BAR MATTER NO.
730 June 13, 1997 For the guidance of the bench and bar, we hold that a law student
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of the Court En
Banc dated June 10, 1997.
IN RE: NEED THAT LAW STUDENT PRACTICING UNDER RULE
138-A BE ACTUALLY SUPERVISED DURING TRIAL (BAR MATTER
NO. 730).
The issue in this Consulta is whether a law student who appears
before the court under the Law Student Practice Rule (Rule 138-A)
should be accompanied by a member of the bar during the trial. This
issue was raised by retired Supreme Court Justice Antonio P. Barredo,
counsel for the defendant in Civil Case No. BCV-92-11 entitled Irene
A. Caliwara v. Roger T. Catbagan filed before the Regional Trial Court
of Bacoor, Cavite.
The records show that the plaintiff in civil Case No. BCV-92-11 was
represented by Mr. Cornelio Carmona, Jr., an intern at the Office of
Legal Aid, UP-College of Law (UP-OLA). Mr. Carmona conducted
hearings and completed the presentation of the plaintiff's evidence-in-
chief without the presence of a supervising lawyer. Justice Barredo
questioned the appearance of Mr. Carmona during the hearing
because the latter was not accompanied by a duly accredited lawyer.
On December 15, 1994, Presiding Judge Edelwina Pastoral issued an
Order requiring Mr. Carmona to be accompanied by a supervising
lawyer on the next hearing. In compliance with said Order, UP-OLA
and the Secretary of Justice executed a Memorandum of Agreement
directing Atty. Catubao and Atty. Legayada of the Public Attorney's
Office to supervise Mr. Carmona during the subsequent hearings.
Justice Barredo asserts that a law student appearing before the trial
court under Rule 138-A should be accompanied by a supervising
lawyer. 1 On the other hand, UP-OLA, through its Director, Atty.
Alfredo F. Tadiar, submits that "the matter of allowing a law intern to
appear unaccompanied by a duly accredited supervising lawyer
should be . . . left to the sound discretion of the court after having
made at least one supervised appearance." 2
appearing before the Regional Trial Court under Rule 138-A should at
all times be accompanied by a supervising lawyer. Section 2 of Rule
138-A provides.
Sec. 2. Appearance. — The appearance of the law student authorized
by this rule, shall be under the direct supervision and control of a
member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines duly accredited by the
law school. Any and all pleadings, motions, briefs, memoranda or
other papers to be filed, must be signed the by supervising attorney
for and in behalf of the legal clinic.
The phrase "direct supervision and control" requires no less than the
physical presence of the supervising lawyer during the hearing. This
is in accordance with the threefold rationale behind the Law Student
Practice Rule, to wit: 3
1. to ensure that there will be no miscarriage
of justice as a result of incompetence or
inexperience of law students, who, not having
as yet passed the test of professional
competence, are presumably not fully
equipped to act a counsels on their own;
2. to provide a mechanism by which the
accredited law school clinic may be able to
protect itself from any potential vicarious
liability arising from some culpable action by
their law students; and
3. to ensure consistency with the
fundamental principle that no person is
allowed to practice a particular profession
without possessing the qualifications,
particularly a license, as required by law.
The matter of allowing a law student to appear before the court
unaccompanied by a supervising lawyer cannot be left to the
discretion of the presiding judge. The rule clearly states that the
appearance of the law student shall be under the direct control and
supervision of a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines duly
accredited by law schools. The rule must be strictly construed because
public policy demands that legal work should be entrusted only to student must be accompanied by a supervising lawyer in all his
those who possess tested qualifications, are sworn to observe the rules appearance.
and ethics of the legal profession and subject to judicial disciplinary
control. 4 We said in Bulacan v. Torcino: 5 Padilla and Francisco, J.J., on leave.

Court procedures are often technical and may prove like Very truly yours,
snares to the ignorant or the unwary. In the past, our law has
allowed non-lawyers to appear for party litigants in places
where duly authorized members of the bar are not available (Sgd.) LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO
(U.S. vs. Bacansas, 6 Phil. 539). For relatively simple litigation
before municipal courts, the Rules still allow a more educated Clerk of court
or capable person in behalf of a litigant who cannot get a
lawyer. But for the protection of the parties and in the interest
of justice, the requirement for appearances in regional trial
courts and higher courts is more stringent.

The Law Student Practice Rule is only an exception to the rule. Hence,
the presiding judge should see to it that the law student appearing
before the court is properly guided and supervised by a member of the
bar.

The rule, however, is different if the law student appears before an

inferior court, where the issues and procedure are relatively simple. In
inferior courts, a law student may appear in his personal capacity
without the supervision of a lawyer. Section 34 Rule 138 provides;

Sec. 34. By whom litigation is conducted. — In the court of a

justice of the peace, a party may conduct his litigation in
person, with the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for
that purpose, or with the aid of an attorney. In any other
court, a party may conduct his litigation personally or by aid
of an attorney, and his appearance must be either personal or
by a duly authorized member of the bar.

Thus, a law student may appear before an inferior court as an agent

or friend of a party without the supervision of a member of the bar.

IN VIEW WHEREOF, we hold that a law student appearing before the

Regional Trial Court under the authority of Rule 138-A must be under
the direct control and supervision of a member of the Integrated Bar
of the Philippines duly accredited by the law school and that said law