LEGAL ETHICS CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Examples of violations of this canon:
1. Respondent admitted that the letterhead of Cristal-
Tenorio Law Office listed Felicisimo R. Tenorio, Jr.,
Gerardo A. Panghulan, and Maricris D. Battung as
senior partners. She admitted that the first two are not
lawyers but paralegals. They are listed in the letterhead
of her law office as senior partners because they have
investments in her law office. That is a blatant
misrepresentation (Cambaliza vs. Atty. Cristal-
Tenorio,Adm. Case No. 6290, July 14, 2004).
2. Respondent, who held himself out as a partner of a law
firm, was rendering legal services together with persons
not licensed to practice law. The firm was actually a
cooperative composed of non-lawyers (Plus Builders,
Inc. et. al. v. Revilla, A.C. No. 7056, September 13,
2006).
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.
Rationale:
1. The practice of law is limited only to individuals duly
qualified in moral character and education and who
passed the Bar Examinations.
2. A client-lawyer relationship is a personal one. Attorneys
are selected on account of their special fitness through
their learning or probity for the work in hand.
Note: “Unqualified person” is not limited to non-lawyers
but also to lawyers who are not in good standing and
lawyers who are unqualified (Funa, Legal and Judicial
Ethics, 2009, p. 123).
Lawyers can engage the services of secretaries,
investigators, detectives, researchers, as long as they are
not involved in the practice of law.
Rule 9.02 - A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to
divide a fee for legal services with persons not
licensed to practice law, except:
1. Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a
partner or associate that, upon the latter's death,
money shall be paid over a reasonable period of
time to his estate or to persons specified in the
agreement; or
2. Where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished
legal business of a deceased lawyer; or
3. Where a lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer
employees in a retirement plan, even if the plan is
based in whole or in part, on a profit-sharing
agreement.
General rule: Non-lawyers are not entitled to attorney’s
fees.
Rationale: Not to leave the public in hopeless confusion
as to whom to consult in case of necessity and also to
leave the bar in a chaotic condition, aside from the fact
that non-lawyers are not amenable to disciplinary
measures
The first and second exceptions to the rule, strictly
speaking, represent compensation for legal services
rendered by the DECEASED lawyer during his lifetime,
which is paid to his estate or heirs.
Note: HOWEVER, impropriety arises where the effect of
the arrangement is to make the estate or heir a member of
the partnership along with the surviving partners, or where
the estate or heir is to receive a percentage of the fees
that may be paid from future business of the deceased
lawyer’s clients.
The third, strictly speaking, is not a division of legal fees
but a pension representing deferred wages for the
employees’ past services.
The statutory rule that an attorney shall be entitled to have
and recover from his client a reasonable compensation for
his services necessarily imports the existence of an
attorney-client relationship as a condition for the recovery
of attorney's fees, and such relationship cannot exist
unless the client's representative is a lawyer (Five J v.
NLRC,G.R. No. 111474 August 22, 1994 ).
C H APTER III: T HE L AWYER
AND THE C OURT
CANON 10: A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS
AND GOOD FAITH TO THE COURT.
A lawyer’s conduct before the court should be
characterized by candor and fairness. The administration
of justice would gravely suffer if lawyers do not act with
complete candor and honesty before the courts. (Serana
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162059, January 22, 2008).
Rationale: The burden cast on the judiciary would be
intolerable if it could not take at face value what is
asserted by counsel.
Obligations related to candor (SVDR)
1. Not to suppress material and vital facts which bear on
the merit or lack of merit of the complaint or petition
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 19
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
 CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
2. To volunteer to the court any development of the case
which has rendered the issue raised moot and
academic
3. To disclose to court any decision adverse to his position
of which opposing counsel is apparently ignorant and
which court should consider in deciding a case.
4. Not to represent himself as a lawyer for a client, appear
in court and present pleadings in the latter’s behalf, only
to claim later that he was not authorized to do so.
(Agpalo, Legal and Judicial Ethics, 2009, pp. 144-145)
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.
Lawyer as a disciple of truth
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. The courts, on the other hand, are entitled to
expect only complete honesty from lawyers appearing and
pleading before them. While a lawyer has the solemn duty
to defend his client’s cause, his conduct must never be at
the expense of truth(Young v. Batuegas, A.C. 5379, May
2003).
A lawyer should not, in the defense of his client, put on the
stand a witness whom he knows will give a false
testimony. He should not distort the facts in disregard of
the truth and the law nor make improvident arguments
based thereon or on the facts on record (People vs.
Manobo, 18 SCRA 30, 1996).
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 provided in this section
(Art. 184, Revised Penal Code).
Some Cases of Falsehoods by Lawyers which Merited
Discipline
1. Falsely stating in a deed of sale that property is free
from all liens and encumbrances when it is not so
(Sevilla vs. Zoleta, 96 Phil. 979);
2. Making it appear that a person, long dead, executed a
deed of sale in his favor (Monterey vs. Arayata, 61 Phil.
820);
3. Encashing a check payable to a deceased cousin by
signing the latter’s name on the check (In re:
Samaniego, 90 Phil. 382);
4. Falsifying a power of attorney and used it in collecting
the money due to the principal and appropriating the
20 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
LEGAL ETHICS
money for his own benefit (In re: Rusina, 105 Phil.
1328);
5. 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 (Chavez vs. Viola, G.R. 2152, 19 April
1991) where there are false allegations in pleadings.
6. Uttering falsehood in a Motion to Dismiss (Martin vs.
Moreno, 129 SCRA 315).
7. Denying having received the notice to file brief which is
belied by the return card (Ragacejo vs. IAC, 153 SCRA
462).
8. Presenting falsified documents in court which he knows
to be false (Bautista vs. Gonzales, 182 SCRA 151) or
introducing false evidence (Berrenguer vs. Carranza, 26
SCRA 673).
9. Filing false charges or groundless suits (Retuya vs.
Gorduiz, 96 SCRA 526)
10. Manufacturing, flaunting and using a spurious CA
resolution before the RTC (Florido v. Florido, A.C. No.
5624, January 20, 2004).
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 law a
provision already rendered inoperative by repeal or
amendment, or assert as a fact that which has not
been proved.
Rationale: If not faithfully and exactly quoted, the
decisions and rulings of the court may lose their proper
and correct meaning, to the detriment of other courts,
lawyers and the public who may thereby be misled.
(Agpalo, Legal and Judicial Ethics, 2009, p.147).
To knowingly misquote or misrepresent in any of these
matters is not only unprofessional but contemptuous as
well. (ibid., p.146).
A mere typographical error in the citation of an authority is
not contemptuous (Del Rosario v. Chingcuangco, No. L-
25503, December 17, 1966).
The respondents deliberately made the quote from the
SCRA syllabus appear as the words of the Supreme
Court. The Court admonish them for what is at the least
patent carelessness, if not an outright attempt to mislead
the parties and the courts taking cognizance to
insubordination (Allied Banking Corporation v. CA and
Galanida G.R. No. 144412, November 2003).
 LEGAL ETHICS
Rule 10.03 - A lawyer shall observe the rules of
procedure and shall not misuse them to defeat the
ends of justice.
Rationale: Procedures are instruments in the speedy and
efficient administration of justice. They should be used to
achieve such end and not to derail it.
Filing multiple actions constitutes an abuse of the Court’s
processes. Those who file multiple or repetitive actions
subject themselves to disciplinary action for incompetence
or willful violation of their duties as attorneys to act with all
good fidelity to the courts, and to maintain only such
actions that appear to be just and consistent with truth and
honor (Pablo R. Olivares etc. vs. Atty. Arsenio Villalon, Jr.,
A.C. No. 6323, April 13, 2007).
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.
Rationale: Disrespect toward the court would necessarily
undermine the confidence of the people in the honesty
and integrity of the members of the court, and
consequently to lower or degrade the administration of
justice by the court.
All lawyers are expected to recognize the authority of the
Supreme Court and obey its lawful processes and orders.
Despite errors which one may impute on the orders of the
Court, these must be respected, especially by the bar or
the lawyers who are themselves officers of the courts
(Yap-Paras vs. Atty. Paras, A.C. No. 4947, June 7, 2007).
Liberally imputing sinister and devious motives and
questioning the impartiality, integrity, and authority of the
members of the Court result in the obstruction and
perversion of the dispensation of justice (Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.159486-88, November 2000).
Even as lawyers passionately and vigorously propound
their points of view, they are bound by certain rules of
conduct for the legal profession. This Court is certainly
not claiming that it should be shielded from criticism. All
the Court demands are the same respect and courtesy
that one lawyer owes to another under established ethical
standards. All lawyers, whether they are judges, court
employees, professors or private practitioners, are officers
of the Court and have voluntarily taken an oath, as an
indispensable qualification for admission to the Bar, to
conduct themselves with good fidelity towards the courts.
There is no exemption from this sworn duty for law
professors, regardless of their status in the academic
CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
community or the law school to which they belong. (Re:
Letter of the UP Law Faculty entitled “Restoring Integrity:
A statement by the Faculty of the University of the
Philippines College of Law on the allegations of plagiarism
and misrepresentation in the Supreme Court,” A.M. No.
10-10-4-SC, March 8, 2011).
Rule 11.01 - A lawyer shall appear in court properly
attired.
Male: Either Barong Tagalog or suit with tie
Female: Appropriate business attire (Funa, Legal and
Judicial Ethics, 2009, p. 170).
Rule 11.02 - A lawyer shall punctually appear at court
hearings.
Inexcusable absence from, or repeated tardiness in,
attending a pre-trial or hearing may not only subject the
lawyer to disciplinary action but may also prejudice his
client who may not be non-suited, declared in default or
adjudged liable ex parte, as the case may be (Agpalo,
Legal and Judicial Ethics, 2009, p. 153).
Rule 11.03 - A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous,
offensive or menacing language or behavior before
the Courts.
The lawyer’s duty to render respectful subordination to the
courts is essential to the orderly administration of justice.
Hence, in the assertion of the client’s rights, lawyers –
even those gifted with superior intellect, are enjoined to
rein up their tempers (Zaldivar vs. Gonzales, 166 SCRA
316, 1988).
(See discussion under 8.01)
Rule 11.04 - A lawyer shall not attribute to a judge
motives not supported by the record or have no
materiality to the case.
This rule does not preclude a lawyer from criticizing
judicial conduct, PROVIDED the criticism is:
1. Supported by the record; or
2. Material to the case (Agpalo, Legal and Judicial Ethics,
2009, p. 157).
Rule 11.05 - A lawyer shall submit grievances against
a Judge to the proper authorities only.
Proper authority: The Supreme Court shall have
administrative supervision over all courts and personnel
thereof (Sec. 5 [5], Article VIII, 1987 Constitution of the
Philippines).
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 21
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
 CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Right and duty of a lawyer to criticize courts
1. The fact that a person is a lawyer does not deprive him
of the right, enjoyed by every citizen, to comment on
and criticize the actuations of a judge.
2. The court, in a pending litigation, must be shielded from
embarrassment or influence in its all-important duty of
deciding the case. Once litigation is concluded, the
judge who decided it is subject to the same criticism as
any other public official because his ruling becomes
public property and is thrown open to public
consumption.
3. 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 (Zaldivar v. Gonzalez, supra).
4. The duty of the bar to support the judge against unjust
criticism and clamor does not, however, preclude a
lawyer from filing administrative complaints against
erring judges or from acting as counsel for clients who
have legitimate grievances against them. But the lawyer
should file charges against the judge before the proper
authorities only and only after proper circumspection
and without the use of disrespectful language and
offensive personalities so as not to unduly burden the
court in the discharge of its functions (Urbina vs.
Maceren, 57 SCRA 403, 1974).
A lawyer may not file administrative complaint against a
judge, which arises from his judicial acts, until the lawyer
shall have exhausted judicial remedies which result in a
finding that the judge has gravely erred. If the lawyer does
so without exhausting such judicial remedies or awaiting
the result thereof, he may be administratively held to
account therefore (Flores v. Abesamis, 275 SCRA 301,
1997).
Note on a lawyer’s freedom of expression: As to the
question on whether lawyers who are also law professors
can invoke academic freedom as a defense in an
administrative proceeding for intemperate statements
tending to pressure the Court or influence the outcome of
a case or degrade the courts.
The same is answered through the application by
analogy of the Court’s past treatment of the “free speech”
defense in other bar discipline cases. Academic freedom
cannot be successfully invoked by respondents. The
implicit ruling in jurisprudence is that the constitutional
right to freedom of expression of members of the Bar
may be circumscribed by their ethical duties as lawyers to
give due respect to the courts and to uphold the public’s
faith in the legal profession and the justice system. The
reason that freedom of expression may be so delimited in
the case of lawyers applies with greater force to the
academic freedom of law professors. It is not contested
22 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
LEGAL ETHICS
that respondent professors are, by law and jurisprudence,
guaranteed academic freedom and undisputably, they
are free to determine what they will teach their students
and how they will teach. But it must be pointed out that
there is nothing in the Show Cause Resolution that
dictates upon respondents the subject matter they can
teach and the manner of their instruction. Moreover, it is
not inconsistent with the principle of academic freedom
for the Court to subject lawyers who teach law to
disciplinary action for contumacious conduct and speech,
coupled with undue intervention in favor of a party in a
pending case, without observing proper procedure, even
if purportedly done in their capacity as teachers. (Re:
Letter of the UP Law Faculty entitled “Restoring Integrity:
A statement by the Faculty of the University of the
Philippines College of Law on the allegations of
plagiarism and misrepresentation in the Supreme
Court,” A.M. No. 10-10-4-SC, March 8, 2011).
CANON 12: A LAWYER SHALL EXERT EVERY
EFFORT AND CONSIDER IT HIS DUTY TO ASSIST IN
THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF
JUSTICE.
Constitutional basis: All persons shall have the right to a
speedy disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-
judicial, or administrative bodies (Art. III, Sec. 16
Constitution).
The filing of another action concerning the same subject
matter, in violation of the doctrine of res judicata, runs
contrary to this Canon (John Siy Lim vs. Atty. Carmelito A.
Montano, A.C. No. 5653, February 27, 2006).
Rule 12.01 - A lawyer shall not appear for trial unless
he has adequately prepared himself on the law and
the facts of his case, the evidence he will adduce and
the order of its preference. He should also be ready
with the original documents for comparison with the
copies.
A newly hired counsel who appears in a case in the
midstream is presumed and obliged to acquaint himself
with all the antecedent processes and proceedings that
have transpired in the record prior to his takeover (Villasis
vs. Court of Appeals, 60 SCRA 120, 1974).
Rule 12.02 - A lawyer shall not file multiple actions
arising from the same cause.
Forum shopping:
The institution two or more actions or proceedings
grounded on the same cause, on the gamble that one or
 LEGAL ETHICS
the other court would make a favorable disposition
(Chemphil Export & Import Corp. v. CA, 260 SCRA 247).
The most important factor in determining the existence
of forum shopping is the vexation caused the courts and
parties by a party who asks different courts to rule on the
same or related causes or grant the same or substantially
the same reliefs (Benguet Electric Cooperatve, Inc. v.
Atty. Ernesto B. Flores, A.C. No. 4058, March 12, 1998).
Penalties for violation of the rule against forum
shopping under Section 5, Rule 7 of the 1997 Rules of
Civil Procedure
1. Failure to comply with the requirements shall NOT be
curable by mere amendment of the complaint or other
initiatory pleading but shall be cause for dismissal of the
case without prejudice, unless otherwise provided, upon
motion and after hearing;
2. 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; and
3. 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.
Note: The mere filing of several cases based on the same
incident does not necessarily constitute forum shopping.
The question is whether the several actions filed involve
the same transactions, essential facts and circumstances.
If they involve essentially different facts, circumstances
and causes of action, there is no forum shopping
(Paredes vs. Sandiganbayan, 252 SCRA 641, 1996).
General Rule: A certification against forum shopping must
be signed by the client and not by the counsel. Otherwise,
it is equivalent to non-compliance with the Rules of Court
and is defective (Far Eastern Shipping Co. v. CA and
PPA, G.R. No. 130068, October 1, 1998).
Exception: When the counsel attests in the certification
that he has personal knowledge of the facts stated and
gives justifiable reasons why the party himself cannot sign
the same (Ortiz v. CA, 299 SCRA 708, 1998).
Rule 12.03 - A lawyer shall not, after obtaining
extensions 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.
CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
The court frowns on lawyers’ practice of repeatedly
seeking extensions to file pleadings and thereafter simply
letting the period lapse without submitting any pleading or
even any explanation of manifestation for their failure. The
same rule applies more forcefully to motion for
continuance. POSTPONEMENT is NOT a matter of right
but a sound judicial discretion (Edrial v. Quilat-Quilat G.R.
No. 133625, September 2000).
Rule 12.04 - A lawyer shall not unduly delay a case,
impede the execution of a judgment or misuse Court
processes.
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 of a judgment sets at
naught the role of courts in disposing justiciable
controversies with finality (Aguilar vs. Manila Banking
Corporation, G.R. No. 157911, Sept. 19, 2006).
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 (Perez vs. Lazatin, 23 SCRA
645).
As part of the lawyer’s duty to assist in the early
termination of the case, he should inform the court:
1. Within thirty days, of the death of his client in a pending
case (Heirs of Elias Lorilla v. CA, 330 SCRA 429, 2000).
2. Of any change of his address (City Sheriff Iligan City v.
Fortunato, 288 SCRA 190, 1998).
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.
Purpose: To prevent the suspicion that he is coaching the
witness what to say during the resumption of the
examination. Moreover, this rule is also designed 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 purpose.
Rule 12.06 - A lawyer shall not knowingly assist a
witness to misrepresent himself or to impersonate
another.
The witness who commits misrepresentation is criminally
liable for “False Testimony” either under Art. 181, 182 or
183 of the Revised Penal Code, as the case may be. The
lawyer who induces a witness to commit false testimony is
equally guilty as the witness.
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 23
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
 CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
The lawyer who presented a witness knowing him to be a
false witness is criminally liable for “Offering False
Testimony in Evidence” under Art. 184.
The lawyer who is guilty of the above is both criminally
and administratively liable.
Subornation of perjury
It is committed by a person who knowingly and willfully
procures another to swear falsely and the witness
suborned does testify under circumstances rendering him
guilty of perjury (U.S. vs. Ballena, 18 Phil. 382)
Rule 12.07 - A lawyer shall not abuse, browbeat or
harass a witness nor needlessly inconvenience him.
It was highly inconsiderate for the prosecutor and the
defense counsel to trade quips at the precise time
Rowena was reliving her harrowing experience. Courts
are looked up to by the people with high respect and are
regarded as places where litigants are heard, rights and
conflicts are settled and justice solemnly dispensed. Levity
has no place in the courtroom during the examination of
the victim of rape, and particularly at her expense (People
v. Nuguid G.R. No. 148991, January 2004).
Rights and obligations of a witness under the Rules of
Court
A witness must answer questions, although his answer
may tend to establish a claim against him. However, it is
the right of a witness:
1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting
questions, and from harsh or insulting demeanor;
2. Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice
require;
3. Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent
to the issue;
4. Not to give an 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 to 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
final conviction for an offense (Rule 132, Sec. 3).
Rule 12.08 - A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf of
his client, except:
1. On formal matters, such as the mailing,
authentication or custody of an instrument, and the
like; or
2. On substantial matters, in cases where his
testimony is essential to the ends of justice, in
24 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
LEGAL ETHICS
which event he must, during his testimony, entrust
the trial of the case to another counsel.
Rationale: There is a difference between the function of a
witness and that of an advocate. A witness is to tell the
facts as he recalls them in answer to questions while an
advocate is a partisan. The lawyer will find it hard to
dissociate his relation to his client as an attorney and his
relation to the party as a witness (Jacobs v. Weissinger,
211 Mich. 47, 178 NW 65, 1920).
The question is one of propriety than competency.
While the law does not disqualify a lawyer from testifying,
the practice is violative of the rule on professional conduct
(Philippine National Bank v. Uy Teng Piao, 57 Phil 337,
1932).
Lawyer as witness
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. 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.
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, 57 Phil 337, 1932).
Instances when a lawyer MAY NOT testify as a
witness in a case which he is handling for a client
1. When such would adversely affect any lawful interest of
the client with respect to which confidence has been
reposed on him;
2. Having accepted a retainer, he cannot be a witness
against his client;
3. He cannot serve conflicting interests;
4. When he is to violate the confidence of his client; and
5. When as an attorney, he is to testify on the theory of the
case.
Instances when a lawyer MAY testify as a witness in a
case which he is handling for a client
1. On formal matters, such as the mailing, authentication
or custody of an instrument and the like;
2. Acting as an expert on his fee;
3. Acting as an Arbitrator;
4. Deposition; and
5. On substantial matters in cases where his testimony is
essential to the ends of justice, in which event he must,
 LEGAL ETHICS
during his testimony, entrust the trial of the case to
another counsel.
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.
Rule 13.01 - A lawyer shall not extend extraordinary
attention or hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for
cultivating familiarity with Judges.
Rationale: To protect the good name and reputation of
the judge and the lawyer
Lawyers should not seek for opportunity to cultivate
familiarity with judges. A lawyer who resorts to such
practices of seeking familiarity with judges dishonors his
profession and a judge who consents to them is unworthy
of his high office.
It is improper for a litigant or counsel to see a judge in
chambers and talk to him about a matter related to the
case pending in the court of said judge (Austria vs.
Masaquel, 20 SCRA 1247, 1967).
HOWEVER, it is not incumbent on a lawyer to refuse
professional employment in a case because it may be
heard by a judge who is his relative, compadre or former
colleague. The responsibility is on the judge not to sit in a
case unless he is both free from bias and from the
appearance thereof (Bautista v. Rebueno, 81 SCRA 535,
1978).
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.
The subjudice rule governs what public statements,
whether orally or in published writings, can be made about
matters pending in legal proceedings before the courts.
The rule applies where court proceedings are ongoing,
and through all stages of appeal until the matter is
completed. It is not limited to parties in a case or their
lawyers. It applies as well to the public and public officials
including legislators (Funa, Legal and Judicial Ethics,
2009, p. 213).
Making public statements in the media regarding
a pending case which tends to arouse public opinion for or
against a party may also constitute indirect contempt
under Section 3 of Rule 71 of the Rules of Court (Funa,
Legal and Judicial Ethics, 2009, p. 214).
CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Test when public statements are contemptuous: The
character of the act done and its direct tendency to
prevent and obstruct the discharge of official duty is the
test to determine whether a newspaper publication
concerning a pending case is contemptuous (Toledo,
Newspaper Co. v. US, 407 US 1186).
In a concluded litigation, a lawyer enjoys a wider latitude
to comment on or criticize the decision of s judge or his
actuation. Thus, a newspaper publication tending to
impede, obstruct, embarrass or influence the courts in
administering justice in a pending case constitutes
criminal contempt, but the rule is otherwise after the
litigation is ended. (In re: Lozano, 54 Phil. 801, 1930).
The restriction does NOT prohibit issuance of statements
by public officials charged with the duty of prosecuting or
defending actions in court. However, such statements
should avoid any statement of fact likely to create an
adverse attitude in the public mind respecting the alleged
actions of the defendants to the pending proceedings
(A.B.A Op. 199, January 26, 1940).
Rule 13.03 - A lawyer shall not brook or invite
interference by another branch or agency of the
government in the normal course of judicial
proceedings.
Rationale: To preserve the independence of the judges in
the performance of their duties
The Supreme Court accordingly administered a reprimand
to respondent for gross ignorance of law and of the
Constitution in having asked the President to set aside by
decree the Court’s decision which suspended him for two
years from the practice of law (De Bumanlag v. Bumanlag
A.M. No. 188, November 1976).
C H APTER IV: T HE L AWYER
AND THE C LI ENT
Attorney-Client relationship
Nature of relation
1. Strictly personal;
2. Highly confidential; and
3. Fiduciary
General rules protecting attorney-client relationships
1. The attorney must exert his best efforts to protect the
interest of his client.
2. He must promptly account for any fund or property
entrusted by or received for, his client.
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 25
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
 CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
3. He cannot purchase his client’s property or interest in
litigation.
4. The privacy of communications shall at all times be
upheld.
5. An attorney cannot represent a party whose interest is
adverse to that of his client even after the termination of
the relation.
Creation of relation: forms of employment as counsel
to a client
1. Oral – when the counsel is employed without a written
agreement, but the conditions and amount of attorney’s
fees are agreed upon.
2. Express – when the terms and conditions including the
amount of fees, are explicitly stipulated in a written
document which may be a private or public document.
Written contract of attorney’s fees is the law between
the lawyer and the client.
3. Implied – when there is no agreement, whether oral or
written, but the client allowed the lawyer to render legal
services not intended to be gratuitous without objection,
and the client is benefited by reason thereof.
Note: While a written agreement for professional services
is the best evidence to show the relation, formality is not
an essential element of the employment of an attorney.
The absence of a written contract will not preclude a
finding that there is a professional relationship.
Documentary formalism is not an essential element in the
employment of an attorney; the contract may be express
or implied.
Advantages of a written contract between the lawyer
and the client:
1. It is conclusive as to the amount of compensation.
2. In case of unjustified dismissal of an attorney, he shall
be entitled to recover from the client full compensation
stipulated in the contract (RA 636).
CANON 14: A LAWYER SHALL NOT REFUSE HIS
SERVICES TO THE NEEDY.
Rule 14.01 – A lawyer shall not decline to represent a
person solely on account of the latter’s race, sex,
creed or status of life, or because of his own opinion
regarding the guilt of said person.
Right to decline employment
General Rule: A lawyer is not obliged to act as legal
counsel for any person who may wish to become his
client. He has the right to decline employment.
26 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
LEGAL ETHICS
Exceptions:
1. A lawyer shall not refuse his services to the
needy (Canon 14);
2. He shall not decline to represent a person solely on
account of the latter’s race, sex, creed or status of life or
because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of said
person (Rule 14.01);
3. Neither shall he decline, except for serious and
sufficient cause, an appointment as counsel de oficio or
amicus curiae or a request from the IBP or any of its
chapters for rendition of free legal aid (Rule 14.02);
4. He shall not decline, except for serious and sufficient
cause like (1) if he is not in a position to carry out the
work effectively or competently; (2) if he labors under a
conflict of interest between him and the prospective
client or between a present client and the prospective
client (Rule 14.03).
Duty to decline employment
A lawyer SHOULD decline professional employment
regardless of how attractive the fee offered may be if its
acceptance will involve:
1. A violation of any of the rules of the legal profession;
2. Nullification of a contract which he prepared;
3. Advocacy in any matter in which he had intervened
while in the government service;
4. Employment, the nature of which might easily be used
as a means of advertising his professional services or
his skill;
5. Employment with a collection agency, which solicits
business to collect claims; and
6. Any matter in which he knows or has reason to believe
that he or his partner will be an essential witness for the
prospective client.
Reasons
1. The attorney’s signature in every pleading constitutes a
certificate by him that there is good cause to support it
and that it is not interposed for delay and willful violation
of such rule shall subject him to disciplinary action.
2. It is the attorney’s duty to “counsel or maintain such
actions or proceedings only as appear to him to be just
and only such defenses as he believes to be honestly
debatable under the law.”
3. A lawyer is not to encourage either the commencement
or the continuance of an action or proceeding, or delay
any man’s cause, for any corrupt motive or interest.
4. A lawyer must decline to conduct a civil cause or to
make a defense when convinced that it is intended
merely to harass or injure the opposite party or to work
oppression or wrong.
Exception BUT with limitation: A lawyer may accept a
losing civil case provided that, in so doing, he must not
 LEGAL ETHICS
engage in dilatory tactics and must advise his client about
the prospects and advantages of settling the case through
a compromise.
If he were to take a bad civil case for the plaintiff, it will
only be to advise him not to file the action or to settle it
with the client.
If he were to accept the defense of a bad civil case for the
defendant, it will either be to exert his best effort toward a
compromise or to tell his client to confess judgment.
Rule 14.02 - A lawyer shall not decline, except for
serious and sufficient cause, an appointment as
counsel de officio or as amicus curiae, or a request
from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines or any of its
chapters for rendition of free legal aid.
Rule 14.03 - A lawyer may not refuse to accept
representation of an indigent client if:
a. He is not in a position to carry out the work
effectively or competently;
b. He labors under a conflict of interest between him
and the prospective client or between a present
client and the prospective client.
Any of the following may constitute a sufficient cause
under Rule 14.02:
1. 1. It is believed that it is a sufficient cause where the
lawyer cannot handle the matter competently; or
2. In case of conflict of interest (Funa, Legal and Judicial
Ethics, 2009, p.226); or
3. Where the lawyer is to incur out-of-pocket expenses for
investigation costs, fees for witnesses, unable to
continue his private practice [Brown v. Board of County
Commissioners, 451 P.2d 708 (Nev. 1969(].
Rule 14.04 - A lawyer who accepts the cause of a
person unable to pay his professional fees shall
observe the same standard of conduct governing his
relations with paying clients.
Rule on Mandatory Legal Aid Service (B.M. No. 2012)
Pursuant to an en banc Resolution of the Supreme Court,
this Rule took effect on January 1, 2010, provided its
implementing regulations have been published prior to the
said date.
Purpose
To enhance the duty of lawyers to society as agents of
social change and to the courts as officers thereof by
helping improve access to justice by the less privileged
members of society and expedite the resolution of cases
involving them.
CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Definition of terms
1. Practicing lawyers are members of the Philippine Bar
who appear for and in behalf of parties in courts of law
and quasi-judicial agencies. The term "practicing
lawyers" shall EXCLUDE:
a. Government employees and incumbent elective
officials not allowed by law to practice;
b. Lawyers who by law are not allowed to appear in
court;
c. Supervising lawyers of students enrolled in law
student practice in duly accredited legal clinics of law
schools and lawyers of NGOs)and peoples
organizations (POs) who by the nature of their work
already render free legal aid to indigent and pauper
litigants and
d. Lawyers not covered under subparagraphs (i) to (iii)
including those who are employed in the private
sector but do not appear for and in behalf of parties in
courts of law and quasi-judicial agencies.
2. Indigent and pauper litigants are those defined under
Rule 141, Section 19 of the Rules of Court and Algura
v. The Local Government Unit of the City of Naga (G.R.
No.150135, 30 October 2006, 506 SCRA 81);
a. (Sec. 19. Rule 141) Indigent litigants are those
whose gross income and that of their immediate
family do not exceed an amount double the monthly
minimum wage of an employee and who do not own
real property with a fair market value as stated in the
current tax declaration of more than three hundred
thousand pesos.
b. (Section 21. Rule 3). An indigent party may be
authorized to litigate his action, claim or defense as
an indigent if the court, upon an ex parte application
and hearing, is satisfied that the party is one who has
no money or property sufficient and available for food,
shelter and basic necessities for himself and his
family.
3. Legal aid cases are those actions, disputes, and
controversies that are criminal, civil and
administrative in nature in whatever stage wherein
indigent and pauper litigants need legal
representation.
Requirements
1. Every practicing lawyer is required to render a minimum
of sixty (60) hours of free legal aid services to indigent
litigants in a year.Said 60 hours shall be spread within a
period of twelve (12) months, with a minimum of five (5)
hours of free legal aid services each month. However,
where it is necessary for the practicing lawyer to render
legal aid service for more than five (5) hours in one
month, the excess hours may be credited to the said
lawyer for the succeeding periods.
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 27
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
 CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
2. The practicing lawyer shall report compliance with the
requirement within ten (10) days of the last month of
each quarter of the year.
3. A practicing lawyer shall be required to secure and
obtain a certificate from the Clerk of Court attesting to
the number of hours spent rendering free legal aid
services in a case.
4. Said compliance report shall be submitted to the Legal
Aid Chairperson of the IBP Chapter within the court’s
jurisdiction.
5. The IBP Chapter shall, after verification, issue a
compliance certificate to the concerned lawyer. The IBP
Chapter shall also submit the compliance reports to the
IBPs National Committee on Legal Aid (NCLA) for
recording and documentation.
6. Practicing lawyers shall indicate in all pleadings filed
before the courts or quasi-judicial bodies the number
and date of issue of their certificate of compliance for
the immediately preceding compliance period.
Penalties
1. At the end of every calendar year, any practicing lawyer
who fails to meet the minimum prescribed 60 hours of
legal aid service each year shall be required by the IBP,
through the NCLA, to explain why he was unable to
render the minimum prescribed number of hours.
2. If no explanation has been given or if the NCLA finds
the explanation unsatisfactory, the NCLA shall make a
report and recommendation to the IBP Board of
Governors that the erring lawyer be declared a member
of the IBP who is not in good standing.
3. Upon approval of the NCLAs recommendation, the IBP
Board of Governors shall declare the erring lawyer as a
member not in good standing.
4. The notice to the lawyer shall include a directive to pay
four thousand pesos P4,000 as penalty which shall
accrue to the special fund for the legal aid program of
the IBP.
5. The "not in good standing" declaration shall be effective
for a period of three (3) months from the receipt of the
erring lawyer of the notice from the IBP Board of
Governors.
6. During the said period, the lawyer cannot appear in
court or any quasi-judicial body as counsel.
7. Provided, however, that the "not in good standing"
status shall subsist even after the lapse of the three-
month period until and unless the penalty shall have
been paid.
8. Any lawyer who fails to comply with his duties under this
Rule for at least three (3) consecutive years shall be
the subject of disciplinary proceedings to be instituted
motu proprio by the Committee on Bar Discipline.
28 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
LEGAL ETHICS
Free Legal Assistance Act of 2010 (R.A. No. 9999)
Purposes
1. To guarantee free legal assistance to the poor, and
2. To ensure that every person who cannot afford the
services of a counsel is provided with a competent and
independent counsel preferably of his/her own choice.
Legal services to be performed by a lawyer
Any activity which requires the application of law, legal
procedure, knowledge, training and experiences which
shall include, among others, legal advice and counsel,
and the preparation of instruments and contracts,
including appearance before the administrative and quasi-
judicial offices, bodies and tribunals handling cases in
court, and other similar services as may be defined by the
Supreme Court.
Requirements for availment
To avail of the benefits and services as envisioned in this
Act, the following requirements should be met:
1. A lawyer or professional partnership shall secure a
certification from the Public Attorney's Office (PAO), the
Department of Justice (DOJ) or accredited association
of the Supreme Court indicating that the said legal
services to be provided are within the services defined
by the Supreme Court, and that the agencies cannot
provide the legal services to be provided by the private
counsel.
2. To determine the number of hours actually provided by
the lawyer and/or professional firm in the provision of
legal services, the association and/or organization duly
accredited by the Supreme Court shall issue the
necessary certification that said legal services were
actually undertaken.
3. The certification issued by, among others, the PAO, the
DOJ and other accredited association by the Supreme
Court shall be submitted to the BIR for purposes of
availing the tax deductions and to the DOJ for purposes
of monitoring.
Incentives to Lawyers
A lawyer or professional partnerships rendering actual
free legal services, as defined by the Supreme Court,
shall be entitled to an allowable deduction from the gross
income, the amount that could have been collected for the
actual free legal services rendered or up to ten percent
(10%) of the gross income derived from the actual
performance of the legal profession, whichever is lower:
Provided, That the actual free legal services herein
contemplated shall be exclusive of the minimum sixty
(60)-hour mandatory legal aid services rendered to
indigent litigants as required under the Rule on Mandatory
 LEGAL ETHICS
Legal Aid Services for Practicing Lawyers, under BAR
Matter No. 2012, issued by the Supreme Court.
CANON 15: A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE CANDOR,
FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY IN ALL HIS DEALINGS AND
TRANSACTIONS WITH HIS CLIENTS.
It demands of an attorney an undivided allegiance, a
conspicuous and high degree of good faith,
disinterestedness, candor, fairness, loyalty, fidelity and
absolute integrity in all his dealings and transactions with
his clients and an utter renunciation of every personal
advantage conflicting in any way, directly or indirectly, with
the interest of his client (Oparel, Sr. vs. Abara, 40 SCRA
128, 1971).
If they find that their client’s cause is defenseless, then it
is their bounden duty to advise the latter to acquiesce and
submit, rather than to traverse the incontrovertible
(Consorcia S. Rollon vs. Atty. Camilo Naraval, A.C. No.
6424, March 4, 2005).
Rule 15.01 - A lawyer, in conferring with a prospective
client, shall ascertain as soon as practicable whether
the matter would involve a conflict with another client
or his own interest, and if so, shall forthwith inform
the prospective client.
Rule 15.02 – A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on
privileged communication in respect of matters
disclosed to him by a prospective client.
(See discussion under Canon 21)
Factors that establish the existence of the attorney-
client privilege communication
1. Where legal advice of any kind is sought;
2. from a professional legal adviser in his capacity as
such;
3. the communications relating to that purpose;
4. made in confidence;
5. by the client;
6. are at his instance permanently protected;
7. from disclosure by himself or by the legal advisor;
8. except the protection be waived (Ma. Luisa Hadjula vs.
Atty. Roceles F. Madianda, A.C. No. 6711, July 3,
2007).
Requisites for the attorney-client privilege (CIA)
1. There exists an attorney and client relationship or a
kind of consultancy relationship with a prospective
client. That is, legal advice is what is sought; This
includes persons appointed as counsel de oficio;
CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
2. The communication was made by the client to the
lawyer in the course of the lawyer’s professional
employment; and
3. The communication must be intended to be
confidential (Uy Chico vs. Union Life Association
Society, 29 Phil 163, 1915).
Thus, the mere relation of attorney and client does not
raise a presumption of confidentiality.
Confidential communication: information transmitted
through voluntary act of disclosure between attorney and
client in confidence, and by means of which, so far as the
client is aware, discloses the information to no third
person other than one reasonably necessary for the
transmission of the information or the accomplishment of
the purpose for which it was given.
Duration of the privilege
The privilege continues to exist even after the termination
of the attorney-client relationship. It outlasts the lawyer’s
engagement. The privileged character of the
communication ceases only when waived by the client
himself or after his death, by the heir or legal
representative (Baldwin vs. Comm. Of Internal Revenue,
125 F 2d 812, 141 LRA 548).
Burden of Proof
The party who avers that the communication is privileged
has the burden of proof to establish the existence of the
privilege unless from the face of the document itself, it
clearly appears that it is privileged. The mere allegation
that the matter is privileged is not sufficient (People vs.
Sleeper, 46 Phil. 625).
Art. 209. Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor.
— Revelation of secrets. — In addition to the proper
administrative action, there shall be imposed upon any
attorney-at-law or solicitor (procurador judicial) who, by
any malicious breach of professional duty or of
inexcusable negligence or ignorance, shall prejudice his
client, or reveal any of the secrets of the latter learned by
him in his professional capacity.
Rule 15.03 - A lawyer shall not represent conflicting
interests except by written consent of all concerned
given after a full disclosure of the facts
Conflict of interest
Duty of a lawyer to his client in case there is conflict
of interest
The proscription against representation of conflicting
interest finds application where the conflicting interests
arise with respect to the same general matter and is
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 29
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
 CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
applicable however slight such adverse interest may be;
the fact that the conflict of interests is remote or merely
probable does not make the prohibition inoperative
(Pormento v. Pontevedra A.C. 5128, March 2005).
Rationale: To bar the dishonest practitioner from
fraudulent conduct and to prevent the honest practitioner
from putting himself in a position where he may be
required to choose between conflicting duties
Exceptions to the rule against representation of
conflicting interests
1. Where no conflict of interest exists;
2. Where clients knowingly consent to the dual
representation; and
3. Where no true attorney-client relationship is
attendant.
Tests to determine conflicting interests
1. Conflicting Duties: Will the attorney be required to
contest for that which his duty to another client requires
him to oppose?
2. Invitation of Suspicion: Will the acceptance of a new
relation invite suspicion and/or actually lead to
unfaithfulness or double-dealing towards another client?
3. Use of prior knowledge obtained: Will the attorney be
called upon in his new relation to use against his first
client any knowledge acquired in the previous
employment?
This pertains to those cases in which the adverse party
against whom the attorney appears is his former client
in a matter which is related, directly or indirectly, to the
present controversy
This rule covers NOT ONLY cases in which confidential
communications have been confided, BUT ALSO those
in which no confidence has been bestowed or will be
used.
A lawyer’s immutable duty to a former client does NOT
COVER transactions that occurred beyond the lawyer’s
employment with the client. The intent of the law is to
impose upon the lawyer the duty to protect the client’s
interests only on matters that he previously handled for
the former client and not for matters that arose after the
lawyer-client relationship has terminated (Ruthie Lim-
Santiago vs. Atty. Carlos B. Sagucio, A.C. No. 6705,
March 31, 2006).
It is inconsequential that petitioner never questioned the
propriety of respondent’s continued representation of
Rodriguez. The lack of opposition does not mean tacit
consent. As long as the lawyer represents inconsistent
interests of two or more opposing clients, he is guilty of
30 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
LEGAL ETHICS
violating his oath (San Jose Homeowners Association,
Inc. vs. Romanillos, A.C. No. 5580, June 15, 2005).
Instances when a lawyer is considered having
conflicting duties
1. As an employee of a corporation whose duty is to
attend to its legal affairs, he cannot join a labor union of
employees in that corporation;
2. As a lawyer who investigated an accident as counsel for
insurance, he cannot represent the injured person;
3. As a receiver of a corporation, he cannot represent the
creditor;
4. As a representative of the obligor, he cannot represent
the obligee; and
5. As a lawyer representing a party in a compromise
agreement, he cannot, subsequently, be a lawyer
representing another client who seeks to nullify the
agreement.
Effects of representing adverse interests
1. Disqualification as counsel of new client on petition of
former client;
2. Where such is unknown to, and becomes prejudicial to
the interests of the new client, a judgment against such
may, on that ground, be set aside;
3. A lawyer can be held administratively liable through
disciplinary action and may be held criminally liable for
betrayal of trust; and
4. The attorney’s right to fees may be defeated if found to
be related to such conflict and such was objected to by
the former client, or if there was a concealment and
prejudice by reason of the attorney’s previous
professional relationship with the opposite party.
Effect of termination of relation
Termination of relation provides no justification for a
lawyer to represent an interest adverse to or in conflict
with that of the former client (San Jose v. Cruz, 57 Phil.
79, 1949).
Rationale: The client’s confidence once reposed cannot
be divested by the expiration of the professional
employment (Hilado v. David, 84 Phil. 569, 1949).
Note: A lawyer is forbidden from representing a
subsequent client against a former client only when the
subject matter of the present controversy is related,
directly or indirectly, to the subject matter of the previous
litigation in which he appeared to the former client
(Nombrado v. Hernandes, 26 SCRA 13, 1968).
The rule likewise applies to law firms. Where a lawyer
is disqualified from appearing as counsel in a case
because of conflict of interests, the law firm of which he is
 LEGAL ETHICS
a member as well as any member, associate or assistant
therein is similarly disqualified or prohibited from so acting
(Hilado v. David, 84 Phil. 569, 1949).
Rule 15.04 – A lawyer may, with the written consent of
all concerned, act as mediator, conciliator or
arbitrator in settling disputes.
Consent in writing is required to prevent future
controversy on the authority of the lawyer to act as
mediator or arbitrator. However, a lawyer who acts as
mediator, conciliator or arbitrator in settling a dispute,
cannot represent any of the parties to it (Report of IBP
Committee, p. 82).
Rule 15.05 – A lawyer, when advising his client, shall
give a candid and honest opinion on the merits and
probable resultsof the client’s case, neither
overstating nor understating the prospects of the
case.
As officers of the court, counsels are under obligation to
advise their clients against making untenable and
inconsistent claims. Lawyers are not merely hired
employees who must unquestionably do the bidding of the
client, however unreasonable this may be when tested by
their own expert appreciation of the facts and applicable
law and jurisprudence. COUNSEL MUST COUNSEL
(Periquet vs. NLRC, 186 SCRA, 1990).
Rule 15.06 – A lawyer shall not state nor imply that he
is able to influence any public official, tribunal or
legislative body.
This rule is known as INFLUENCE-PEDDLING.
It is improper for a lawyer to show in any way that he has
connections and can influence any tribunal or public
official, judges, prosecutors, congressmen and others,
specially so if the purpose is to enhance his legal standing
and to entrench the confidence of the client that his case
or cases are assured of victory.
Rule 15.07 – A lawyer shall impress upon his client
compliance with the laws and the principles of
fairness.
A lawyer who advises his client not to obey the order of
the courts is guilty of contempt and misconduct (Conge
vs. Deret, C.A.-G.R. No. 08848-CR., March 25, 1974).
Rule 15.08 – A lawyer who is engaged in another
profession or occupation concurrently with the
practice of law shall make clear to his client whether
he is acting as a lawyer or in another capacity.
CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Rationale: Certain ethical considerations governing the
client-lawyer relationship may be operative in one case
and not in the other (Report of the IBP Committee, p. 84).
A lawyer is not barred from dealing with his client but the
business transaction must be characterized with utmost
honesty and good faith. Business transactions between an
attorney and client are disfavored and discouraged by
policy of law because by virtue of a lawyer’s office, he is in
an easy position to take advantage of the credulity and
ignorance of his client. Thus, there is no presumption of
innocence or improbability of wrongdoing in favor of
lawyers (Nakpil vs. Valdez, A.C. No. 2040, March 4,
1998).
CANON 16: A LAWYER SHALL HOLD IN TRUST ALL
MONEYS AND PROPERTIES OF HIS CLIENT THAT
MAY COME INTO HIS PROFESSION.
Rule 16.01 - A lawyer shall account for all money or
property collected or received for or from the client.
This duty of a lawyer is generally derived from the law on
agency, which imposes the duties of separation,
accounting, notification and delivery on all agents
possessing the principal’s property (Funa, 2009, p.256).
Obligations of a lawyer under Rule 16.01 (ARD)
1. When a lawyer collects or receives money from his
client for a particular purpose, he should promptly
account to the client how the money was spent.
2. If he does not use the money for its intended purpose,
he must immediately return it to the client. His failure
either to render an accounting or to return the money (if
the intended purpose of the money does not
materialize) constitutes a blatant disregard of Rule
16.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
3. ,A lawyer has the duty to deliver his client’s funds or
properties as they fall due or upon demand. His failure
to return the client’s money upon demand gives rise to
the presumption that he has misappropriated it for his
own use to the prejudice of and in violation of the trust
reposed in him by the client (Hector Trenas vs. People
of the Philippines. G.R. No. 195002. January 25, 2012).
Rule 16.02 - A lawyer shall keep the funds of each
client separate and apart from his own and those of
others kept by him.
Rationale: To prevent confusion and possible
misappropriation of funds and properties
Rule 16.03 - A lawyer shall deliver the funds and
property of his client when due or upon demand.
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 31
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
 CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
However, he shall have a lien on the funds and may
apply so much thereof as may be necessary to satisfy
his lawful fees and disbursements, giving notice
promptly thereafter to his client. He shall also have a
lien to the same extent on all judgments and the
execution he has secured for his client as provided
for in the Rules of Court.
A lawyer is not entitled to unilaterally appropriate his
client’s money for himself by the mere fact alone that the
client owes him attorney’s fees (Rayos v. Hernandez, G.R.
No. 169079, February 12, 2007).
Rule 16.04 - A lawyer shall not borrow money from his
client unless the client's interests are fully protected
by the nature of the case or by independent advice.
Neither shall a lawyer lend money to a client except,
when in the interest of justice, he has to advance
necessary expenses in a legal matter he is handling
for the client.
A lawyer who takes advantage of his client’s financial
plight to acquire the latter’s properties for his own benefit
is destructive of the confidence of the public in the fidelity,
honesty and integrity of the legal profession (Hernandez,
Jr. v. Go, A.C.No. 1526, January 2005).
Prohibitions under Rule 16.05
1. Lawyer borrowing money from client
Rationale: To prevent lawyer from taking advantage of
his influence over the client
2. Lawyer lending money to client
Rationale: To assure the lawyer’s independent
professional judgment (Comments of the IBP
Committee).
Prohibition against purchase of property in litigation
under the Civil Code
Art. 1491: The following persons cannot acquire by
purchase, even at a public or judicial auction, either in
person or through the mediation of another:
Xxx
(5) Justices, judges, prosecuting attorneys, clerks of
superior and inferior courts, and other officers and
employees connected with the administration of justice,
the property and rights in litigation or levied upon an
execution before the court within whose jurisdiction or
territory they exercise their respective functions; this
prohibition includes the act of acquiring by assignment
and shall apply to lawyers, with respect to the property
and rights which may be the object of any litigation in
which they may take part by virtue of their profession.
32 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
LEGAL ETHICS
Prohibition is absolute and permanent, and rests on
considerations of public policy and interest. There is no
need to show fraud and no excuse will be heard. Law
does not trust human nature to resist temptation likely to
arise.
Elements of Prohibition
1. There is an attorney-client relationship;
2. The property is in litigation;
3. The attorney is the counsel of record in the case; and
4. The attorney, by himself or through an agent, purchases
such property during the pendency of said case
Other instances where prohibition is applicable
Redemption, compromise and renunciation of the subject
in litigation (Art. 1492, NCC).
Lease of the subject in litigation (Art.1646, NCC).
Instances where prohibition is INAPPLICABLE:
1. Where the property purchased by a lawyer was not
involved in litigation;
2. Where the sale took place before it became involved in
the suit;
3. Where the attorney at the time of the purchase was not
the counsel in the case;
4. Where the purchaser of the property in litigation was a
corporation even though the attorney was an officer
thereof;
5. Where the sale took place after the termination of the
litigation;
6. A lawyer may accept an assignment from his client of a
money judgment rendered in the latter’s favor in a case
in which he was not counsel, in payment of his
professional services performed in another case; and
7. In a contract for attorney’s fees which is contingent
upon the outcome of the litigation.
A lawyer may borrow money from a client bank for here,
the client’s interests are fully protected by the bank’s rules
and regulations which have to be complied with. A lawyer
is allowed to borrow money from his client provided the
interests of the client are fully protected by the nature of
the case or by independent advice (Pineda, Legal Ethics,
2009, p. 283).
CANON 17: A LAWYER OWES FIDELITY TO THE
CAUSE OF HIS CLIENT AND HE SHALL BE MINDFUL
OF THE TRUST AND CONFIDENCE REPOSED IN HIM.
Good moral character expresses itself in the will to do the
unpleasant thing if it is right and the resolve not to do the
pleasant thing if it is wrong (Cordon v. Balicanta, A.C. No.
2797, October 4, 2002).
 LEGAL ETHICS
CANON 18: A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT
WITH COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE.
Diligence: The attention and care required of a person in
a given situation and is the opposite of negligence
(Edquibal v. Ferrer, A.C. No. 5687, February 2005).
It is axiomatic in the practice of law that the price of
success is eternal diligence to the cause of the client.
Ordinary pater familias and not extraordinary diligence is
required (Edquibal v. Ferrer, supra).
A lawyer is presumed to be diligent in the performance of
his duties (People vs. Mantawar, 80 Phil 817).
Duty to protect the client’s interests
Rule 18.01 - A lawyer shall not undertake a legal
service which he knows or should know that he is not
qualified to render. However, he may render such
service if, with the consent of his client, he can obtain
as collaborating counsel a lawyer who is competent
on the matter.
A lawyer’s acceptance of a case is an implied
representation that he possesses the requisite degree of
academic learning, skill and ability in his practice (Azor v.
Beltran, A.C. No. 1054, March 25, 1975).
General Rule: A lawyer should not accept a case which
he knows or should know he is not qualified to render.
Exception: If his client consents, the lawyer can take as
collaborating counsel another lawyer competent on the
matter.
Collaborating counsel
One who is subsequently engaged to assist a lawyer
already handling a particular case for a client (Pineda,
Legal and Judicial Ethics, 2009, p. 291.
The fiduciary nature of attorney-client relationship
prohibits a lawyer from collaborating with another in a
particular case without the consent of the client (Agpalo,
Comments on the Code of Professional Responsibility and
the Code of Judicial Connduct, 2004, p. 291).
The same diligence of the first counsel is required of the
collaborating counsel (Sublay v. NLRC, 324 SCRA 188).
CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Duty to handle cases with adequate preparation
Rule 18.02 - A lawyer shall not handle any legal matter
without adequate preparation.
Rule 18.03 - A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter
entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection
therewith shall render him liable.
In the absence of contrary evidence, a lawyer is presumed
to be prompt and diligent in the performance of his duties
and to have employed his best efforts, learning and ability
in the protection of his client’s interests and in the
discharge of his duties as an officer of the court (People v.
Mantawar, 80 Phil. 817).
The attorney’s duty to safeguard the client’s interests
commences from his retainer until his effective release
from the case or the final disposition of the whole subject
matter of the litigation. During that period, he is expected
to take such reasonable steps and such ordinary care as
his client’s interests may require.
A lawyer who received money to handle a client’s case
but rendered no service at all shall be subject to
disciplinary measure (Dalisay v. Atty. Melanio “Batas”
Mauricio, A.C. No. 5655, April 2005).
The mere failure of the lawyer to perform the obligations
due to the client is considered per se a violation. The
circumstance that the client was also at fault does not
exonerate a lawyer from liability for his negligence in
handling a case (Atty. Elmer C. Solidon vs. Atty. Ramil E.
Macalalad, A.C. No. 8158, February 24, 2010).
General rule: The client is bound by his counsel’s
conduct, negligence and mistake in handling the case.
Exceptions:
1. Where adherence to the rule will result in outright
deprivation of the client’s liberty or property
2. Where the interests of justice require and accord
relief to the client who suffered by reason of the
lawyer’s gross negligence (Agpalo, 2009, p.363).
Duty to keep the client fully informed
Rule 18.04 - A lawyer shall keep the client informed of
the status of his case and shall respond within a
reasonable time to the client's request for information.
He should notify his client of an adverse decision while
within the period to appeal to enable his client to decide
whether to seek an appellate review. He should
SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 33
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
 CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
communicate with him concerning the withdrawal of
appeal with all its adverse consequences. The client is
entitled to the fullest disclosure of the mode or manner by
which his interest is defended.
Respondent Atty. Ga breached the duties imposed by
Rules 18.03 and 18.04 when he failed to reconstitute or
turn over the records of the case to his client, herein
complainant Gone. His negligence manifests lack of
competence and diligence required of every lawyer. His
failure to comply with the request of his client was a gross
betrayal of his fiduciary duty and a breach of the trust
reposed upon him by his client. Respondent’s sentiments
against complainant Gone is not a valid reason for him to
renege on his obligation as a lawyer. The moment he
agreed to handle the case, he was bound to give it his
utmost attention, skill and competence. Those who
perform that duty with diligence and candor not only
safeguard the interests of the client, but also serve the
ends of justice (Patricio Gone v. Atty. Macario Ga, A.C.
No. 7771, April 6, 2011).
Doctrine of imputed knowledge
(Notice to Counsel is Notice to Client)
The knowledge acquired by an attorney during the time
that he is acting within the scope of his authority is
imputed to the client (Ramirez v. Sheriff of Pampanga, 75
Phil 462).
Basis: An attorney, who has notice of matter affecting his
client, has communicated the same to his principal in the
course of professional dealings.
The doctrine applies regardless of whether or not the
lawyer actually communicated to the client what he
learned in his professional capacity, the attorney and his
client being, in legal contemplation, one juridical person
(Agpalo, Legal and Judicial Ethics, 2009, p.350).
Exceptions
1. If strict application might foster dangerous collusion to
the detriment of justice;
2. If service of notice upon party instead of upon his
attorney is ordered by court;
3. If notice of pre-trial is required to be served upon parties
and their respective lawyers; and
4. In appeal from the lower court to the RTC, upon
docketing of appeal. Failure to appeal to CA despite
instructions by the client to do so constitutes
inexcusable negligence on the part of the counsel.
Canon 18, Rule 18.04 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility requires a lawyer to keep his client
informed of the status of the case and respond within a
34 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW
2013 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS
LEGAL ETHICS
reasonable time to the client’s request for information
(Abiero vs. Juanino, A.C. No. 5302, February 2005).
Duty when the accused intends to plead guilty
A plea of guilty is an admission by the accused of his guilt
of crime as charged in the information and of the truth of
the facts alleged, including the qualifying and aggravating
circumstances.
It is the duty of the defense counsel when his client
desires to enter a plea of guilty to: (ACEPA)
1. Fully Acquaint himself with the records and surrounding
circumstances of the case;
2. Confer with the accused and obtain from him his
account of what had happened;
3. Thoroughly Explain to him the import of a guilty plea
and the inevitable conviction that will follow;
4. See to it that the prescribed Procedure which
experience has shown to be necessary to the
administration of justice is strictly followed and disclosed
in the court records; and
5. Advise him of his constitutional rights.
Duty to comply with the client’s lawful request
A lawyer should endeavor to seek instruction from his
client on any substantial matter concerning the litigation,
which may require decision on the part of the client, such
as whether to compromise the case or to appeal an
unfavorable judgment. He should give his client sound
advice on any such and similar matters and comply with
the client’s lawful instructions relative thereto. He should
resist and should never follow any unlawful instruction of
his client.
CANON 19: A LAWYER SHALL REPRESENT HIS
CLIENT WITH ZEAL WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE
LAW.
In the discharge of his duty of entire devotion to the
client’s cause, a lawyer should present every remedy or
defense authorized by law in support of his client’s cause,
regardless of his personal views (Legarda vs. Court of
Appeals, 195 SCRA 418, 1991).
While a lawyer owes absolute fidelity to the cause of his
client, full devotion to his genuine interest, and warm zeal
in the maintenance and defense of his rights, he must do
so only within the bounds of law (Choa vs. Chiongson,
260 SCRA 477, 1996).
A lawyer’s duty is not to his client but to the administration
of justice; to that end, his client’s success is wholly
subordinate and his conduct ought to and must always be
unscrupulously observant of law and ethics (Magsalang
vs. People, 190 SCRA 306).