62. Ramos vs. Imbang, A.C. No. 6788, August 23, 2007
e) COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE

 Adequate protection
 (ii) Negligence
 (iii) Collaborating counsel
 (iv) Duty to apprise client

v. Canon 18 – Duty to serve with due diligence

 Rule 18.01 – Duty to know his professional limitations

 Rule 18.02 – Duty to be prepared for any legal matter
 Rule 18.03 – Duty not to be negligent
 Rule 18.04 – Duty to keep client informed

f) REPRESENTATION WITH ZEAL WITHIN LEGAL BOUNDS

 Use of fair and honest means

 Client’s fraud
 Procedure in handling the case

vi. Canon 19 – Duty to serve only within the bounds of the Law

7
 63. Peña vs. Aparicio, A.C. No. 7298, June 25, 2007
64. Rivera vs. Corral, A.C. No. 3548, July 4, 2002

 Rule 19.01 – Duty to serve only thru fair and honest means
 Rule 19.02 – Duty not to condone a client’s fraud
 Rule 19.03 – Duty to take the lead in handling a case

g) ATTORNEY’S FEES

 Acceptance fees

 Contingency fee arrangements

 Attorney’s liens

 Fees and controversies with clients

 Concepts of attorney’s fees

 Ordinary concept

 Extraordinary concept

vii. Canon 20 – Duty to charge only fair and reasonable fees

65. Retuya vs. Gorduiz, A.C. No. 1388, March 28, 1980

 Rule 20.01 – Duty to comply with the guidelines in determining lawyer’s fees
 Rule 20.02 – Duty to divide fees in proportion to work done
 Rule 20.03 – Duty not to accept any compensation in relation to a client’s
case except from the client himself
 Rule 20.04 – Duty to avoid disputes with client over fees

h) PRESERVATION OF CLIENT’S CONFIDENCES

 Prohibited disclosures and use

 Disclosure, when allowed

viii. Canon 21 – Duty to Preserve the Client’s Confidence and Secrets

 Rule 21.01 – Duty not to reveal the client’s secrets except when allowed by
the Rule
 Rule 21.02 – Duty not to misuse information acquired from a client
 Rule 21.03 – Duty to obtain the written consent of the client prior to
disbursement of a certain information

8
  Rule 21.04 – Duty not to disclose information to members of the firm when
prohibited by the client
 Rule 21.05 – Duty to prevent leakages of client’s confidences and secrets
 Rule 21.06 – Duty to prevent indiscreet conversations about a client’s affairs
 Rule 21.07 – Duty not to reveal the fact of consultation

i) WITHDRAWAL OF SERVICES

ix. Canon 22 – Duty to Withdraw legal services only for good cause and
upon notice

 Rule 22.01 – Duty to withdraw legal services only when allowed by the Rule
 Rule 22.02 – Duty to effect an orderly turn-over after withdrawal or
discharge.

III. SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS (RULE 139-B,

RULES OF COURT)

1. Nature and characteristics of disciplinary actions against lawyers

a) Sui generis

b) Prescription

2. Grounds

3. Proceedings

4. Discipline of Filipino lawyers practicing abroad

IV. READMISSION TO THE BAR

1. Lawyers who have been suspended

2. Lawyers who have been disbarred

3. Lawyers who have been repatriated

V. MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION

1. Purpose

2. Requirements

3. Compliance

4. Exemptions

5. Sanctions

6. Bar Matter 2012, Rule on Mandatory Legal Aid Service

9
 VI. NOTARIAL PRACTICE (A. M. NO. 02-8-13-SC, AS AMENDED)

1. Qualifications of notary public

2. Term of office of notary public

3. Powers and limitations

4. Notarial register

5. Jurisdiction of notary public and place of notarization 6. Revocation of

commission

6. Competent evidence of identity

7. Sanctions

VII. Canons of Professional Ethics

VIII. JUDICIAL ETHICS

A. SOURCES

1. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary (Bangalore Draft)
2. Code of Judicial Conduct

B. Qualities

1. Independence

a) Re: Letter of Presiding Justice Conrado M. Vasquez, Jr. on CA-G.R. SP

No. 103692 (A.M. No. 08-8-11-CA, October 15, 2008)

b) Perez vs. Costales, A.M. No. RTJ-04-1876, February 23, 2005

c) Re: Suspension of Clerk of Court Joboco, A.M. No. 93-10-1296-RTC,

August 12, 1998

d) Arban vs. Borja, A.M. No. R-281-RTJ, August 26, 1986

2. Integrity

e) Vedana vs. Judge Valencia, 295 SCRA 1 (1998)

f) Judge Alumbres vs. Judge Caoibes, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1431, January 23,
2002

g) Junio vs. Rivera, Jr., 225 SCRA 688, August 30, 1993

3. Impartiality

10
 h) OCA vs. Judge Floro, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1460, March 31, 2006

i) Hilado vs. Judge Reyes, A.M. No. 163155, July 21, 2006

j) Santos vs. Judge Lacurom, A.M. No. RTJ-04-1823, August 28, 2006

4. Propriety

k) Alday vs. Cruz, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1530, March 14, 2001

l) Francisco vs. Cosico, A.M. No. CA-0437, March 16, 2004

m) Resngit-Marquez vs. Judge Llamas, A.M. No. RTJ-02-1708, July 23,

2002

n) Ortiz vs. Judge Jaculbe, A.M. No. RTJ-04-1833, June 28, 2005

o) In re: Judge Acuña, A.M. No. RTJ-04-1891, July 28, 2005

5. Equality

6. Competence and diligence

p) In Torcende v. Judge Sardido, A.M. No. MTJ-99-1239, January 24, 2003

q) Echaus vs. CA, G.R. No. 57343, July 23, 1990

r) Gonzalo-Decano v. Siapno, A.M. No. MTJ-00-1279, March 1, 2009

s) Mane vs. Judge Belen, A.M. No. RTJ-08-2119, June 30, 2008

C. Discipline of members of the Judiciary

1. Members of the Supreme Court

a) Impeachment

b) Ethical Lessons from Former Chief Justice Corona’s Impeachment

2. Lower court judges and justices of the Court of Appeals and Sandiganbayan
(Rule 140)

3. Grounds

4. Impeachment (ethical aspects)

5. Sanctions imposed by the Supreme Court on erring members of the Judiciary

D. Disqualification of Justices and Judges (Rule 137)

11
 1. Compulsory

2. Voluntary

E. Powers and Duties of Courts and Judicial Officers (Rule 135)

F. Court Records and General Duties of Clerks and Stenographer (Rule 136)

G. Legal Fees (Rule 141)

1. Manner of payment

2. Fees in lien

3. Persons authorized to collect legal fees

H. Costs

1. Recovery of costs (Rule 142)

a) Prevailing party

b) Dismissed appeal or action

c) Frivolous appeal

d) False allegations

e) Non-appearance of witness

12