DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018

LEGAL ETHICS AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES

Green Notes
Chel Sy
LCBO Chairperson Tet Valeza Gel Yatcco
Academic Affairs Legal Ethics and Practical
Nico Garcia Chairperson Exercises Chairperson
LCBO Vice Chair for
Internals Janine Tutanes Donna Santy
Rod Zantua Legal Ethics and Practical
Steph Griar Academic Affairs Deputy Exercises Deputy
LCBO Vice Chair for Chairpersons
Externals Ian Aquino
RJ Cal
Pat Costales Dane Chua
LCBO Executive Secretary Nolan Domingo
Saibert Santos
Ces Naga Legal Ethics and Practical
LCBO Executive Treasurer Exercises Team Members
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises Legal Ethics

TABLE OF CONTENTS GROUNDS ............................................ 26

LEGAL ETHICS...................................... 5 THE POWERS OF THE SUPREME
PRACTICE OF LAW (RULE 138) ......... 5 COURT TO PUNISH FOR
CONTEMPT VS. THE POWER TO
CONCEPT ............................................... 5 DISCIPLINE LAWYERS...................... 27
DEFINITION ............................................5
READMISSION TO THE BAR .......... 27
POWER TO CONTROL & REGULATE
THE PRACTICE OF LAW ..................... 6 LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN
SUSPENDED ........................................ 27
QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE
PRACTICE OF LAW .............................. 6 LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN
DISBARRED ......................................... 27
CONTINUING REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE PRACTICE OF LAW ............ 7 LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN
REPATRATED ...................................... 28
APPEARANCE OF NON-LAWYERS .. 8
MANDATORY CONTINUING
SANCTIONS FOR PRACTICE OR LEGAL EDUCATION .......................... 28
APPEARANCE WITHOUT
AUTHORITY .......................................... 9 PURPOSE .............................................. 28

PRIVILEGES OF ATTORNEY ........... 10 PERSONS REQUIRED TO COMPLY

WITH THE CONTINUING LEGAL
PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND PRACTICE EDUCATION ........................................ 28
OF LAW ................................................. 10
REQUIREMENTS................................. 28
LAWYERS AUTHORIZED TO
REPRESENT THE GOVERNMENT.. 10 COMPLIANCE ..................................... 28

LAWYER’S OATH ............................... 11 EXEMPTIONS ...................................... 28

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF SANCTIONS......................................... 29

A LAWYER UNDER THE CODE OF MANDATORY LEGAL AID SERVICE
PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY 11 ................................................................. 29
TO THE SOCIETY (CANONS 1-6) .... 11 FREE LEGAL AID SERVICES ............ 29
TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION PRACTICING LAWYERS ................... 29
(CANONS 7-9) ...................................... 14
PURPOSE .............................................. 29
TO THE COURTS (CANONS 10-13) . 16
SCOPE .................................................... 29
TO THE CLIENTS (CANONS 14-22) 18
REQUIREMENTS................................. 29
SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND
PENALTIES ........................................... 29
DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS (RULE
139-B)...................................................... 25 NOTARIAL PRACTICE (A.M. NO. 02-
8-13-SC, AS AMENDED) ..................... 30
NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS
OF DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS DEFINITIONS ...................................... 30
AGAINST LAWYERS ......................... 25 QUALIFICATIONS OF A NOTARY
PROCEEDINGS ................................... 26 PUBLIC .................................................. 30
3
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises Legal Ethics

TERM OF OFFICE OF NOTARY SIMPLE CONTRACTS- LEASE, SALE

PUBLIC .................................................. 30 OF REALTY, OR PERSONAL
PROPERTY ............................................ 49
PUBLIC POWERS AND LIMITATION
................................................................ 30 PROMISSORY NOTES ....................... 52
NOTARIAL REGISTER ...................... 31 VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATE
OF NON FORUM SHOPPING........... 52
JURISDICTION OF NOTARY PUBLIC
AND TERM OF NOTARIZATION ... 32 NOTICE OF HEARING AND
EXPLANATION.................................... 53
REVOCATION OF COMMISSION .. 32
AFFIDAVITS – LOSS, CHANGE OF
COMPETENT EVIDENCE OF
NAME, JUDICIAL AFFIDAVITS ...... 54
IDENTITY ............................................. 33
NOTARIAL CERTIFICATES – JURAT
DUTIES OF NOTARY PUBLIC ......... 33
AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .......... 56
SANCTIONS ........................................ 34
JUDICIAL ETHICS ..... Error! Bookmark
not defined.
SOURCES OF JUDICIAL ETHICS .... 36
NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL
CONDUCT ............................................ 37
AUTHORITY TO DISCIPLINE ......... 41
ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION
OVER JUDGES AND JUSTICES ....... 42
INITIATION OF COMPLAINT ....... 42
POWERS AND DUTIES OF COURTS
AND JUDICIAL OFFICERS (RULE
135) ....................................................... 41
PROCEDURE FOR DISCIPLINE OF
JUDGES ................................................ 44
DISQUALIFICATION OF JUSTICES
AND JUDGES....................................... 42
DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE
JUDICIARY ........................................... 42
COURT RECORDS AND GENERAL
DUTIES OF CLERKS AND
STENOGRAPHER ............................... 42

PRACTICAL EXERCISES ............. Error!

Bookmark not defined.
QUITCLAIMS IN LABOR CASES
..................Error! Bookmark not defined.
4
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises Legal Ethics

LEGAL ETHICS

DEFINITION
It is the branch of moral science which treats of the duties
which an attorney owes to the court, to his client, to his
colleagues in the profession, and to the public (Malcolm) as
embodied in the Constitution, Rules of Court, the Code of
Professional Responsibility, Canons of Professional Ethics,
jurisprudence, moral law and special laws. (Pineda)

SOURCES
1. 1987 Constitution
2. Rules of Court
3. Code of Professional Responsibility
4. Code of Judicial Conduct
5. Lawyer’s Oath
6. Supreme Court decisions
7. Revised Penal Code
8. New Civil Code
9. Local Government Code

PRACTICE OF LAW (RULE 138)

LEGAL CONCEPT

DEFINITION

ETHICS
Any activity in or out of court, which requires the
application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training,
and experience.

According to Justice Padilla, in his dissent in Cayetano v.

Monsod, the following factors are considered in determining
whether there is practice of law [H.A.C.A]:

1. Habituality – Practice of law implies customarily or

habitually holding one's self out to the public as a lawyer.
It is more than an isolated appearance for it consists in
frequent or customary action.
However, an isolated appearance may constitute
practice of law when there is a rule prohibiting
some persons from engaging in the exercise of the
legal profession.
2. Application of law, legal principles, practice or procedure
– It calls for legal knowledge, training and experience.
3. Compensation– Practice of law implies that one must have
presented himself to be in the active and continued
practice of the legal profession and that his professional
services are available to the public for compensation.
4. Attorney-client relationship – Where no such relationship
exists, such as in cases of teaching law or writing law
books or articles, there is no practice of law.

Generally, to practice law is to give advice or render any

kind of service which device or service requires the use in
any degree of legal knowledge or skill. Hence, the Supreme
Court declared that a lawyer-economist, a lawyer-manager,
a lawyer-entrepreneur, and a lawyer-legislator of both rich
and the poor as engaged in the practice of law. (Cayetano v.
Monsod, G.R. No. 100113 September 3, 1991)

Teaching law is considered practice of law because the fact

of their being law professors is inextricably intertwined with
the fact that they are lawyers. (Re: Letter of UP Law Faculty,

5
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
A.M. 10-10-4-SC)
PRACTICE OF LAW IS A PRIVILEGE, NOT A RIGHT
The right to practice law is not a natural or constitutional
right but is a privilege. It is limited to persons of good moral
character with special qualifications duly ascertained and
certified. The exercise of this privilege presupposes
possession of integrity, legal knowledge, educational
attainment, and even public trust since a lawyer is an officer
of the court. A bar candidate does not acquire the right to
practice law simply by passing the bar examinations. The
practice of law is a privilege that can be withheld even from
one who has passed the bar examinations, if the person
seeking admission had practiced law without a license.
(Aguirre v. Rana, B. M. No. 1036, June 10, 2003)
Passing the bar is not the only qualification to become an
attorney-at-law. The two essential requisites for becoming a
lawyer still had to be performed, namely:
1. His lawyer’s oath to be administered by this Court; and
2. His signature in the Roll of Attorneys. (Aguirre v. Rana,
supra)
LAW AS A PROFESSION, NOT A BUSINESS OR TRADE
Lawyering is not primarily meant to be a money-making
venture, and law advocacy is not a capital that necessarily
yields profits. Duty to public service and to the
administration of justice should be the primary
consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate their
personal interests or what they owe to themselves. (Burbe v.
Magulta, AC No. 99-634, June 10, 2002)
POWER TO CONTROL & REGULATE THE
PRACTICE OF LAW
(1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5(5)
The authority to decide who may be admitted to the bar
naturally and logically belongs to the judiciary represented
by the Supreme Court in view of the nature of its judicial
function and in the role played by the attorneys in the
administration of justice.(Agpalo)
THE POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT TO REGULATE
THE PRACTICE OF LAW INCLUDES THE AUTHORITY
TO:
(a) Define the term;
(b) Prescribe the qualifications of a candidate to and the
subjects of the bar examinations;
(c) Decide who will be admitted to practice;
(d) Discipline, suspend, or disbar any unfit and unworthy
member of the bar;
(e) Reinstate any disbarred or indefinitely suspended
attorney;
(f) Ordain the Integration of the Philippine Bar;
(g) Punish for contempt any person for unauthorized
practice of law;
(h) Exercise overall supervision of the legal profession;
(i) Exercise any other power as may be necessary to
elevate the standards of the bar and preserve its
integrity. (Agpalo)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE PRACTICE OF LAW
QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE PRACTICE OF LAW
General Rule: Only those who are licensed to practice law
can appear and handle cases in court.
WHO MAY PRACTICE LAW
Any person heretofore duly admitted as a member of the
bar, or hereafter admitted as such in accordance with the
provisions of this rule, and who is in good and regular
standing. (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 1)
Exception: The following are also allowed in exceptional
circumstances:
a) Law students,
b) By an agent/friend,
c) By the litigant himself.
EVERY APPLICANT FOR ADMISSION AS A MEMBER
OF THE BAR MUST BE:
1. A citizen of the Philippines,
2. At least twenty-one years of age,
3. Of good moral character, and
4. A resident of the Philippines; and
5. Must produce before the Supreme Court satisfactory
evidence of good moral character, and
6. That no charges against him, involving moral
turpitude, have been filed or are pending in any court
in the Philippines. (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec.2)
CITIZENSHIP
The practice of all professions in the Philippines shall be
limited to Filipino citizens save in cases prescribed by law
(Sec. 14, Art. XII, 1987 Constitution).
Every applicant for admission as a member of the bar must
be a citizen of the Philippines. (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec.
2)
Ratio: Citizenship ensures allegiance to the Republic and its
laws. The loss of Filipino citizenship ipso jure terminates the
privilege to practice law in the Philippines except when
citizenship is lost by reason of naturalization and reacquired
through RA 9225 (Petition to Resume Practice of Law of
Dacanay, B.M. 1678, December 17, 2007).
RESIDENCE
Every applicant for admission as a member of the bar must
be... a resident of the Philippines. (Rules of Court, Rule 138,
Sec.2)
Ratio: His/her duties to his client and to the court will
require that he be readily accessible and available.
AGE
Every applicant for admission as a member of the bar must
be at least 21 years of age. (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec.2)
Ratio: Maturity and discretion are required in the practice of
law.
GOOD MORAL CHARACTER
Good moral character is a continuing qualification required
of every member of the bar, it is not only a qualification
precedent to the practice of law (Narag v. Narag, A.C. 3405,
6
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
June 29, 1998).
Absence of a proven conduct or act which has been
historically and traditionally considered as a manifestation
of moral turpitude. The act or conduct need not amount to a
crime; and even if it does constitute an offense, a conviction
upon a criminal charge is not necessary to demonstrate bad
moral character although it may show moral depravity
(Agpalo).
Good moral character is what a person really is, as
distinguished from good reputation, the estimate in which
he is held by the public in the place where he is known [In
the Matter of the Disqualification of Bar Examinee Haron S.
Meling In The 2002 Bar Examinations and For Disciplinary
Action As Member of The Philippine Shari’a Bar, B.M. 1154, June
8, 2004).
The Supreme Court may deny lawyer’s oathtaking based on
a conviction for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide
(hazing case). But after submission of evidence and various
certifications “he may now be regarded as complying with
the requirements of good moral character…he is not
inherently of bad moral fiber”. (In re: Argosino, A.M. 712,
March 19, 1997).
Concealment of pending criminal cases constitutes lack of
good moral character (in petition to take the bar
examinations) (In the Matter of the Disqualification of Bar
Examinee Haron S. Meling In The 2002 Bar Examinations and
For Disciplinary Action As Member of The Philippine Shari’a
Bar, B.M. 1154 June 8, 2004).
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR OTHER
APPLICANTS
All applicants for admission shall, before being admitted to
the examination:
satisfactorily show that they have regularly studied law for
four years, and successfully completed all prescribed
courses, in a law school or university, officially approved
and recognized by the Secretary of Education;
PRESCRIBED COURSES:
1. Civil Law,
2. Commercial Law,
3. Remedial Law,
4. Criminal Law,
5. Public and Private International Law,
6. Political Law,
7. Labor and Social Legislation,
8. Medical Jurisprudence,
9. Taxation
10. Legal Ethics.
The affidavit of the candidate, accompanied by a certificate
from the university or school of law, shall be filed as
evidence of such facts, and further evidence may be required
by the court. (Sec.5, Rule 138, Rules of Court)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
CONTINUING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
PRACTICE OF LAW
✓ Good and Regular Standing;
✓ Membership in the IBP;
✓ Payment of IBP Dues;
✓ Payment of Professional Tax;
✓ Compliance with the Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education (MCLE)
✓ Possession of Good Moral Character.
GOOD MORAL CHARACTER
Lawyers have been repeatedly reminded that their
possession of good moral character is a continuing condition
to preserve their membership in the Bar in good
standing. The continued possession of good moral
character is a requisite condition for remaining in the
practice of law. (Advincula v. Macabata, A.C. No. 7204, March
7, 2007)
The possession of good moral character is both a condition
precedent and a continuing requirement to warrant
admission to the Bar and to retain membership in the Legal
Profession. Members of the Bar are clearly duty-bound to
observe the highest degree of morality and integrity in order
to safeguard the reputation of the Bar. Any errant behavior
on the part of a lawyer that tends to expose a deficiency in
moral character, honesty, probity or good demeanor, be it in
the lawyer’s public or private activities, is sufficient to
warrant the lawyer’s suspension or disbarment. (De Leon v.
Pedreña, 708 SCRA 13, October 22, 2013)
CITIZENSHIP
REACQUISITION OF THE PRIVILEGE TO PRACTICE
LAW UNDER RA NO. 9225
A Filipino lawyer who has lost and reacquired his
citizenship under RA 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Re-
acquisition Act of 2003) is deemed not to have lost his
Philippine citizenship. However, he still needs to apply with
the Supreme Court for a license or permit to engage in such
practice after compliance with the following:
(a) Updating and payment of annual
(b) membership dues in the IBP;
(c) Payment of professional tax;
(d) Completion of 36 hours of MCLE;
(e) Retaking of the lawyer’s oath (Sec. 5(4), RA 9225).
A Filipino lawyer who becomes a citizen of another country
and later re-acquires his Philippine citizenship under RA
9225, remains to be a member of the Philippine Bar.
However, the right to resume the practice of law is not
automatic. RA 9225 provides that a person who intends to
practice his profession in the Philippines must apply with
the proper authority for a license or permit to engage in such
practice. Thus, in pursuance to the qualifications laid down
by the Court for the practice of law, the OBC requires the
following:
1. Petition for Re-Acquisition of Philippine Citizenship;
2. Order (for Re-Acquisition of Philippine citizenship);
3. Oath of Allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines;
4. Identification Certificate (IC) issued by the Bureau of
Immigration;
5. Certificate of Good Standing issued by the IBP;
7
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
6. Certification from the IBP indicating updated payments of
annual membership dues;
7. Proof of payment of professional tax; and
8. Certificate of compliance issued by the MCLE Office.
(Petition to Reacquire the Privilege to Practice Law of Muneses,
B.M. 2112, July 24, 2012).
APPEARANCE OF NON-LAWYERS
LAW STUDENT PRACTICE RULE (RULE 138-A)
CONDITIONS FOR STUDENT PRACTICE
A LAW STUDENT WHO HAS:
1. successfully completed his 3rd year of the regular four-
year prescribed law curriculum and;
2. is enrolled in a recognized law school's clinical legal
education program approved by the Supreme Court,
may appear without compensation in any civil,
criminal or administrative case before any trial court,
tribunal, board or officer, to represent indigent clients
accepted by the legal clinic of the law school. (Rules of
Court, Rule 138-A, Sec. 1)
The appearance of the law student authorized by this rule
shall be under the direct supervision and control of a
member of the IBP duly accredited by the law school. Any
and all pleadings, motions, briefs, memoranda, or other
papers to be filed, must be signed by the supervising
attorney for and in behalf of the legal clinic. (Rules of Court,
Rule 138-A, Sec. 2)
The phrase "direct supervision and control" requires no less
than the physical presence of the supervising lawyer during
the hearing.
The Rules safeguarding privileged communications between
attorney and client shall apply. (Rules of Court, Rule 138-A,
Sec. 3)
The law student shall comply with the standards of
professional conduct governing members of the bar. Failure
of an attorney to provide adequate supervision of student
practice may be a ground for disciplinary action (Rules of
Court, Rule 138-A, Sec. 4).
Sec. 34, Rule 138 is clear that appearance before the inferior
courts by a non-lawyer is allowed, irrespective of whether or
not he is a law student (Cruz v. Mina, G.R. 154207, April 27,
2007). Thus, a law student may appear under the
circumstances of Sec. 38, as an agent or a friend of a party
litigant, without complying with the requirements of Rule
138- A, e.g., supervision of a lawyer.
This is in accordance with the threefold rationale behind the
Law Student Practice Rule, to wit:
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
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 as 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. (Bar Matter
No. 730 [In Re: Need That Law Student Practicing Under
Rule 138-A Be Actually Supervised During Trial], June 10,
1997)
Note: A law student appearing before the RTC under Rule
138-A should at all times be accompanied by a supervising
lawyer. Section 2 of Rule 138-A provides. (Bar Matter No. 730,
supra)
NON-LAWYERS IN COURTS
By whom litigation conducted:
In the MTC- a party may conduct his litigation in person,
with the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for the
purpose, or with the aid an attorney. (Rules of Court, Rule
138, Sec. 34)
Note: It may be inferred from Sec. 34, Rule 138 that a law
student may appear without his supervising attorney as an
agent or friend of a party-litigant in inferior courts (i.e.,
MTC)
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.(Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 34)
In a criminal case before the MTC – in a locality where a
duly licensed member of the Bar is not available, the judge
may appoint a non-lawyer who is a resident of that province,
of good repute for probity and ability to represent the
accused in his defense. (Rules of Court, Rule 116, Sec. 7)
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DE OFFICIO
A counsel de officio is a counsel, appointed or assigned by
the court, from among such members of the bar in good
standing who, by reason of their experience and ability may
adequately defend the accused. The person need not be a
member of the bar if no lawyer is available in a given
locality. (Rules of Court, Rule 115, Sec. 7)
They are appointed to defend an indigent in a criminal
action (Rules of Court Rule 116, Sections 3, 4, and 5; Rule 138,
Sec. 32); or to represent a destitute party in a case (Rules of
Court, Rule 138, Sec. 31).
The court, considering the gravity of the offense and the
difficulty of the questions that may arise, shall appoint as
counsel de oficio only such members of the bar in good
standing who, by reason of their experience and ability, can
competently defend the accused.
8
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
But in localities where such members of the bar are not
available, the court may appoint any person, resident of the
province and of good repute for probity and ability, to
defend the accused.
SELF-REPRESENTATION
A non-lawyer conducting his own litigation is bound by the
same rules in conducting the trial of his case. He cannot,
after judgment, claim that he was not properly represented.
When a person conducts his litigation in person, he is not
engaged in the practice of law. (Agpalo)
A juridical person may also appear through its non-lawyer
agents or officers in the municipal trial court.
Sec. 34 does not distinguish between civil and criminal cases.
However, in criminal cases, the rule is qualified:
(a) Under Sec. 1(c), Rule 115, the accused may defend
himself in person “when it sufficiently appears to the
court that he can properly protect his rights without the
assistance of counsel.”
(b) Under Sec. 7, Rule 116, in determining whether a
counsel de oficio should be appointed, or, for that
matter, whether a counsel de parte should be required
(conversely, whether the accused should be allowed to
defend himself in person), the gravity of the offense
and the difficulty of the questions that may arise should
be considered.
While the right to be represented by counsel is immutable,
the option to secure the services of counsel de parte is not
absolute. The court may restrict the accused’s option to
retain a counsel de parte if:
(a) He insists on an attorney he cannot afford;
(b) He chose a person not a member of the bar;
(c) The attorney declines for a valid reason (e.g., conflict of
interest) (People v. Serzo, G.R. No. 118435 June 20, 1997).
AGENT OR FRIEND
When appointed or chosen, the agent or friend is not
engaged in the practice of law, since there is no habituality in
the activity and no attorney-client relationship exists. He is
only permitted to appear in the municipal trial court.
In criminal cases, in localities where members of the bar are
not available, the court may appoint any person (i.e., non-
lawyer), who is a resident of the province and of good repute
for probity and ability to defend the accused, in lieu of a
counsel de oficio (Rules of Court, Rule 116, Sec. 7). In relation to
Sec. 34, Rule 138, this is only allowed in the municipal trial
court.
NON-LAWYERS IN ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS
Under the Labor Code, non-lawyers may appear before the
Commission or any Labor Arbiter only:
1. If they represent themselves; or
2. If they represent their organization or members thereof.
(Labor Code, Art. 222(1))
Under the Cadastral Act, any person claiming any interest in
any part of the lands, whether named in the notice or not,
shall appear before the Court by himself, or by some person
in his behalf and shall file an answer on or before the return
day or within such further time as may be allowed by the
Court. (Sec. 9, Act. No. 2259 (The Cadastral Act))
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
The 2011 NLRC Rule of Procedure, promulgated pursuant to
Art 218(a), Labor Code, allows (a) non-lawyers, who are not
necessarily a party to the case, to represent a union or
members thereof, (b) non-lawyers who are duly-accredited
members of any legal aid office recognized by the
Department of Justice or Integrated Bar of the Philippines,
and (c) non-lawyer owners of establishments, to appear
before it.
A non-lawyer may represent a party before the Department
of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB). (Pineda)
LIMITATIONS
In order that these laws will not infringe upon the power of
the Supreme Court to regulate the practice of law, the
following limitations must be observed:
a) The non-lawyer should confine his work to non-
adversary contentions and should not undertake purely
legal work (i.e., examination of witness, presentation of
evidence);
b) The services should not be habitual;
c) Attorney’s fees should not be charged. (Agpalo)
PROCEEDINGS WHERE LAWYERS ARE PROHIBITED
FROM APPEARING AS COUNSELS
1. In small claims cases, no attorney shall appear in
behalf of or represent a party at the hearing, unless the
attorney is the plaintiff or defendant. If the court
determines that a party cannot properly present
his/her claim or defense and needs assistance, the court
may, in its discretion, allow another individual who is
not an attorney to assist that party upon the latter's
consent. (Rules of Procedure in Small Claims Cases, Sec. 17)
2. In all katarungang pambarangay proceedings, the
parties must appear in person without the assistance of
the counsel or representative, except for minors and
incompetents who may be assisted by their next of kin
who are not lawyers. (Local Government Code, Sec 415)
SANCTIONS FOR PRACTICE OR
APPEARANCE WITHOUT AUTHORITY
LAWYERS WITHOUT AUTHORITY
Under Sec. 27, Rule 138, corruptly or willfully appearing as
an attorney for a party to a case without authority to do so is
a ground for disbarment or suspension.
Consequently, for respondents’ willful appearance as
counsels of KWD without authority to do so, there is a valid
ground to impose disciplinary action against them. Under
Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, a member of the
bar may be disbarred or suspended from his office as
attorney by the Supreme Court … for corruptly or willfully
appearing as an attorney for a party to a case without
authority to do so. (Vargas v. Ignes, A.C. No. 8096, July 5,
2010)
PERSONS WHO ARE NOT LAWYERS
A respondent adjudged guilty of indirect contempt
committed against a RTC or a court of equivalent or higher
rank may be punished by a fine not exceeding thirty
thousand pesos or imprisonment not exceeding six (6)
9
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
months, or both. If a respondent is adjudged guilty of
contempt committed against a lower court, he may be
punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand pesos or
imprisonment not exceeding one (1) month, or both. (1997
Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 71, Sec. 7)
The liability for the unauthorized practice of law under
Section 3(e), Rule 71 of the Rules of Court is in the nature of
criminal contempt. (Tan v. Balajadia, G.R. No. 169517, March
14, 2006)
PRIVILEGES OF ATTORNEY
A lawyer has the privilege and right to practice law during
good behavior before any judicial, quasi-judicial, or
administrative tribunal.
An attorney enjoys the presumption of regularity in the
discharge of his duty. His statements, if relevant or material
to the case, are absolutely privileged regardless of their
defamatory tenor. He can speak freely and courageously in
proceedings without the risk of criminal prosecution.
The law makes his passing the bar is equivalent to first grade
Civil Service eligibility for any position in the classified
service of the government the duties of which require
knowledge of law, or a second grade eligibility for any other
government position which does not prescribe proficiency in
the law a qualification. (Agpalo)
PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND PRACTICE OF LAW
General Rule: Government lawyers are not allowed to
engage in the private practice of their profession during their
incumbency.
Exception: A government lawyer can engage in the practice
of his or her profession under the following conditions: first,
the private practice is authorized by the Constitution or by
the law; and second, the practice will not conflict or tend to
conflict with his or her official functions.
PROHIBITION OR DISQUALIFICATION OF FORMER
GOVERNMENT ATTORNEYS
In case of lawyers separated from the government service
who are covered under subparagraph (b) (2) of Section 7 of
R.A. No. 6713, a one-year prohibition is imposed to practice
law in connection with any matter before the office he used
to be with. Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility echoes this restriction and prohibits lawyers,
after leaving the government service, to accept engagement
or employment in connection with any matter in which he
had intervened while in the said service. (Olazo v. Justice
Tinga, A.M. No. 10-5-7-SC, December 7, 2010)
PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHO CANNOT PRACTICE LAW
OR CAN PRACTICE LAW WITH RESTRICTIONS
ABSOLUTELY PROHIBITED TO ENGAGE IN THE
PRIVATE PRACTICE OF LAW:
1. Judges and other officials as employees of the Supreme
Court (Rules of Court, Rule 148, Sec. 35)
2. Officials and employees of the OSG
3. Government prosecutors (People v. Villanueva, G.R. No.
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
L-19450, May 27, 1965, 14 SCRA 109)
4. President, Vice-President, members of the cabinet, their
deputies and assistants (1987 Constitution, Art. VIII Sec.
15)
5. Members of the Constitutional Commission (1987
Constitution, Art IX-A, Sec. 2)
6. Ombudsman and his deputies (1987 Constitution, Art.
IX, Sec. 8(2))
7. All governors, city and municipal mayors (R.A. No.
7160, Sec. 90; Javellana v. DILG,G.R. No. 102549 August
10, 1992)
8. Those prohibited by special law
WITH RESTRICTIONS TO ENGAGE IN THE PRACTICE
OF LAW:
No Senator as member of the House of Representative may
personally appear as counsel before any court of justice as
before the Electoral Tribunals, as quasi-judicial and other
administrative bodies (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 14)
Under the Local Government Code (RA 7160, Sec. 91)
Sanggunian members may practice their professions
provided that if they are members of the Bar, they shall not:
1. appear as counsel before any court in any civil case
wherein a local government unit or any office, agency,
or instrumentality of the government is the adverse
party;
2. appear as counsel in any criminal case wherein an
officer or employee of the national or local government
is accused of an offense committed in relation to his
office;
3. collect any fee for their appearance in administrative
proceedings involving the local government unit of
which he is an official;
4. use property and personnel of the government except
when the Sanggunian member concerned is defending
the interest of the government.
A retired justice or judge receiving pension from the
government, cannot act as counsel in any civil case in which
the Government, or any of its subdivision or agencies is the
adverse party or in a criminal case wherein an officer or
employee of the Government is accused of an offense in
relation to his office. (RA 910, Sec. 1, as amended)
LAWYERS AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT
THE GOVERNMENT
1. Members of the Office of the Solicitor General
2. State prosecutors
3. Members of the Office of the Government Corporate
Counsel
4. Officers who may be authorized by law.
5. Private lawyers retained by government entities with
the approval of the OSG or GOCC and the Commission
on Audit. (Vargas v. Ignes, supra)
PERSON APPOINTED TO APPEAR FOR THE
GOVERNMENT (RULES OF COURT, RULE 138, SEC. 33)
Those mentioned in numbers 4 and 5 are allowed only to
appear in certain cases. They do not practice law. (Pineda) A
non-lawyer who practices law will be guilty of illegal
practice of law. (Zeta v. Malinao, A.M. No. P-220, December 20,
1978)
10
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
LAWYER’S OATH
I___________ of ___________ do solemnly swear that I will
maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines; I will
support the Constitution and obey the laws as well as the
legal orders of the duly constituted authorities therein; I will
do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any court; I will
not wittingly nor willingly promote or sue any groundless,
false or unlawful suit, or give aid nor consent to the same; I
will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct
myself as a lawyer according to the best of my knowledge
and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to the courts as
to my clients; and I impose upon myself this voluntary
obligations without any mental reservation or purpose of
evasion. So help me God.
By the Lawyer's Oath, every lawyer is enjoined not only to
obey the laws of the land but also to refrain from doing any
falsehood in or out of court or from consenting to the doing
of any in court, and to conduct himself according to the best
of his knowledge and discretion with all good fidelity as
well to the courts as to his clients. Every lawyer is a servant
of the Law, and has to observe and maintain the rule of law
as well as be an exemplar worthy of emulation by others. It
is by no means a coincidence, therefore, that honesty,
integrity and trustworthiness are emphatically reiterated by
the Code of Professional Responsibility. (Samonte v. Abellana,
727 SCRA 80, June 23, 2014)
An applicant who has passed the required examination, or
has been otherwise found to be entitled to admission to the
bar, shall take and subscribe before the Supreme Court the
corresponding oath of office. (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 7)
The lawyer's oath is not a mere ceremony or formality for
practicing law. Every lawyer should at all times weigh his
actions according to the sworn promises he makes when
taking the lawyer's oath. If all lawyers conducted themselves
strictly according to the lawyer's oath and the Code of
Professional Responsibility, the administration of justice will
undoubtedly be faster, fairer and easier for everyone
concerned (In re: Argosino, supra).
DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A
LAWYER UNDER THE CODE OF
PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
FOUR-FOLD DUTIES OF A LAWYER
1. To society
2. To the legal profession
3. To the court
4. To the client
Promulgated on June 21, 1988.
TO THE SOCIETY (CANONS 1-6)
CANON 1: RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL
PROCESSES
RULE 1.01
An act constituting immoral or deceitful conduct is one that
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
involves moral turpitude. It includes any act done contrary
to justice, honesty, modesty or good morals. (Malcolm)
GROSSLY IMMORAL ACTS
1. Wanton disregard for the sanctity of marriage as shown
when the lawyer pursued a married woman and
thereafter cohabited with her. (Guevarra v. Eala, A.C.
No. 7136, August 1, 2007)
2. Rape of a neighbor’s wife, which constitutes serious
moral depravity, even if his guilt was not proved
beyond reasonable doubt in the criminal prosecution
for rape. (Calub v. Suller, A.C. No. 1474, January 8, 2000)
NOT GROSSLY IMMORAL
1. Mere intimacy between a man and a woman, both of
whom possess no impediment to marry, voluntarily
carried and devoid of deceit on the part of the
respondent, even if a child was born out of wedlock of
such relationship; it may suggest a doubtful moral
character but not grossly immoral. (Figueroa v. Barranco,
SBC Case No. 519, July 31, 1997)
2. Stealing a kiss from a client. (Advincula v. Macabata, A.C.
No. 7204, March 7, 2007)
IMMORAL AND GROSSLY IMMORAL CONDUCT
Immoral conduct involves acts that are willful, flagrant, or
shameless, and that show a moral indifference to the opinion
of the upright and respectable members of the community.
Immoral conduct is gross when it is so corrupt as to
constitute a criminal act, or so unprincipled as to be
reprehensible to a high degree, or when committed under
such scandalous or revolting circumstances as to shock the
community’s sense of decency. The Court makes these
distinctions, as the supreme penalty of disbarment from
conduct requires grossly immoral, not simply immoral,
conduct. (Perez v. Catindig, A.C. No. 5816, March 10, 2015)
Examples of crimes involving moral turpitude:
✓ estafa
✓ bribery
✓ murder
✓ seduction
✓ abduction
✓ smuggling
✓ falsification of public documents
✓ forgery
✓ bigamy
✓ concubinage
✓ murder, whether consummated or attempted
✓ illicit sexual relations with a fellow worker
✓ violation of Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972
✓ perjury
CASES:
In the case of Arciga v. Maniwang (A.M. No. 1608, August 14,
1981) it was held that respondent’s refusal to marry the
complainant was not so corrupt nor unprincipled as to
warrant disbarment.
In Zaguirre v. Castillo (A.C. No. 4921, March 6, 2003), it was
ruled that even though respondent repeatedly engaged in
11
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
sexual congress with a woman not his wife and refused to
support his child born from this relationship, he shall not be
disbarred. Although he clearly violated the standards of
morality required of the legal profession, records show that
from the time he took his oath, he has severed ties with
complainant and now lives with his wife and children. Thus,
merely indefinite suspension from the practice of law was
ordered.
RULE 1.02
A lawyer who assists a client in a dishonest scheme or who
connives in violating the law commits an act which justifies
disciplinary action. (Donton v. Tansingco, A.C. No. 6057, June
27, 2006)
RULE 1.03
The purpose of the prohibition is to prevent ambulance
chasing, which refers to solicitation of almost any kind of
legal business by laymen employed by an attorney for the
purpose or by the attorney himself. (Agpalo)
This rule proscribes “ambulance chasing” (the solicitation of
almost any kind of legal business by an attorney, personally
or through an agent in order to gain employment) as a
measure to protect the community from barratry and
champerty. (Linsangan v. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September
4, 2009)
CHAMPERTY AND MAINTENANCE
Maintenance
The doctrine of maintenance was directed "against wanton
and in officious intermeddling in the disputes of others in
which the intermeddler has no interest whatever, and where
the assistance rendered is without justification or excuse."
Champerty
Characterized by "the receipt of a share of the proceeds of
the litigation by the intermeddler." (Cadavedo v. Lacaya, G.R.
No. 173188, January 15, 2014)
Ambulance Chasing
Accident-site solicitation of any kind of legal business by
laymen employed by an attorney for the purpose or by the
attorney himself.
Supports perjury, the defrauding of innocent persons by
judgments, upon manufactured causes of actions and the
defrauding of injured persons having proper causes of action
but ignorant of legal rights and court
procedure.
A lawyer may be disciplined in his professional and private
capacity. The filing of multiple complaints reflects on his
fitness to be a member of the legal profession. His conduct of
vindictiveness a decidedly
undesirable trait especially when one resorts to using the
court not to secure justice but merely to exact revenge
warrants his dismissal from the judiciary. (Saburnido v.
Madrono, A.C. No. 4497, September 26, 2001)
RULE 1.04
The useful function of a lawyer is not only to conduct
litigation but to avoid it where possible, by advising
settlement or withholding suit. (Agpalo)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
Ratio: To save the client from additional expenses and help
prevent clogging of the docket.
That the counsels initiated and participated in the settlement
of the case, there was nothing wrong in their doing so. It was
actually their obligation as lawyers to do so, pursuant
to Rule 1.04, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility. (Campugan v. Tolentino, Jr., 752 SCRA, 254,
March 11, 2015)
CANON 2: EFFICIENT AND CONVENIENT LEGAL
SERVICES
RULE 2.01
This rule stems from one of the obligations of a lawyer
which is to represent the poor and the oppressed in the
prosecution of their claims or the defense of their rights.
(Agpalo)
Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with
conditions. It could be that for some lawyers, especially the
neophytes in the profession, being appointed counsel de
oficio is an irksome chore. For those holding such belief, it
may come as a surprise that counsel of repute and of
eminence welcome such an opportunity. It makes even more
manifest that law is indeed a profession dedicated to the
ideal of service and not a mere trade. It is understandable
then why a
high degree of fidelity to duty is required of one so
designated. (Ledesma v. Climaco, G.R. No. L-23815, June 28,
1974)
RULE 2.02
A lawyer may refuse to accept the cause of the defenseless or
the oppressed for valid reasons, such as when he is not in a
position to carry out the work effectively or competently.
Nonetheless, he shall not refuse to render legal advice such
as the preliminary steps to take, until the person concerned
shall have secured the services of counsel.
VALID REASONS FOR REFUSING TO ACCEPT
REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENT CLIENTS (CANON
14, RULE 14.03):
1. The lawyer is not in a position to carry out the work
effectively or competently
2. There is a conflict of interest
RULE 2.03
The most worthy and effective advertisement possible is the
establishment of a well-merited reputation for professional
capacity and fidelity to trust. The publication or circulation
of ordinary simple business cards is not per se improper, but
solicitation of business by circulars or advertisements, or by
personal communications or interview not warranted by
personal relations is unprofessional. (In Re: Tagorda, G. R. No.
32329, March 23, 1929, 53 Phil 37)
A lawyer’s best advertisement is a well-merited reputation
for professional capacity and fidelity to trust based on his
character and conduct. For this reason, lawyers are only
allowed to announce their services by publication in
reputable law lists or use of simple professional cards. The
Court enumerated what professional calling cards may
contain: (a) lawyer’s name; (b) law firm with which he is
12
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
connected; (c) address; (d) telephone and (e) special branch
of law practiced. (Linsangan v. Tolentino, supra)
A lawyer who agrees with a non-lawyer to divide attorney’s
fees paid by clients supplied or solicited by the non-lawyer is
guilty of malpractice, the same being a form of solicitation of
cases.
RULE 2.04
Charging lower rates than that customarily prescribed can
constitute unfair competition and as such can be an indirect
solicitation of business.
The rule does not prohibit a lawyer from charging a reduced
fee or none at all to an indigent or to a person who would
have difficulty paying the fee usually charged for such
services, or if there is a relationship of friendship between
the attorney and the client. (Aguirre)
CANON 3: TRUE, HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED AND
OBJECTIVE INFORMATION ON LEGAL SERVICES
RULE 3.01
General Rule: A lawyer cannot advertise his talent.
Exceptions:
1. Writing legal articles
2. Reputable law lists
3. Ordinary professional cards
4. The offer of free legal services to the indigent even
when broadcasted over the radio
5. Simple announcement of opening of a law firm
Not all types of advertising or solicitation are prohibited.
The canons of the profession enumerate exceptions to the
rule against advertising or solicitation and define the extent
to which they may be undertaken. The first of such
exceptions is the publication in reputable law lists, in a
manner consistent with the standards of conduct imposed by
the canons, of brief biographical and informative data. The
use of an ordinary simple professional card is also permitted.
The card may contain only a statement of his name, the
name of the law firm which he is connected with, address,
telephone number and special branch of law practiced.
Taking into consideration the nature and contents of the
advertisements for which respondent is being taken to task,
which even includes a quotation of the fees charged by said
Respondent Corporation for services rendered, the same
definitely do not and conclusively cannot fall under any of
the above-mentioned. (Ulep v. Legal Clinic, 223 SCRA 378,
June 17, 1993)
RULE 3.02
Use of a foreign firm’s name amounts to misrepresentation
because a foreign law firm is not authorized to practice law
in the Philippines (Dacanay v. Baker & McKenzie, Adm. Case
No. 2131, May 10, 1985)
The continued use of the name of a deceased partner is
permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its
communications that said partner is deceased. (Agpalo)
RULE 3.03
Purpose: To prevent the law firm from using his name to
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
attract legal business and to avoid suspicion of undue
influence.
A civil service officer or employee whose duty or
responsibility does not require his entire time to be at the
disposal of the government may not engage in the private
practice of law without the written permit from the head of
the department concerned. (Agpalo)
Note: Teaching is not a prohibited practice of profession.
(1986 Constitutional Commission opinion)
RULE 3.04
Purpose: To prevent some lawyers from gaining an unfair
advantage over others through the use of gimmickry, press
agentry or other artificial means.
The standards of the legal profession condemn the lawyer's
advertisement of his talents. A lawyer cannot, without
violating the ethics of his profession, advertise his talents or
skill as in a manner similar to a merchant advertising his
goods. The prescription against advertising of legal services
or solicitation of legal business rests on the fundamental
postulate that the practice of law is a profession. (Ulep v. The
Legal Clinic, Inc., supra)
CANON 4: PARTICIPATION IN THE IMPROVEMENT
OF REFORMS IN THE LEGAL SYSTEM
CANON 5: PARTICIPATION IN LEGAL EDUCATION
PROGRAMS
The primary duty of lawyers to obey the laws of the land
and promote respect for the law and legal processes carries
with it the obligation to be well-informed of the existing
laws and to keep abreast with legal developments, recent
enactments, and jurisprudence. It is imperative that they be
conversant with basic legal principles. Unless they faithfully
comply with such duty, they may not be able to discharge
competently and diligently their obligations as members of
the bar. (Dulalia, Jr. v. Cruz, A.C. No. 6854, April 25, 2007)
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
(MCLE)
Purpose: to ensure that throughout a lawyer’s career, he
keeps abreast with law and jurisprudence, maintains the
ethics of the profession, and enhances the standards of the
practice of law
REQUIREMENTS OF COMPLETION OF MCLE:
Shall be completed every 3 years
At least 36 hours of continuing legal education activities to
be divided as follows:
 6 hours- legal ethics
 4 hours- trial and pre-trial skills
 5 hours- alternative dispute resolution
 9 hours- updates on substantive and procedural laws
and jurisprudence
 4 hours- writing and oral advocacy
 2 hours- international law and international
conventions
 6 hours- such other subjects prescribed by the
committee on MCLE
PARTIES EXEMPTED FROM MCLE:
13
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
1. The President and the Vice President of the Philippines,
and the Secretaries and Undersecretaries of Executive
Departments;
2. Senators and Members of the House of Representatives;
3. The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme
Court, incumbent and retired members of the judiciary,
incumbent members of the Judicial and Bar Council
and incumbent court lawyers covered by the Philippine
Judicial Academy program of continuing judicial
education;
4. The Chief State Counsel, Chief State Prosecutor and
Assistant Secretaries of the Department of Justice;
5. The Solicitor General and the Assistant Solicitors
General;
6. The Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy and
Assistant Government Corporate Counsel;
7. The Chairmen and Members of the Constitutional
Commissions;
8. The Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy Ombudsman, the
Deputy Ombudsman and the Special Prosecutor of the
Office of the Ombudsman;
9. Heads of government agencies exercising quasi-judicial
functions;
10. Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and professors of law
who have teaching experience for at least ten (10) years
in accredited law schools;
11. The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and members of the
Corps of Professors and Professorial Lecturers of the
Philippine Judicial Academy; and
12. Governors and Mayors.
OTHER PARTIES EXEMPTED FROM THE MCLE:
1. Those who are not in law practice, private or public.
2. Those who have retired from law practice with the
approval of the IBP Board of Governors.
COMPOSITION OF MCLE BOARD
1. A retired Justice of the Supreme Court as chair
2. 4 members respectively nominated by the IBP, the
Philippine Judicial Academy, a law center designated
by the Supreme Court and associations of law schools
and/or law professors.
CANON 6: APPLICATION TO LAWYERS IN
GOVERNMENT SERVICE
RULE 6.01
A member of the bar who assumes public office does not
shed his professional obligation. Lawyers in government are
public servants who owe the utmost fidelity to the public
service. A lawyer in public service is a keeper of public faith
and is burdened with a high degree of social responsibility,
perhaps higher than her brethren in private practice. (Vitriolo
v. Dasig, A.C 4984, April 1, 2003)
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The representative of the sovereignty whose interest in a
criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case but that
justice shall be done.
This restriction applies particularly to lawyers in
government service, who are allowed by law to engage in
private law practice and although prohibited from engaging
in the practice of law, have friends, former associates and
relatives, who are in the active practice of law.
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
RULE 6.03
In relation to Rule 3.03, Canon 3, if the law allows a public
official to practice law concurrently, he must not use his
public position to feather his law practice. Moreover, he
should not only avoid all impropriety. Neither should he
even inferentially create a public image that he is utilizing
his public position to advance his professional success or
personal interest at the expense of the public. (Agpalo)
This restriction covers engagement or employment, which
means that he cannot accept any work or employment from
anyone that will involve or relate the matter in which he
intervened as a public official, except on behalf of the body
or authority which he served during his public employment.
(Comment of IBP that drafted the Code, pp.32-33)
Government lawyers may leave government service through
retirement, resignation, expiration of term of office,
abandonment, and dismissal.
General Rule: Practice of profession is allowed immediately
after leaving public service.
Exceptions: The lawyer cannot practice as to matters with
which he had connection during his term. This prohibition
lasts:
(1) For one year, if he had not intervened;
(2) Permanently, if he had intervened.
The Code 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
cannot apply to respondent Mendoza because his alleged
intervention is an intervention on a matter different from the
matter involved in the Civil case of sequestration. The
applicable meaning as the term “intervention” is an act of a
person who has the power to influence the subject
proceedings. The evil sought to be remedied by the Code do
not exist where the government lawyer does not act which
can be considered as innocuous such as “drafting, enforcing,
or interpreting government or agency procedures,
regulations or laws or briefing abstract principles of law.”
The “matter” contemplated are those that are adverse-
interest conflicts (substantial relatedness and adversity
between the government matter and the new client’s matter
in interest) and congruent-interest representation conflicts.
“Intervention” should be significant and substantial which
can or have affected the interest of others (PCGG v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 151809-12, April 12, 2005).
TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION (CANONS 7-9)
RULE 139-A INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES
Composed of all persons whose names appear in the Roll of
Attorneys of the Supreme Court.
Purposes. — To elevate the standards of the legal profession,
improve the administration of justice, and enable the Bar to
discharge its public responsibility more effectively.
Membership. — Lawyers seeking positions in the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines must respect the rotational rule. The
rotational rule is adopted to allow equal opportunity for all
lawyers in different regions to have access to positions of
14
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
leadership in the IBP. (In Re: Brewing Controversies, dissent,
Velasco, A.M. No. 09-5-2-SC, April 11, 2013)
Membership dues. — Every member of the Integrated Bar
shall pay such annual dues as the Board of Governors shall
determine with the approval of the Supreme Court.
Default in the payment of annual dues for six months shall
warrant suspension of membership in the Integrated Bar,
and default in such payment for one year shall be a ground
for the removal of the name of the delinquent member from
the Roll of Attorneys.
IN THE MATTER OF THE INTEGRATION OF THE BAR
OF THE PHILIPPINES, JANUARY 9, 1973
The official unification of the entire lawyer population of the
Philippines. This requires membership and financial support
(in reasonable amount) of every attorney as conditions sine
qua non to the practice of law and the retention of his name
in the Roll of Attorneys of the Supreme Court.
FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION
Integration does not make a lawyer a member of any group
of which he is not already a member. He became a member
of the Bar when he passed the Bar examinations. Bar
integration does not compel the lawyer to associate with
anyone. He is free to attend or not attend the meetings of his
Integrated Bar Chapter or vote or refuse to vote in its
elections as he chooses. The only compulsion to which he is
subjected is the payment of annual dues (In the Matter of the
IBP Membership Dues Delinquency of Atty. Marcial A. Edilion,
A.M. No. 1928, August 3, 1978)
REGULATORY FEE
A membership fee in the Integrated Bar is an exaction for
regulation, while the purpose of a tax is revenue. If the Court
has inherent power to regulate the Bar, it follows that as an
incident to regulation, it may impose a membership fee for
that purpose. It would not be possible to push through an
Integrated Bar program without means to defray the
concomitant expenses.
CANON 7: UPHOLDING THE INTEGRITY AND
DIGNITY OF THE PROFESSION
RULE 7.02
Lawyers must maintain high standards of legal proficiency,
as well as morality including honesty, integrity and fair
dealing. For they are at all times subject to the scrutinizing
eye of public opinion and community approbation.
When the Code or the Rules speaks of "conduct" or
"misconduct," the reference is not confined to one’s behavior
exhibited in connection with the performance of the lawyer’s
professional duties, but also covers any misconduct which,
albeit unrelated to the actual practice of his profession,
would show him to be unfit for the office and unworthy of
the privileges which his license and the law invest him with.
To borrow from Orbe v. Adaza, "the grounds expressed in
Section 27, Rule 138, of the Rules of Court are not limitative
and are broad enough to cover any misconduct, including
dishonesty, of a lawyer in his professional or private
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
capacity." (Garcia v. Balauitan, A.C. No. 7280, November 16,
2006)
It must be remembered that a retained counsel is expected to
serve the client with competence and diligence. This duty
includes not merely reviewing the cases entrusted to the
counsels care and giving the client sound legal advice, but
also properly representing the client in court, attending
scheduled hearings, preparing and filing required pleadings,
prosecuting the handled cases with reasonable dispatch, and
urging their termination without waiting for the client or the
court to prod him or her to do so. The lawyer should not be
sitting idly by and leave the rights of the client in a state of
uncertainty. The failure to file a brief resulting in the
dismissal of an appeal constitutes inexcusable negligence.
This default translates to a violation of the injunction of
Canon 18, Rules 18.03 and 18.04 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility. (Conlu v. Aredonia Jr., A.C. 4955, September 12,
2011)
A lawyer that is engaged in illicit relationships with two
women, one after the other, and had illegitimate children
with them— failing to give regular support to complainant
and his legitimate children is disbarred. (Dantes v. Dantes,
A.C. No. 6486, September 22, 2004)
To justify suspension or disbarment, the act must not only be
immoral; it must be grossly immoral as well.
Contracting a marriage during the subsistence of a previous
one amounts to a grossly immoral conduct. (Perez v. Catindig,
A.C. No. 5816, March 10, 2015)
GROSSLY IMMORAL ACT
One that is so corrupt and false as to constitute a criminal act
or so unprincipled or disgraceful as to be reprehensible to a
high degree.
RULE 7.03
An attorney may be removed, or otherwise disciplined, not
only for malpractice and dishonesty in the profession, but
also for gross misconduct not connected with his
professional duties, making him unfit for the office and
unworthy of the privileges which his license and the law
confer upon him. Having been tasked to sell such valuables,
Casuga was duty-bound to return them upon Nevada’s
demand. His failure to do so renders him subject to
disciplinary action. To be sure, he cannot use, as a defense,
the lack of a lawyer-client relationship as an exonerating
factor. (Nevada v. Casuga, A.C. No. 7591, March 20, 2012)
In disciplinary proceedings against lawyers, the only issue is
whether the officer of the court is still fit to be allowed to
continue as a member of the Bar. The only concern is the
determination of respondent’s administrative liability.
Furthermore, disciplinary proceedings against lawyers do
not involve a trial of an action, but rather investigations by
the Court into the conduct of one of its officers. The issuance
of checks which were later dishonored for having been
drawn against a closed account indicates a lawyer’s
unfitness for the trust and confidence reposed on her.
(Heenan v. Espejo, A.C. No. 10050, April 13, 2013)
15
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
CANON 8: COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND CANDOR
TOWARD PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES
RULE 8.01
Rudely interrupting opposing counsel while the latter is
presenting evidence is a violation of Canon 8.(Bugaring v.
Español, G.R. No. 133090, January 19, 2001)
The lady senator’s statements that she “spits on the fact of
Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban..and would rather be in
another environment but not in the Supreme Court of Idiots”
were intemperate and highly improper in substance. No
lawyer who has taken an oath to maintain the respect due to
the courts should be allowed to erode the people’s faith in
the judiciary. (Pobre v. Defensor-Santiago, A.C. No. 7399, 2009)
A lawyer should treat the opposing counsel and his brethren
in the law profession with courtesy, dignity, and civility.
They may do as adversaries do in law: strive mightily but eat
and drink as friends. (Valencia v. Cabanting, A.M. 1302, April
26, 1991).
A lawyer’s language should be forceful but dignified,
emphatic but respectful as befitting an advocate and in
keeping with the dignity of the legal profession. (Surigao
Mineral Reservation Board v. Cloribel, G.R. L- 27072, January 9,
1970)
Lack or want of intention is no excuse for the disrespectful
language employed. Counsel cannot escape responsibility by
claiming that his words did not mean what any reader must
have understood them as meaning. (Rheem of the Philippines v
Ferrer, G.R. L-22979, June 26, 1967)
RULE 8.02
A lawyer should not steal another lawyer’s client, nor induce
the latter to retain him by a promise of better service, good
results, or reduced fees for his services. Respondent lawyer
committed an unethical, predatory overstep into another’s
legal practice. (Linsangan v. Tolentino, supra)
However, it is the right of a lawyer, without fear or favor, to
give proper advice and assistance to those seeking relief
against unfaithful or neglectful counsel (Canon 7).He may
properly accept employment to handle a matter which has
been previously handled by another lawyer, provided that
the other lawyer has been given notice by the client that his
services have been terminated.
CANON 9: NO ASSISTANCE IN THE UNAUTHORIZED
PRACTICE OF LAW
RULE 9.01
Ratio: The practice of law is limited only to individuals who
have the necessary educational qualifications and good
moral character. Moreover, an attorney-client relationship is
a strictly personal one. Lawyers are selected on account of
their special fitness through their learning or probity for the
work at hand.
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
Exception: Labor union officers, in accordance with Art. 222
of the Labor Code, as amended by Sec. 3 of PD No. 1691
The appearing and signing as counsel for and in behalf of
her husband, conducting or offering stipulation/admission
of facts, conducting direct and cross-examination, all
constitute practice of law. Thus, it is clear that when Atty.
Lozada appeared for and in behalf of her husband in Civil
Case No. 101-V-07 and actively participated in the
proceedings therein in June-July 2007, or within the two (2)-
year suspension, she, therefore, engaged in the unauthorized
practice of law. (Feliciano v Bautista-Lozada, A.C No. 7593,
March 11, 2015)
RULE 9.02
Ratio: Allowing non-lawyers to get attorney’s fees would
confuse the public as to whom they should consult. It would
leave the bar in a chaotic condition because nonlawyers are
also not subject to disciplinary action.
While a reading of Canon 9 appears to merely prohibit
lawyers from assisting in the unauthorized practice of law,
the unauthorized practice of law by the lawyer himself is
subsumed under this provision, because at the heart of
Canon 9 is the lawyer's duty to prevent the unauthorized
practice of law. This duty likewise applies to law students
and Bar candidates. As aspiring members of the Bar, they are
bound to comport themselves in accordance with the ethical
standards of the legal profession. (In Re: Petition to Sign in the
Roll of Attorneys, B.M. No. 2540, September 24, 2013)
A lawyer who obtained his law degree, passed the bar and
took the Attorney’s Oath, but failed to sign the Attorney’s
Roll was allowed to sign after 30 years of practicing the
profession but was imposed a penalty similar to suspension
by allowing him to sign in the Roll of Attorneys 1 year after
receipt of the Resolution and was fined P32,000. (In Re:
Medado, B.M. No. 2540, September 24, 2013)
Canon 9 likewise prohibits lawyers from dividing or sharing
fees for legal services with persons not licensed to practice
law, except in the following instances:
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; 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.
TO THE COURTS (CANONS 10-13)
CANON 10 CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH
TO THE COURT
RULE 10.01
A lawyer’s primary duty is not to their clients but to the
courts.
Candor in all of the lawyer’s dealings is the very essence of
honorable membership in the legal profession. (Cuaresma v.
Daquis, G.R. L35113, March 25, 1975)
16
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
SOME CASES OF FALSEHOOD COMMITTED BY
LAWYERS:
1. Falsely stating in a deed of sale that property is free
from all liens and encumbrances. (Sevilla v. Zoleta, 96
Phil 979, 1955);
2. Falsifying a power of attorney to use in collecting the
money due to the principal and appropriating the
money for his own benefit (In Re: Rusiana, A.C. 270,
March 29, 1974);
3. Denying having received the notice to file brief which is
belied by the return card (Ragasajo v. IAC, G.R. L-69129,
August 31, 1987);
4. Presenting falsified documents in court which he
knows to be false. (Bautista v. Gonzales, A.M. 1625,
February 12, 1990);
RULE 10.03
His duty as a lawyer obligates him not to conceal the truth
from the court, or to mislead the court in any manner, no
matter how demanding his duties to his clients may be. In
case of conflict, his duties to his client yield to his duty to
deal candidly with the court. (Que v. Revilla, Jr., A.C. No.
7054, December 4, 2009)
CANON 11: RESPECT FOR COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL
OFFICERS
RULE 11.01
If a lawyer dresses improperly, he may be cited for
contempt. (Agpalo)
RULE 11.04
A judge may commit errors or mistakes in his decisions;
hence, a lawyer should not make hasty accusations against
the judge without any cogent and valid ground extant in the
record. The rule, however, does not preclude a lawyer from
criticizing judicial conduct in a fair and respectful manner.
The rule allows such criticism so long as it is supported by
the record or is material to the case.
RULE 11.05
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. (Agpalo)
Grievances may be filed with the Supreme Court which has
administrative supervision over all courts and the power to
discipline judges of lower courts. (1987 Constitution, Art. VIII,
Secs. 6 and 11)
CANON 12: ASSISTANCE IN THE SPEEDY AND
EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.
RULE 12.01
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
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 v. CA,
G.R. L-34369, September 30, 1974)
RULE 12.02
Ratio: There is an affirmative duty of a lawyer to check
against useless litigations. His signature in every pleading
constitutes a certificate by him that to the best of his
knowledge there is a good ground to support it and that it is
not to interpose for delay. The willful violation of this rule
may subject him to appropriate disciplinary action or render
him liable for the costs of litigation. (Agpalo). This rule
prohibits forum shopping.
FORUM SHOPPIN
the improper practice of going from one court to another in
the hope of securing a favourable relief in one court which
another court has denied or the filing of repetitious suits or
proceedings in different courts concerning substantially the
same subject matter, or whenever, as a result of an adverse
opinion in one forum, a party seeks a favourable opinion in
another forum, other than appeal or certiorari.
REQUISITES OF LITIS PENDENTIA:
1. Identity of parties, or at least such parties as represent
the same interests in both actions;
2. Identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the
relief being founded on the same facts; and
3. Identity of the two preceding particulars is such that
any judgment rendered in the pending case, regardless
of which party is successful, would amount to res
judicata in the other. (HSBC v. Catalan, G.R. 159590,
October 18, 2004)
RES JUDICATA REQUIRES THAT:
1. There be a decision on the merits;
2. It be decided by a court of competent jurisdiction;
3. The decision is final; and
4. The two actions involved identical parties, subject
matter, and causes of action.
SANCTION FOR VIOLATION OF RULE ON FORUM
SHOPPING:
1. Administrative sanctions
2. Direct or indirect contempt of court
There is nothing ethically remiss in a lawyer who files
numerous cases in different fora, as long as he does so in
good faith, in accordance with the Rules, and without any ill-
motive or purpose other than to achieve justice and fairness.
The nature of the cases filed by the respondent, the fact of re-
filing them after being dismissed, the timing of the filing of
cases, all indicate that the respondent was acting beyond the
desire for justice and fairness. Like the court itself, he is an
instrument to advance its ends – the speedy, efficient,
impartial, correct and inexpensive adjudication of cases and
the prompt satisfaction of final judgments. A lawyer should
not only help attain these objectives but should likewise
avoid any unethical or improper practices that impede,
obstruct or prevent their realization. (Alcantara v. De Vera,
A.C. No. 5859, November 23, 2010)
RULE 12.03
17
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
Postponement is not a matter of right but a sound judicial
discretion. (Edrial v. Quilat-Quilat, G.R. No. 133625, September
6, 2000)
RULE 12.05
Purpose: To avoid any suspicion that he is coaching the
witness what to say during the resumption of the
examination.
RULE 12.06
While he may interview witnesses in advance of trial, the
lawyer should avoid any such action as may be
misinterpreted as an attempt to influence the witness what
to say in court.
Subornation of perjury is committed by a person who
knowingly and willfully procures another to swear falsely
and the witness suborned [or induced] does testify under
circumstances rendering him guilty of perjury. (US v.
Ballena, G.R. L-6294, February 10, 1911)
RULE 12.08
Ratio: The underlying reason for the impropriety of a
lawyer acting in such dual capacity lies in the difference
between the function of a witness and that of an advocate.
The function of a witness is to tell the facts as he recalls then
in answer to questions. The function of an advocate is that of
a partisan.
A lawyer may not properly support his contention as an
advocate with his testimony as a witness.
CANON 13: RELIANCE ON MERITS OF HIS CAUSE
AND AVOIDANCE FROM ANY IMPROPRIETY WHICH
TENDS TO INFLUENCE, OR GIVES THE APPEARANCE
OF INFLUENCE UPON THE COURT
RULE 13.01
The highly immoral implication of a lawyer approaching a
judge––or a judge evincing a willingness––to discuss, in
private, a matter related to a case pending in that judge’s
sala cannot be over-emphasized. (Bildner v. Ilusorio, G.R.
No. 157384, June 5, 2009)
In order not to subject both the judge and the lawyer to
suspicion, the common practice of some lawyers of making
judges and prosecutors godfathers of their children to
enhance their influence and their law practice should be
avoided by judges and lawyers alike. (Report of IBP
Committee)
RULE 13.02
FOR NEWSPAPER PUBLICATIONS BY A LAWYER
CONCERNING A PENDING LITIGATION MAY:
1. interfere with a fair trial in court and
2. otherwise prejudice the impartial administration of
justice
3. likely to create an adverse attitude in the public mind
respecting the alleged actions of the defendants to the
pending proceedings
Once a litigation is concluded, the judge who decided it is
subject to the same criticism as any other public official
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
because then, his ruling becomes public property and is
thrown open to public consumption. In a concluded
litigation, a lawyer enjoys a wider latitude of comment or on
criticism of the judge’s decision or actuation. (In re Gomez, 43
Phil 376, May 16, 1922)
In the original decision of the Supreme Court in Re: Request
Radio-TV Coverage of the Trial in the Sandiganbayan of the
Plunder Cases against Former President Joseph Estrada,
September 13, 2001, it was stated that the propriety of
granting or denying the petition involve the weighing out of
the constitutional guarantees of freedom of the press and the
right to public information, on the one hand, and the
fundamental rights of the accused, on the other hand, along
with the constitutional power of a court to control its
proceedings in ensuring a fair and impartial trial. It was held
that when these rights race against one another, the right of
the accused must be preferred to win, considering the
possibility of losing not only the precious liberty but also the
very life of an accused.
RULE 13.03
Ratio: It endangers the independence of the judiciary.
(Comments of IBP Committee that drafted the Code, p. 71)
TO THE CLIENTS (CANONS 14-22)
NATURE OF RELATION:
 Strictly personal
 Highly confidential
 Fiduciary
CANON 14: AVAILABILITY OF SERVICE WITHOUT
DISCRIMINATION
RULE 14.01
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.
Exceptions:
1. A lawyer shall not refuse his services to the needy
(Canon 14);
2. 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. (Rule 14.01)
3. A lawyer may not refuse to accept representation of an
indigent client unless:
- He is in no position to carry out the work
effectively or competently;
- He labors under a conflict of interest between him
and the prospective client or between a present
client and the prospective client. (Rule 14.02)
4. A lawyer may not refuse to accept representation of an
indigent client unless: a. He is in no 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. (Rule 14.03)
Ratio: It is a declared policy of the State to value the dignity
of every human person and guarantee the rights of every
individual, particularly those who cannot afford the services
of counsel. (RA 9999 or Free Legal Assistance Act of 2010)
18
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
INDIGENT
(1) A person who has no visible means of income or whose
income is insufficient for the subsistence of his family,
to be determined by the fiscal or judge, taking into
account the members of his family dependent upon
him for subsistence. (Sec. 2, RA 6033)
(2) A person who has no visible means of support or
whose income does not exceed P300.00 per month or
whose income even in excess of P300.00 per month is
insufficient for the subsistence of his family. (Sec. 2, RA
6035)
RULE 14.04
A lawyer is not obliged to act as counsel for every person
who may wish to become his client. He has the right to
decline employment subject however, to the provision of
Canon 14. Once he agrees to take up the cause of a client, he
owes fidelity to such cause and must always be mindful of
the trust and confidence reposed to him. (Navarro v. Meneses
III, CBD Adm. Case No. 313, January 30, 1998)
Rule 14.01 of the CPR clearly directs lawyers not to
discriminate clients as to their belief of the guilt of the latter.
It is ironic that it is the defense counsel that actually branded
his own clients as being the culprits that "salvaged" the
victims. Though he might think of his clients as that, still it is
unprofessional to be labeling an event as such when even the
Sandiganbayan had not done so. (Francisco v. Portugal, A.C.
No. 6155, 14 March 2006)
CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH A COUNSEL DE
OFICIO MAY BE APPOINTED
IF IT APPEARS FROM THE RECORD OF THE CASE AS
TRANSMITTED THAT:
 the accused is confined in prison,
 is without counsel de parte on appeal, or
 has signed the notice of appeal himself, ask the clerk of
court of the Court of Appeals shall designate a counsel
de officio. (Rules of Court, Rule 124, Sec. 2)
VALID GROUNDS FOR REFUSING TO REPRESENT AN
INDIGENT:
(1) He is in no position to carry out the work effectively or
competently;
(2) 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)
CANON 15: CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY TO
CLIENTS
RULE 15.01
A lawyer should decline professional employment even
though how attractive the fee offered may be if its
acceptance will involve a violation of any of the rules of the
legal profession. (Ylaya v. Gacott, Adm. Case No. 6475, January
30, 2013)
RULE 15.03
There is conflict of interest when a lawyer represents
inconsistent interests of two or more opposing parties.
(Hornilla v. Salunat, A.C. 5804, July 1, 2003)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
Disclosure alone is not enough for the clients must give their
informed consent to such representation. The lawyer must
explain to his clients the nature and extent of conflict and the
possible adverse effect must be thoroughly understood by
his clients. (Nakpil v. Valdes, A.C. No. 2040, March 4, 1998)
The termination of the attorney-client relationship does not
justify a lawyer to represent an interest adverse to or in
conflict with that of the former client. Even after the
severance of the relation, a lawyer should not do anything
that will injuriously affect his former client in any matter in
which the lawyer previously represented the client. (Samson
v. Atty. Era, A.C. No. 6664, July 16, 2013)
REQUISITES
(1) There are conflicting duties;
(2) The acceptance of the new relations invites or actually
leads to unfaithfulness or double-dealing to another
client; or
(3) The attorney will be called upon to use against his first
client any knowledge acquired in the previous
employment.
General Rule: A lawyer may not represent two opposing
parties at any point in time. A lawyer need not be the
counsel-of-record of either party. It is enough that the
counsel had a hand in the preparation of the pleading of one
party.
Exception: When the parties agree, and for amicable
settlement. (Agpalo)
RULE 15.04
An attorney’s knowledge of the law and his reputation for
fidelity may make it easy for the disputants to settle their
differences amicably. However, he shall not act as counsel
for any of them. (Agpalo)
RULE 15.06
Ratio: To protect against influence peddling. (Agpalo)
RULE 15.08
Ratio: Certain ethical considerations may be operative in
one profession and not in the other. (Agpalo)
Exercise of dual profession is not prohibited but a lawyer
must make it clear when he is acting as a lawyer or when he
is acting in another capacity, especially in occupations
related to the practice of law. (In re: Rothman, 12 N.J. 528,
June 8, 1953)
CONFIDENTIALITY RULE
It is settled that the mere relation of attorney and client does
not raise a presumption of confidentiality. The client must
intend the communication to be confidential. (Palm v.
Iledan, A.C. No. 8242, October 2, 2009)
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS
It refers to information transmitted by voluntary act of
disclosure between attorney and client in confidence and by
means 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
19
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
An attorney is to keep inviolate his client’s secrets or
confidence and not to abuse them. Thus, the duty of a lawyer
to preserve his client’s secrets and confidence outlasts the
termination of the attorney-client relationship, and continues
even after the client’s death.
Ratio: It is the glory of the legal profession that its fidelity to
its client can be depended on, and that a man may safely go
to a lawyer and converse with him upon his rights or
supposed rights in any litigation with absolute assurance
that the lawyer’s tongue is tied from ever disclosing it. With
full disclosure of the facts of the case by the client to his
attorney, adequate legal representation will result in the
ascertainment and enforcement of rights or the prosecution
or defense of the client’s cause. (Mercado v. Vitriolo, A.C.
No. 5108, May 26, 2005)
Note: The privilege continues to exist even after the
termination of the attorney-client relationship.
FACTORS ESSENTIAL TO ESTABLISH A PRIVILEGED
COMMUNICATION
1. There exists an attorney-client relationship, or a
prospective attorney-client relationship, and it is by
reason of this relationship that the client made the
communication.
2. Matters disclosed by a prospective client to a lawyer are
protected by the rule on privileged communication
even if the prospective client does not thereafter retain
the lawyer or the latter declines the employment.
3. The client made the communication in confidence.
4. The legal advice must be sought from the attorney in
his professional capacity.
5. The communication made by a client to his attorney
must not be intended for mere information, but for the
purpose of seeking legal advice from his attorney as to
his rights or obligations. (Mercado v. Vitriolo, supra)
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
There is conflict of interest when, on behalf of one client, it is
the attorney’s duty to contend for that which his duty to
another client requires him to oppose.
Three tests to determine conflict of interest for practicing
lawyers (2009 Bar Question)
1. Whether a lawyer is duty-bound to fight for an issue or
claim in behalf of one client and, at the same time, to
oppose that claim for the other client.
2. Whether the acceptance of a new relation would
prevent the full discharge of the lawyer’s duty of
undivided fidelity and loyalty to the client or invite
suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the
performance of that duty.
3. Whether the lawyer would be called upon in the new
relation to use against a former client any confidential
information acquired through their connection or
previous employment. (Quiambao v. Bamba, Adm.
Case No. 6708, August 25, 2005)
Note: The test to determine whether there is a conflict of
interest in the representation is probability, not certainty of
conflict.
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
LIMITATIONS ON THE RULE AGAINST
REPRESENTATION OF CONFLICTING INTERESTS:
1. When no conflict of interest exists
2. A lawyer may properly represent a subsequent client
against a former client in a matter which is not, in any
way, related to the previous controversy in which he
appeared for the former client. The lawyer represents
no conflicting interests in that situation.
3. Where clients knowingly consent
This may only apply when one client is a former client, and
not where both clients are current clients in the case, where
each asserts an interest adverse to that of the other. Hence, a
lawyer cannot represent both clients at the same time, even if
they give their written consent.
COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
Rule 15.07 of the Code requires a lawyer to impress upon his
client compliance with the law and principles of fairness. A
lawyer must employ only fair and honest means to attain the
lawful objectives of his client. It is his duty to counsel his
clients to use peaceful and lawful methods in seeking justice
and refrain from doing an intentional wrong to their
adversaries. (Rural Bank of Calape, Inc., Bohol v. Florido, A.C.
No. 5736, June 18, 2010)
CONCURRENT PRACTICE OF ANOTHER PROFESSION
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 (Rule 15.08, Canon 15, CPR). As a rule, 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 his client are disfavored and discouraged by
the policy of the law. Hence, courts carefully watch these
transactions to assure that no advantage is taken by a lawyer
over his client. (Nakpil v. Valdes, supra)
CANON 16: CLIENT’S MONIES AND PROPERTIES
RULE 16.01
Ratio: The lawyer merely holds said money or property in
trust.
When a lawyer collects or receives money from his client for
a particular purpose (such as for filing fees, registration fees,
transportation and office expenses), he should promptly
account to the client how the money was spent. If he does
not use the money for its intended purpose, he must
immediately return it to the client. (Belleza v. Macasa, A.C. No.
7815, July 23, 2009)
The fact that a lawyer has a lien for fees on money in his
hands would not relieve him from the duty of promptly
accounting for the funds received. (Daroy v. Legaspi, A.C. No.
936, 1975)
The fact that a lawyer allowed the use of the Nissan Sentra
car by persons who had no business using it, did not inform
the court or the sheriff of the destruction of the car, and did
not inform the court that he took custody of the same
constituted infidelity in the custody of the attached cars and
grave misconduct. (Salomon v. Frial, A.C. No. 7820, September
12, 2008)
20
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
FIDUCIARY RELATIONSHIP
The relation between an attorney and his client is highly
fiduciary in its nature and of a very delicate, exacting and
confidential in character, requiring a high degree of fidelity
and good faith (Licuanan v. Melo, citing 7 Am. Jur. 2d 105,
A.M. No. 2361, February 9, 1989).
COMMINGLING OF FUNDS
Under paragraph 11 of the Canons of Legal Ethics, a lawyer
is obligated to report promptly the money of client that has
come to his possession and should not commingle it with his
private property or use it for his personal purpose without
his client's consent. (Licuanan v. Melo, supra)
DELIVERY OF FUNDS
When a lawyer collects or receives money from his client for
a particular purpose (such as for filing fees, registration fees,
transportation and office expenses), he should promptly
account to the client how the money was spent. If he does
not use the money for its intended purpose, he must
immediately return it to the client. Moreover, 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. (Belleza v.
Macasa, A.C. No. 7815, July 23, 2009)
BORROWING OR LENDING
A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client – to
prevent him from taking advantage of his influence over the
client. While the lawyer may borrow money from his client,
he should not abuse the client’s confidence by delaying
payment.
A lawyer shall not lend money to his client. The only
exception is, when in the interest of justice, he has to
advance necessary expenses (such as filing fees,
stenographer’s fees for transcript of stenographic notes, cash
bond or premium for surety bond, etc.) for a matter that he is
handling for the client. If the lawyer lends money to the
client in connection with the client’s case, the lawyer in effect
acquires an interest in the subject matter of the case or an
additional stake in its outcome. Either of these circumstances
may lead the lawyer to consider his own recovery rather
than that of his client, or to accept a settlement which may
take care of his interest in the verdict to the prejudice of the
client in violation of his duty of undivided fidelity to the
client’s cause. (Linsangan v. Tolentino, supra)
Lawyers are bound to promptly account for money received
by them on behalf of their clients and failure to do so
constitutes professional misconduct
The fact that a lawyer has a lien for fees on money in his
hands collected for his clients does not relieve him from the
duty of promptly accounting for the funds received.
However, delivery of funds is subject to lawyer’s lien.
CANON 17: FIDELITY TO CLIENT’S CAUSE
A lawyer shall serve his client with competence and
diligence, and his duty of entire devotion to his client’s cause
not only requires, but entitles him to employ every
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
honorable means to secure for the client what is justly due
him or to present every defense provided by law to enable
the latter’s cause to succeed. (Gamalinda v. Alcantara, A.C. No.
3695, 24 February 1992)
CANON 18: COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
RULE 18.04
The fiduciary duty of every lawyer towards his client
requires him to conscientiously act in advancing and
safeguarding the latter's interest. His failure or neglect to do
so constitutes a serious breach of his Lawyer's Oath and the
canons of professional ethics, and renders him liable for
gross misconduct that may warrant his suspension from the
practice of law.
He contravenes the Code of Professional Responsibility,
particularly its Canon 17, and Rules 18.03 and 18.04 of
Canon 18 (Ramiscal v. Orro, 784 SCRA 421, February 23, 2016)
ADEQUATE PREPARATION
While it is true that respondent was not complainant’s
lawyer from the trial to the appellate court stage, this fact
did not excuse him from his duty to diligently study a case
he had agreed to handle. If he felt he did not have enough
time to study the pertinent matters involved, as he was
approached by complainant’s husband only two days before
the expiration of the period for filing the Appellant’s Brief,
respondent should have filed a motion for extension of time
to file the proper pleading instead of whatever pleading he
could come up with, just to “beat the deadline set by the
Court of Appeals.” (Hernandez v. Padilla, A.C. No. 9387, June
20, 2012)
DILIGENCE
It is the attention and care required of a person in a given in
a situation and is the opposite of negligence. (Edquibal v.
Ferrer, A.C. No. 5687, February 3, 2005)
NEGLIGENCE
For administrative liability under Canon 18 to attach, the
negligent act of the attorney should be gross and inexcusable
as to lead to a result that was highly prejudicial to the client’s
interest. Accordingly, the Court has imposed administrative
sanctions on a grossly negligent attorney for unreasonable
failure to file a required pleading, or for unreasonable failure
to file an appeal, especially when the failure occurred after
the attorney moved for several extensions to file the
pleading and offered several excuses for his nonfeasance.
The Court has found the attendance of inexcusable
negligence when an attorney resorts to a wrong remedy, or
belatedly files an appeal, or inordinately delays the filing of
a complaint, or fails to attend scheduled court hearings.
Gross misconduct on the part of an attorney is determined
from the circumstances of the case, the nature of the act done
and the motive that induced the attorney to commit the act.
(Seares, Jr. v. Gonzales-Alzate, Adm. Case No. 9058, November
14, 2012)
A counsel de oficio is expected to render effective service and
to exert his best efforts on behalf of an indigent accused. He
has as high a duty to a poor litigant as to a paying client.
21
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
COLLABORATING COUNSEL
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. (Rule 18.01, Canon 18, CPR)
DUTY TO APPRISE CLIENT
The relationship of lawyer-client being one of confidence, it
is the lawyer’s duty to keep the client regularly and fully
updated on the developments of the client’s case. The Code
provides that “[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.” (Meneses v.
Macalino, A.C. No. 6651, February 27, 2006)
FAILURE TO PERFECT APPEAL
A lawyer has no right to waive his client’s right to appeal.
His failure to perfect an appeal within the prescribed period
constitutes negligence and malpractice. (Reontoy v. Ibadlit,
A.C. CBD No. 190, January 28, 1998)
Mere volume of the work of an attorney has never excused
an omission to comply with the period to appeal. Clearly,
the neglect of counsel in not filing the appeal on time was
not something that ordinary diligence and prudence could
not have guarded against. A client is generally bound by the
mistakes of his lawyer.(NTA v Castillo, G.R. No. 154124, Aug.
4, 2010)
CANON 19: REPRESENTATION WITH ZEAL AND
LEGAL BOUNDS
USE OF FAIR AND HONEST MEANS
Rule 19.01 commands that a “lawyer shall employ only fair
and honest means to attain the lawful objectives of his client
and shall not present, participate in presenting, or threaten
to present unfounded criminal charges to obtain an
improper advantage in any case or proceeding.” Under this
Rule, a lawyer should not file or threaten to file any
unfounded or baseless criminal case or cases against the
adversaries of his client designed to secure leverage to
compel the adversaries to yield or withdraw their own cases
against the lawyer’s client. (Pena v. Aparicio, A.C. No. 7298,
June 25, 2007)
CLIENT’S FRAUD
A lawyer who has received information that his clients has,
in the course of the representation, perpetrated a fraud upon
a person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon the client to
rectify the same, and failing which he shall terminate the
relationship with such client in accordance with the Rules of
Court. (Rule 19.02, Canon 19, CPR) As a lawyer, respondent
should confront complainant and ask her to rectify her
fraudulent representation. If complainant refuses, then he
should terminate his relationship with her. (Dalisay v.
Mauricio, A.C. No. 5655, January 23, 2006)
PROCEDURE IN HANDLING THE CASE
While a lawyer owes utmost zeal and devotion to the
interest of his client, he also has the responsibility of
employing only fair and honest means to attain the lawful
objectives of his client and he should not allow the latter to
dictate the procedure in handling the case. (Fernandez v.
Novero, Jr., A.C. No. 5394, December 2, 2002)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
AUTHORITY TO COMPROMISE
General Rule: A lawyer has no authority to compromise his
client’s case (Revised Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 23)
Exception: Where the lawyer is confronted with an
emergency and prompt, urgent action is necessary to protect
the interest of his client, and there is no opportunity for
consultation with him
NEGLIGENCE OF LAWYER BINDING UPON CLIENT
General Rule: Client is bound by attorney’s conduct,
negligence, and mistake in handling case, or in management
of litigation and in procedural technique (Vivero v. Santos,
G.R. No. L-8105, February 28, 1956)
Exceptions:
(1) Where adherence thereto results in outright deprivation
of client’s liberty or property or where interest of justice
so requires.
(2) Where the error by counsel is purely technical which
does not substantially affect the client’s cause
(3) Ignorance, incompetence, or inexperience of a lawyer is
so great and error so serious that client who has good
cause is prejudiced and denied a day in court
(4) Gross negligence of a lawyer
(5) Lack of acquaintance with technical part of procedure
CANON 20: ATTORNEY’S FEES
ACCEPTANCE FEE AND CONTINGENCY FEE
Acceptance fee refers to the charge imposed by the lawyer
for merely accepting the case. Since the acceptance fee only
seeks to compensate the lawyer for the lost opportunity, it is
not measured by the nature and extent of the legal services
rendered (Dalupan v. Gacott, A.C. No. 5067, June 29, 2015)
In a contingent fee contract, the lawyer gets reimbursed for
the advances made for the client in the course of
representation, whether he wins the suit or not; only the
amount of the professional fee is contingent upon winning.
CHAMPERTOUS CONTRACT
A lawyer assumes all expenses for litigation and
reimbursement is contingent on the outcome of the case.
This is strictly prohibited under Rule 16.04 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
BARRATRY
the offense of frequently exciting and stirring up quarrels in
suits. It is frowned upon as it is against public policy
An approved compromise agreement between the petitioner
and the respondent without the former informing her
counsel, unreasonably reducing the stipulated fees of the
counsel, the payment of the counsel’s reasonable
compensation could not be annulled by the settlement of the
litigation without the counsel’s participation and conformity.
(Malvar v. Kraft, G.R. No. 183952, September 9, 2013)
CONTINGENCY FEE ARRANGEMENTS
CONTRACT FOR CONTINGENT FEES
An agreement in writing by which the fees, usually a fixed
percentage of what may be recovered in the action, are made
22
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
to depend upon the success in the effort to enforce or defend
a supposed right. Contingent fees depend upon an express
contract, without which the attorney can only recover on the
basis of quantum meruit.
QUANTUM MERUIT (AS MUCH AS HE DESERVES)
Used as basis for determining an attorney’s professional fees
in the absence of an express agreement. The recovery of
attorney’s fees on the basis of quantum meruit is a device that
prevents an unscrupulous client from running away with the
fruits of the legal services of counsel without paying for it
and also avoids unjust enrichment on the part of the attorney
himself. An attorney must show that he is entitled to
reasonable compensation for the effort in pursuing the
client’s cause, taking into account certain factors in fixing the
amount of legal fees.
VALIDITY OF CONTINGENCY FEE ARRANGEMENTS
A contingent fee arrangement is valid in this jurisdiction and
is generally recognized as valid and binding but must be laid
down in an express contract. The amount of contingent fee
agreed upon by the parties is subject to the stipulation that
counsel will be paid for his legal services only if the suit or
litigation prospers. A much higher compensation is allowed
as contingent fee in consideration of the risk that the lawyer
may get nothing if the suit fails. (Rayos v. Hernandez, G.R. No.
169079, February 12, 2007)
Ratio: Contracts of this nature are permitted because they
redound to the benefit of the poor client and the lawyer
"especially in cases where the client has meritorious cause of
action, but no means with which to pay for legal services
unless he can, with the sanction of law, make a contract for a
contingent fee to be paid out of the proceeds of the litigation.
Oftentimes, the contingent fee arrangement is the only
means by which the poor and helpless can seek redress for
injuries sustained and have their rights vindicated." (Rayos v.
Hernandez, supra)
ATTORNEY’S LIENS
An attorney shall have a lien upon the funds, documents and
papers of his client, which have lawfully come into his
possession and may retain the same until his lawful fees and
disbursements have been paid, and may apply such funds to
the satisfaction thereof.
He shall also have a lien to the same extent upon all
judgments for the payment of money, and executions issued
in pursuance of such judgments, which he has secured in a
litigation of his client, from and after the time when he shall
have caused a statement of his claim of such lien to be
entered upon the records of the court rendering such
judgment, or issuing such execution, and shall have caused
written notice thereof to be delivered to his client and to the
adverse party; and he shall have the same right and power
over such judgments and executions as his client would have
to enforce his lien and secure the payment of his just fees
and disbursements. (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Section 37)
KINDS OF LIENS
RETAINING LIEN
the right of an attorney to retain possession of a client’s
documents, money, or other property which comes into the
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
hands of the attorney professionally, until a general balance
due him for professional services is paid. (7 C.J.S., 1141)
REQUISITES:
(1) Attorney-client relationship;
(2) Lawful possession by lawyer of the client’s funds,
documents and papers in his professional capacity;
(3) Unsatisfied claim for attorney’s fees or disbursements
CHARGING LIEN
the equitable right of an attorney to have fees and costs due
him for services in a particular suit secured by the judgment
or recovery in such suit. (7 C.J.S., 1142) (Bar Reviewer in Legal
and Judicial Ethics by Ernani Cruz Paňo, pg. 54)
REQUISITES:
(1) Attorney-client relationship;
(2) The attorney has rendered services;
(3) A money judgment favorable to the client has been
secured in the action;
(4) The attorney has a claim for attorney’s fees or advances
statement of his claim has been recorded in the case
with notice served upon the client and adverse party
FEES AND CONTROVERSIES WITH CLIENTS
Canon 20, Rule 20.4 of the CPR mandates that "[a] lawyer shall
avoid controversies with clients concerning his
compensation and shall resort to judicial action only to
prevent imposition, injustice or fraud." Likewise, Canon 14
of the Canons of Professional Ethics states that
"[c]ontroversies with clients concerning compensation are to
be avoided by the lawyer so far as shall be compatible with
his self-respect and with his right to receive reasonable
recompense for his service; and lawsuits with the clients
should be resorted to only to prevent injustice, imposition, or
fraud." (Cueto v. Jimenez, Jr., A.C. No. 5798, January 20, 2005)
REQUISITES FOR THE RIGHT TO ATTORNEY’S FEES
TO ACCRUE:
 Existence of attorney-client relationship
 Rendition by the lawyer or services to the client
FACTORS IN DETERMINING ATTORNEY’S FEES:
(1) Time spent and the extent of the services rendered
(2) Importance of the subject matter
(3) Novelty and the difficulty of the questions involved
(4) Skill demanded
(5) Amount involved in the controversy and the benefit
resulting from the service
(6) Probability of losing other employment as a result of
the acceptance of the proffered case
(7) Professional standing of the lawyer
(8) Customary charges for similar services and the
schedule of fees of the IBP Chapter to which he belongs
(9) Contingency or certainty of compensation
(10) Character of the employment whether occasional or
established.
CONCEPTS OF ATTORNEY’S FEES
TWO ACCEPTED CONCEPTS OF ATTORNEY'S FEES:
ORDINARY CONCEPT
An attorney's fee is the reasonable compensation paid to a
lawyer by his client for the legal services he has rendered to
23
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
the latter. The basis of this compensation is the fact of his
employment by and his agreement with the client.
EXTRAORDINARY CONCEPT
an attorney's fee is an indemnity for damages ordered by the
court to be paid by the losing party in a litigation. The basis
of this is any of the cases provided by law where such award
can be made, such as those authorized in Article 2208, Civil
Code, and is payable not to the lawyer but to the client,
unless they have agreed that the award shall pertain to the
lawyer as additional compensation or as part thereof.
(Traders Royal Bank Employees Union-Independent v. NLRC,
G.R. No. 120592, March 14, 1997)
KINDS OF RETAINER FEES
GENERAL RETAINER
The fee paid to a lawyer to secure his future services as
general counsel for any ordinary legal problem that may
arise in the routinary business of the client and referred to
him for legal action. The future services of the lawyer are
secured and committed to the retaining client. For this, the
client pays the lawyer a fixed retainer fee which could be
monthly or otherwise, depending upon their arrangement.
The fees are paid whether or not there are cases referred to
the lawyer. The reason for the remuneration is that the
lawyer is deprived of the opportunity of rendering services
for a fee to the opposing party or other parties. In fine, it is a
compensation for lost opportunities.
SPECIAL RETAINER
A fee for a specific case handled or special service rendered
by the lawyer for a client. A client may have several cases
demanding special or individual attention. If for every case
there is a separate and independent contract for attorney’s
fees, each fee is considered a special retainer.
CIRCUMSTANCES TO BE CONSIDERED IN
DETERMINING THE REASONABLENESS OF A CLAIM
FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES:
(1) the amount and character of the service rendered;
(2) labor, time, and trouble involved;
(3) the nature and importance of the litigation or business
in which the services were rendered;
(4) the responsibility imposed;
(5) the amount of money or the value of the property
affected by the controversy or involved in the
employment;
(6) the skill and experience called for in the performance of
the services;
(7) the professional character and social standing of the
attorney;
(8) the results secured;
(9) whether the fee is absolute or contingent, it being
recognized that an attorney may properly charge a
much larger fee when it is contingent than when it is
not; and
(10) the financial capacity and economic status of the client
have to be taken into account in fixing the
reasonableness of the fee.
In the absence of a law allowing compensation, the lawyer
designated as counsel de oficio cannot charge the government
nor the indigent litigant for his professional services.
(Agpalo)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
Under Article 111 of the Labor Code, in cases of unlawful
withholding of wages, the culpable party may be assessed
attorney’s fees equivalent to ten percent of the amount of
wages recovered. It shall be unlawful for any person to
demand or accept, in any judicial or administrative
proceedings for the recovery of wages, attorney’s fees which
exceed ten percent of the amount of wages recovered.
CANON 21: PRESERVATION OF CLIENT’S
CONFIDENCES
AT WHAT POINT AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT
RELATIONSHIP IS ESTABLISHED:
It is not necessary that any retainer be paid, promised, or
charged; neither is it material that the attorney consulted did
not afterward handle the case for which his service had been
sought.
If a person, in respect to business affairs or troubles of any
kind, consults a lawyer with a view to obtaining professional
advice or assistance, and the attorney voluntarily permits or
acquiesces with the consultation, then the professional
employment is established (Burbe v. Magulta, supra)
FACTORS ESTABLISHING ATTORNEY-CLIENT
RELATION (DEAN WIGMORE’S LIST)
(1) Where legal advice of any kind is sought
(2) From a professional legal adviser in his capacity as
such:
 The communications relating to that purpose
 Made in confidence
 By the client
 Are at his instance permanently protected
 From disclosure by himself or by the legal advisor
 Except the protection be waived. (Hadjula v
Madianda, A.C. No. 6711, July 3, 2007)
PROHIBITED DISCLOSURES AND USE
A lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his client, use
information acquired in the course of employment, nor shall
he use the same to his own advantage or that of a third
person, unless the client with full knowledge of the
circumstances consents thereto.
A lawyer shall not, without the written consent of his client,
give information from his files to an outside agency seeking
such information for auditing, statistical, bookkeeping,
accounting, data processing, or any similar purpose. A
lawyer shall avoid indiscreet conversation about a client’s
affairs even with members of his family.
A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been consulted about a
particular case except to avoid possible conflict of interest.
INSTANCES WHEN A LAWYER MAY DISCLOSE THE
CONFIDENCES OR SECRETS OF HIS CLIENT:
(1) When authorized by the client after acquainting him of
the consequences of the disclosure;
(2) When required by law;
(3) When necessary to collect his fees or to defend himself,
his employees or associates or by judicial action.
(4) A lawyer may disclose the affairs of a client of the firm
to partners or associates thereof unless prohibited by
the client.
24
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
CANON 22: WITHDRAWAL OF SERVICES
TERMINATION OF ATTORNEY CLIENT
RELATIONSHIP
 The act of the client;
 the act of the attorney;
 the death of the client;
 the death of the attorney; or
 the accomplishment of the purpose for which it was
created.
Ordinarily, the attorney-client relation is ended by the
completion of the specific task for which the attorney was
employed.
General Rule: The withdrawal in writing, with the client’s
conformity, does not require the approval of the court to be
effective.
Exception: If no new counsel has entered his appearance, the
court may, in order to prevent a denial of a party’s right to
the assistance of counsel require that the lawyer’s
withdrawal be held in abeyance until another lawyer shall
have appeared for the party. (Villasis v. CA, G.R. No. L-34369,
September 30, 1974)
Although a lawyer may withdraw his services when the
client deliberately fails to pay the fees for the services,
withdrawal is unjustified if client did not deliberately fail to
pay. (Montano v. IBP, A.C. No. 4215, May 21, 2001)
SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND
DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS (RULE 139-B)
NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AGAINST
LAWYERS
SUI GENERIS (A CLASS OF THEIR OWN)
Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers are sui generis.
Neither purely civil nor purely criminal, they do not involve
a trial of an action or a suit, but is rather an investigation by
the Court into the conduct of one of its officers. Not being
intended to inflict punishment, it is in no sense a criminal
prosecution. Accordingly, there is neither a plaintiff nor a
prosecutor therein. It may be initiated by the Court motu
proprio.
Public interest is its primary objective, and the real question
for determination is whether or not the attorney is still a fit
person to be allowed the privileges as such. Hence, in the
exercise of its disciplinary powers, the Court merely calls
upon a member of the Bar to account for his actuations as an
officer of the Court with the end in view of preserving the
purity of the legal profession and the proper and honest
administration of justice by purging the profession of
members who by their misconduct have proved themselves
no longer worthy to be entrusted with the duties and
responsibilities pertaining to the office of an attorney. In
such posture, there can thus be no occasion to speak of a
complainant or a prosecutor. (Ylaya v. Gacott, supra; Que v.
Revilla Jr., A.C. No. 7054, December 4, 2009)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL
Disbarment proceedings against attorneys shall be private
and confidential except that the final order of the court shall
be made public as in other cases coming before the court.
(Sec. 10, Rule 139, Rules of Court)
NO RES JUDICATA IN DISBARMENT CASES
The doctrine of res judicata applies only to judicial or quasi-
judicial proceedings and not to the exercise of the [Court’s]
administrative powers. (Dinsay v. Cioco, A.C. No. 2995, 27
November 1996)
PRESCRIPTION
An administrative complaint against a member of the bar
does not prescribe. If the rule were otherwise, members of
the bar would be emboldened to disregard the very oath
they took as lawyers, prescinding from the fact that as long
as no private complainant would immediately come
forward, they stand a chance of being completely exonerated
from whatever administrative liability they ought to answer
for. No matter how much time has elapsed from the time of
the commission of the act complained of and the time of the
institution of the complaint, erring members of the bench
and bar cannot escape the disciplining arm of the Court.
(Heck v. Santos, A.M. No.RTJ-01-1657. February 23, 2004)
Monetary claims cannot be granted in disbarment cases
except restitution and return of monies and properties of the
client given in the course of the lawyer-client relations.
A lawyer who leaked the bar questions in Mercantile Law
prepared by a founding partner in his law firm was
reinstated upon proof of good moral character during his
period of suspension. (2003 Bar Question)
A proceeding for disbarment or suspension is not in any
sense a civil action; it is undertaken and prosecuted for
public welfare. It does not involve private interest and
affords no redress for private grievance. (Bellosillo v. Board
of Governors of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, G.R.
No. 126980, March 31, 2006)
No private interest is involved in disbarment cases. Hence, a
real party-in-interest is not required. The procedural
requirement observed in ordinary civil proceedings that only
the real party-in-interest must initiate the suit does not apply
in disbarment cases. In fact, the person who called the
attention of the court to a lawyer’s misconduct is in no sense
a party, and generally has no interest in the outcome except
as all good citizens may have in the proper administration of
justice.(Rayos-Ombac v. Rayos, A.C. No. 2884, January 28,
1998)
In Heck v. Santos, the Court held that “any interested person
or the court motu proprio may initiate disciplinary
proceedings.” The right to institute disbarment proceedings
is not confined to clients nor is it necessary that the person
complaining suffered injury from the alleged wrongdoing.
Disbarment proceedings are matters of public interest and
the only basis for the judgment is the proof or failure of
proof of the charges. (Sebastian v. Bajar, A.C. No. 3731,
September 7, 2007)
25
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
NO PREJUDICIAL QUESTIONS IN DISBARMENT
PROCEEDINGS
It is not sound judicial policy to await the final resolution of
a criminal case before a complaint against a lawyer may be
acted upon; otherwise, this Court will be rendered helpless
to apply the rules on admission to, and continuing
membership in, the legal profession during the whole period
that the criminal case is pending final disposition, when the
objectives of the two proceedings are vastly
disparate. Disciplinary proceedings involve no private
interest and afford no redress for private grievance. They
are undertaken and prosecuted solely for the public welfare
and for preserving courts of justice from the official
ministration of persons unfit to practice law. The attorney is
called to answer to the court for his conduct as an officer of
the court. (Yu v. Palaña, A.C. No. 7747, July 14, 2008, 558
SCRA 21)
IN PARI DELICTO IS NOT A DEFENSE
In a disbarment proceeding, it is immaterial that the
complainant is in pari delicto because this is not a proceeding
to grant relief to the complainant, but one to purge the law
profession of unworthy members to protect the public and
the courts. (Mortel v. Aspiras, G.R. No. L-9152, December 28,
1956,100 Phil. 586, 592)
POWER TO DISCIPLINE
The Supreme Court en banc shall have the power to
discipline judges of lower courts, or order their dismissal by
a vote of majority of the Members who actually took part in
the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted in
thereon. (1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 11). The power of
the Court to discipline is an inherent and exclusive power.
Referral of complaints to the IBP is not mandatory as it is not
an exclusive procedure under Rule 139-B. Under this rule,
the Supreme Court may conduct disciplinary proceedings
against lawyers without the intervention of the IBP by
referring the complaint to the Solicitor General, or to any
officer of the Supreme Court, or to a judge of a lower court.
(Bautista v. Gonzales, A.M. No. 1625, February 12, 1990)
PROCEEDINGS
Proceedings for disbarment, suspension or discipline of
attorneys
(1) may be taken by the Supreme Court motu proprio, or by
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
(2) Filing of a verified complaint of any person.
The complaint shall state clearly and concisely the facts
complained of and shall be supported by affidavits of
persons having personal knowledge of the facts therein
alleged and/or by such documents as may substantiate said
facts.
The IBP Board of Governors may, motu proprio or upon
referral by the Supreme Court or by a Chapter Board of
Officers, or at the instance of any person, initiate and
prosecute proper charges against erring attorneys including
those in the government service; Provided, however, that all
charges against Justices of the Court of Tax Appeals and the
Sandiganbayan, and Judges of the Court of Tax Appeals and
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
lower courts, even if lawyers are jointly charged with them,
shall be filed with the Supreme Court; Provided, further, that
charges filed against Justices and Judges before the IBP,
including those filed prior to their appointment in the
Judiciary, shall immediately be forwarded to the Supreme
Court for disposition and adjudication.
Six (6) copies of the verified complaint shall be filed with the
Secretary of the IBP or the Secretary of any of its chapters
who shall forthwith transmit the same to the IBP Board of
Governors for assignment to an investigator.” (Rule 139-B as
amended by B.M No. 1960, Sec. 1)
SUSPENSION OF ATTORNEY BY THE COURT OF
APPEALS OR REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
The Court of Appeals or Regional Trial Court may suspend
an attorney from practice for any of the causes named in
Rule 138, Section 27, until further action of the Supreme
Court in the case.(Rules Of Court, Rule 139-B, Sec. 16)
GROUNDS
UNDER SECTION 27, RULE 138 OF THE REVISED RULES
OF COURT, A MEMBER OF THE BAR MAY BE
DISBARRED OR SUSPENDED ON ANY OF THE
FOLLOWING GROUNDS:
(1) deceit;
(2) malpractice or other gross misconduct in office;
(3) grossly immoral conduct;
(4) conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude;
(5) violation of the lawyer’s oath;
(6) willful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior
court; and
(7) willfully appearing as an attorney for a party without
authority.
The practice of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain,
either personally or through paid agents or brokers,
constitutes malpractice.
Art. 1491(5), NCC. Justices, judges, prosecuting attorneys,
clerks of superior and inferior courts, and other officers and
employees connected with the administration of justice
cannot acquire by assignment or by purchase, even at a
public or judicial auction, either in person or through the
mediation of another, property and rights which may be the
object of any litigation.
Paragraph 5 of Article 1491 prohibits the lawyer’s acquisition
by assignment of the client’s property which is the subject of
the litigation handled by the lawyer. Under Article 1492, the
prohibition extends to sales in legal redemption. The
prohibition ordained in paragraph 5 of Article 1491 and
Article 1492 is founded on public policy because, by virtue of
his office, an attorney may easily take advantage of the
credulity and ignorance of his client and unduly enrich
himself at the expense of his client. (Re: Atty. Leon G.
Maquera, Bar Matter No. 793, July 30, 2004)
Art. 208, RPC. Prosecution of offenses; negligence and
tolerance. — The penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum period and suspension shall be imposed upon any
public officer, or officer of the law, who, in dereliction of the
duties of his office, shall maliciously refrain from instituting
26
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises Legal Ethics

prosecution for the punishment of violators of the law, or

shall tolerate the commission of offenses. deals with the fitness of the
court’s officer to continue in
Art. 209, RPC Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor. — that office, to preserve and
Revelation of secrets. — In addition to the proper to vindicate the
protect the court and the
administrative action, the penalty of prision correccional in its Object authority of the
public from the official
minimum period, or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos, court
ministrations of persons
or both, shall be imposed upon any attorney-at-law or unfit or unworthy to hold
solicitor (procurador judicial) who, by any malicious breach of such office
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. to assure respect for orders
to safeguard of such court by attorneys
The same penalty shall be imposed upon an attorney-at-law Purpose the functions of who, as much as judges, are
or solicitor (procurador judicial) who, having undertaken the the court responsible for the orderly
defense of a client or having received confidential administration of justice.
information from said client in a case, shall undertake the governed by
defense of the opposing party in the same case, without the the procedures
consent of his first client. Governing laid down governed by Rules 138 and
Law under Rule 71 139 of the Rules of Court
QUANTUM OF PROOF of the Rules of
In administrative cases for disbarment or suspension against Court
lawyers, the quantum of proof required is clearly
preponderant evidence and the burden of proof rests upon
the complainant. (Cruz v. Centron, Adm. Matter No. P-02-1644,
READMISSION TO THE BAR
November 11, 2004)
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED
May a lawyer be disbarred for causes other than those
mentioned in the statute? When? (1977 Bar Question) LIFTING OF THE SUSPENSION NOT AUTOMATIC
The lifting of a lawyer’s suspension is not automatic upon
Held: YES. It is already a settled rule that the statutory the end of the period stated in the Court’s decision, and an
enumeration of the grounds for disbarment or suspension is order from the Court lifting the suspension at the end of the
not to be taken as a limitation on the general power of courts period is necessary in order to enable [him] to resume the
to suspend or disbar a lawyer. The inherent powers of the practice of his profession. Thus, according to the OBC, a
court over its officers cannot be restricted. (Quingwa v. suspended lawyer must first present proof(s) of his
Puno, A.C. No. 389, February 28, 1967) compliance by submitting certifications from the IBP and
from the Executive Judge that he has indeed desisted from
May a member of the Philippine Bar who was disbarred or the practice of law during the period of suspension.
suspended from the practice of law in a foreign jurisdiction Thereafter, the Court, after evaluation, and upon a favorable
where he has also been admitted as an attorney be meted the recommendation from the OBC, will issue a resolution lifting
same sanction as a member of the Philippine Bar for the the order of suspension and thus allow him to resume the
same infraction committed in the foreign jurisdiction? practice of law. (Maniago v. De Dios, A.C. No. 7472, March 30,
2010)
HELD: Yes. Under Section 27, Rule 138, the disbarment or
suspension of a member of the Philippine Bar in a foreign
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN DISBARRED
jurisdiction, where he has also been admitted as an attorney,
is also a ground for his disbarment or suspension in this
CRITERIA FOR REINSTATEMENT OF A DISBARRED
realm, provided the foreign court’s action is by reason of an
LAWYER
act or omission constituting deceit, malpractice or other
(1) Appreciation of the significance of his dereliction
gross misconduct, grossly immoral conduct, or a violation of
(2) Assurance to the court that he now possesses the
the lawyer’s oath. (Re: Atty. Leon G. Maquera, supra)
requisite probity and integrity necessary to guarantee
his worthiness to be restored to the practice of law.
THE POWERS OF THE SUPREME COURT TO (3) The time elapsed between disbarment and application
PUNISH FOR CONTEMPT VS. THE POWER for reinstatement.
TO DISCIPLINE LAWYERS (4) Good conduct and honorable dealing subsequent to his
disbarment.
(5) Active involvement in civic, educational and religious
organizations.
Contempt Disciplinary Proceeding
(6) Favorable indorsement of IBP as well as local
Proceeding
government officials and citizens of his community.

Whether the applicant shall be reinstated in the Roll of

Attorneys rests to a great extent on the sound discretion of
the Court. The applicant must, like a candidate for

27
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises Legal Ethics

admission to the bar, satisfy the Court that he is a person of Subject Hours Credit Units
good moral character, a fit and proper person to practice (CU)
law. The Court will take into consideration the applicant’s Legal Ethics 6 6
character and standing prior to the disbarment, the nature Trial and Pretrial Skills 4 4
and character of the charge/s for which he was disbarred, Alternative Dispute Resolution 5 5
his conduct subsequent to the disbarment, and the time that Substantive and Procedural Law 9 9
has elapsed between the disbarment and the application for and Jurisprudence
reinstatement. (Que v. Revilla, Jr., supra) Legal Writing and Advocacy 4 4
International Law and International 2 2
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN REPATRATED Conventions
Total Number of Hours 30 -
CONDITIONS BEFORE A LAWYER WHO REACQUIRES
FILIPINO CITIZENSHIP PURSUANT TO RA 9225 CAN Note: The remaining 6 from 36 hours, the subject shall be
RESUME LAW PRACTICE prescribed by the MCLE Committee is upon the discretion of
the MCLE Committee. (Rule 2, Sec. 2)
He must first secure from this Court the authority to do so,
conditioned on:
(1) the updating and payment in full of the annual
COMPLIANCE
membership dues in the IBP;
(2) the payment of professional tax;
The compliance groups enumerated by Bar Matter 850
(3) the completion of at least 36 credit hours of mandatory
Group Scope
continuing legal education; this is especially significant
to refresh the applicant/petitioner’s knowledge of Compliance Group 1 Members in the NCR
Philippine laws and update him of legal developments Compliance Group 2 Members in Luzon outside NCR
and Compliance Group 3 Members in Visayas and
(4) the retaking of the lawyer’s oath which will not only Mindanao
remind him of his duties and responsibilities as a
lawyer and as an officer of the Court, but also renew his Initial compliance period. - The initial compliance period shall
pledge to maintain allegiance to the Republic of the begin not later than three (3) months from the adoption of
Philippines. (Petition for Leave to Resume Practice of Law, these Rules. Except for the initial compliance period for
Benjamin M. Dacanay, B.M. No. 1678, December 17, 2007) members admitted or readmitted after the establishment of
the program, all compliance periods shall be for thirty-six
(36) months and shall begin the day after the end of the
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL
previous compliance period.
EDUCATION
EXEMPTIONS
PURPOSE
PARTIES EXEMPTED FROM THE MCLE
(1) To keep abreast with law and jurisprudence, (2012 (1) The President and the Vice President of the Philippines
Bar Exam, MCQ no. 7) (2) The Secretaries and Undersecretaries of Executive
(2) To maintain the ethics of the profession, and Departments
(3) To enhance the standards of the practice of law (3) Senators and Members of the House of Representatives
(Rule 1, Sec.1) (4) The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the Supreme
Court, incumbent and retired members of the judiciary
PERSONS REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE (5) incumbent members of the Judicial and Bar Council
CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION and incumbent court lawyers covered by the Philippine
Judicial Academy program of continuing judicial
education
General Rule: All members of the Integrated Bar of the
(6) 6.The Chief State Counsel
Philippines
(7) Chief State Prosecutor
(8) Assistant Secretaries of the Department of Justice
Exception: Rule 7, Section 1 provides for the parties exempt
(9) The Solicitor General
from MCLE.
(10) The Assistant Solicitors General
(11) The Government Corporate Counsel
REQUIREMENTS (12) Deputy and Assistant Government Corporate Counsel
(13) The Chairmen and Members of the Constitutional
DURATION FOR THE COMPLIANCE OF THE MCLE Commissions
Every three (3) years at least thirty-six (36) hours of (14) The Ombudsman
continuing legal education activities approved by the MCLE (15) The Overall Deputy Ombudsman
Committee (Rule 2, Sec. 2). (2012 Bar Exam MCQ no. 4) (16) The Special Prosecutor of the Office of the Ombudsman
(17) Heads of government agencies exercising quasi-judicial
36 HOURS OF CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION functions
ALLOCATION (18) Incumbent deans, bar reviewers and professors of law
who have teaching experience for at least ten (10) years

28
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
in accredited law schools;
(19) The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and members of the
Corps of Professors and Professorial Lecturers of the
Philippine Judicial Academy
(20) Governors and Mayors.
(21) Those who are not in law practice, private or public
who are members of the bar
(22) Those who have retired from law practice with the
approval of the IBP Board of Governors.
SANCTIONS
SANCTIONS IMPOSED FOR THE NON-COMPLIANCE
IN THE CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
(1) Payment of Non-compliance fee.
(2) Listing as Delinquent member of the IBP
(3) Accrual of Membership fee.
REQUIREMENT AMONG PRACTICING LAWYERS IN
THEIR PLEADINGS IMPOSED UNDER BAR MATTER
NO. 1922
Practicing members of the bar are required to INDICATE in
all pleadings filed before the courts or quasi-judicial bodies,
the number and date of issue of their MCLE Certificate of
Compliance or Certificate of Exemption, as may be
applicable, for the immediately preceding compliance
period.
Failure to disclose the required information would cause the
dismissal of the case and the expunction of the pleadings
from the records.(Re. Number and date of MCLE certificate of
completion/exemption required in all pleadings/motions, B.M. No.
1922, June 3, 2008)
MANDATORY LEGAL AID SERVICE
Bar Matter 2012, Proposed Rule on Mandatory Legal Aid
Service for Practicing Lawyers, February 10, 2009
FREE LEGAL AID SERVICES
Appearance in court or quasi-judicial body for and in behalf
of an indigent or pauper litigant and the preparation of
pleadings or motions. It shall also cover assistance by a
practicing lawyer to indigent or poor litigants in court-
annexed mediation and in other modes of alternative dispute
resolution (ADR). Services rendered when a practicing
lawyer is appointed counsel de oficio shall also be
considered as free legal aid services and credited as
compliance under this Rule.
PRACTICING LAWYERS
Members of the Philippine Bar who appear for and in behalf
of parties in courts of law and quasi-judicial agencies,
including but not limited to the National Labor Relations
Commission, National Conciliation and Mediation Board,
Department of Labor and Employment Regional Offices,
Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board and
National Commission for Indigenous Peoples.
THE TERM "PRACTICING LAWYERS" SHALL
EXCLUDE:
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
(1) Government employees and incumbent elective
officials not allowed by law to practice;
(2) Lawyers who by law are not allowed to appear in court;
(3) Supervising lawyers of students enrolled in law student
practice in duly accredited legal clinics of law schools
and lawyers of non-governmental organizations
(NGOs) and peoples’ organizations (POs) like the Free
Legal Assistance Group who by the nature of their
work already render free legal aid to indigent and
pauper litigants and
(4) 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.
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.
Mandatory free legal service by members of the bar and their
active support thereof will aid the efficient and effective
administration of justice, especially in cases involving
indigent and pauper litigants.
SCOPE
This Rule shall govern the mandatory requirement for
practicing lawyers to render free legal aid services in all
cases (whether civil, criminal, or administrative) involving
indigent and pauper litigants where the assistance of a
lawyer is needed.
It shall also govern the duty of other members of the legal
profession to support the legal aid program of the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines.
REQUIREMENTS
Every practicing lawyer is required to render a minimum of
sixty (60) hours of free legal aid services to indigent litigants
in a year.
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.
PENALTIES
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 National
Committee on Legal Aid, to explain why he was unable to
render the minimum prescribed number of hours.
If no explanation has been given or if the NCLA finds the
explanation unsatisfactory, the erring lawyer be declared a
member of the IBP who is not in good standing.
29
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
Notice thereof shall be furnished the erring lawyer and 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.
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.
During the said period, the lawyer cannot appear in court or
any quasi-judicial body as counsel. 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.
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 Commission on Bar Discipline. If found
administratively liable, the penalty of suspension in the
practice of law for one (1) year shall be imposed upon him.
Any lawyer who falsifies a certificate or any form required to
be submitted under this Rule or any contents thereof shall be
administratively charged with falsification and dishonesty
and shall be subject to disciplinary action by the CBD. This is
without prejudice to the filing of criminal charges against the
lawyer.
The falsification of a certificate or any contents thereof by
any Clerk of Court or by any Chairperson of the Legal Aid
Committee of the IBP local chapter where the case is
pending or by the Director of a legal clinic or responsible
officer of an NGO or PO shall be a ground for an
administrative case against the said Clerk of Court or
Chairperson. This is without prejudice to the filing of the
criminal and administrative charges against the malfeasor.
NOTARIAL PRACTICE (A.M. NO. 02-8-13-SC,
AS AMENDED)
DEFINITIONS
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
An act in which an individual on a single occasion:
(1) appears in person before the notary public and presents
an integrally complete instrument or document;
(2) is attested to be personally known to the notary public
or identified by the notary public through competent
evidence of identity as defined by these Rules; and
(3) represents to the notary public that the signature on the
instrument or document was voluntarily affixed by him
for the purposes stated in the instrument or document,
declares that he has executed the instrument or
document as his free and voluntary act and deed, and,
if he acts in a particular representative capacity, that he
has the authority to sign in that capacity.
AFFIRMATION OR OATH
An act in which an individual on a single occasion:
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
(1) appears in person before the notary public;
(2) is personally known to the notary public or 3. identified
by the notary public through competent evidence of
identity as defined by these Rules; and
(3) avows under penalty of law to the whole truth of the
contents of the instrument or document.
COMMISSION
The grant of authority to perform notarial acts and to the
written evidence of the authority.
COPY CERTIFICATION
A notarial act in which a notary public:
(1) is presented with an instrument or document that is
neither a vital record, a public record, nor publicly
recordable;
(2) copies or supervises the copying of the instrument or
document;
(3) compares the instrument or document with the copy;
(4) determines that the copy is accurate and complete.
JURAT
An act in which an individual on a single occasion:
(1) appears in person before the notary public and presents
an instrument or document;
(2) is personally known to the notary public or identified
by the notary public through competent evidence of
identity as defined by these Rules;
(3) signs the instrument or document in the presence of the
notary; and
(4) takes an oath or affirmation before the notary public as
to such instrument or document.
The jurat is that end part of the affidavit in which the notary
certifies that the instrument is sworn to before her. As such,
the notarial certification is essential. Considering that
notarization is not an empty, meaningless, routinary act, the
faithful observance and utmost respect of the legal solemnity
of the oath in the jurat are sacrosanct. (Bides-Ulaso v. Noe-
Lacsamana, Adm. Case No. 7297, September 29, 2009)
NOTARIAL ACT AND NOTARIZATION
Any act that a notary public is empowered to perform under
these Rules.
NOTARY PUBLIC AND NOTARY
Any person commissioned to perform official acts under
these Rules.
QUALIFICATIONS OF A NOTARY PUBLIC
30
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises Legal Ethics

(1) Must be a citizen of the Philippines;
(2) Must be over twenty-one (21) years of age;
(3) Must be a resident in the Philippines for at least one (1)
year and maintains a regular place of work or business
in the city or province where the commission is to be
issued;
(4) Must be a member of the Philippine Bar in good
standing with clearances from the Office of the Bar
Confidant of the Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar
of the Philippines; and
(5) Must not have been convicted in the first instance of
any crime involving moral turpitude. (A.M. No. 02-8-13-
SC, as amended, Rule III, Section 1)
TERM OF OFFICE OF NOTARY PUBLIC
A person commissioned as notary public may perform
notarial acts in any place within the territorial jurisdiction of
the commissioning court for a period of two (2) years
commencing the first day of January of the year in which the
commissioning is made, unless earlier revoked, or the notary
public has resigned under these Rules and the Rules of
Court. (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, as amended, Rule III, Section 11)
PUBLIC POWERS AND LIMITATION
addresses of person and two [2] witnesses)”; and
(5) The notary public notarizes his signature by
acknowledgment or jurat.
PROHIBITIONS
A notary public shall not perform a notarial act outside his
regular place of work or business; provided, however, that
on certain exceptional occasions or situations, a notarial act
may be performed at the request of the parties in the
following sites located within his territorial jurisdiction:
(1) Public offices, convention halls, and similar places
where oaths of office may be administered;
(2) Public function areas in hotels and similar places for the
signing of instruments or documents requiring
notarization; hospitals and other medical institutions
where a party to an instrument or document is confined
for treatment; and
(3) Any place where a party to an instrument or document
requiring notarization is under detention.
A person shall not perform a notarial act if the person
involved as signatory to the instrument or document -
is not in the notary's presence personally at the time of the
notarization; and is not personally known to the notary
public or otherwise identified by the notary public through
competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules.

POWERS
NOTARIAL REGISTER
A notary public is empowered to perform the following
notarial acts:
 acknowledgments; A notarial register refers to a permanently bound book with
 oaths and affirmations; numbered pages containing a chronological record of
 jurats; notarial acts performed by a notary public. (Sec. 5, Rule II,
 signature witnessings; Notarial Rules)
 copy certifications; and
 any other act authorized by these Rules. FORM OF NOTARIAL REGISTER
A notary public shall keep, maintain, protect, and provide
for lawful inspection as provided in these Rules, a
A notary public is authorized to certify the affixing of a
chronological official notarial register of notarial acts
signature by thumb or other mark on an instrument or
consisting of a permanently bound book with numbered
document presented for notarization if
pages.
(1) The thumb or other mark is affixed in the presence of
the notary public and of two (2) disinterested and
The register shall be kept in books to be furnished by the
unaffected witnesses to the instrument or document;
Solicitor General to any notary public upon request and
(2) Both witnesses sign their own names in addition to the
upon payment of the cost thereof. The register shall be duly
thumb or other mark;
paged, and on the first page, the Solicitor General shall
(3) The notary public writes below the thumb or other
certify the number of pages of which the book consists.
mark: "Thumb or Other Mark affixed by (name of
signatory by mark) in the presence of (names and
A notary public shall keep only one active notarial register at
addresses of witnesses) and undersigned notary
any given time.
public"; and
(4) The notary public notarizes the signature by thumb or
other mark through an acknowledgment, jurat, or
signature witnessing.

A notary public is authorized to sign on behalf of a person

who is physically unable to sign or make a mark on an
instrument or document if
(1) The notary public is directed by the person unable to
sign or make a mark to sign on his behalf;
(2) The signature of the notary public is affixed in the
presence of two disinterested and unaffected witnesses
to the instrument or document;
(3) Both witnesses sign their own names;
(4) The notary public writes below his signature:
“Signature affixed by notary in presence of (names and

31
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
ENTRIES IN THE NOTARIAL REGISTER
For every notarial act, the notary shall record in the notarial
register at the time of notarization the following:
(1) the entry number and page number;
(2) the date and time of day of the notarial act;
(3) the type of notarial act;
(4) the title or description of the instrument, document or
proceeding;
(5) the name and address of each principal;
(6) the competent evidence of identity as defined by these
Rules if the signatory is not personally known to the
notary;
(7) the name and address of each credible witness
swearing to or affirming the person's identity;
(8) the fee charged for the notarial act;
(9) the address where the notarization was performed if
not in the notary's regular place of work or business;
(10) any other circumstance the notary public may deem of
significance or relevance.
A notary public shall record in the notarial register the
reasons and circumstances for not completing a notarial act.
A notary public shall record in the notarial register the
circumstances of any request to inspect or copy an entry in
the notarial register, including the requester's name, address,
signature, thumbmark or other recognized identifier, and
evidence of identity. The reasons for refusal to allow
inspection or copying of a journal entry shall also be
recorded.
When the instrument or document is a contract, the notary
public shall keep an original copy thereof as part of his
records and enter in said records a brief description of the
substance thereof and shall give to each entry a consecutive
number, beginning with number one in each calendar year.
He shall also retain a duplicate original copy for the Clerk of
Court.
The notary public shall give to each instrument or document
executed, sworn to, or acknowledged before him a number
corresponding to the one in his register, and shall also state
on the instrument or document the page/s of his register on
which the same is recorded. No blank line shall be left
between entries.
In case of a protest of any draft, bill of exchange, or
promissory note, the notary public shall make a full and true
record of all proceedings in relation thereto and shall note
therein whether the demand for the sum of money was
made, by whom, when, and where; whether he presented
such draft, bill, or note; whether notices were given, to
whom and in what manner; where the same was made,
when and to whom and where directed; and of every other
fact touching the same.
At the end of each week, the notary public shall certify in his
notarial register the number of instruments or documents
executed, sworn to, acknowledged, or protested before him;
or if none, this certificate shall show this fact.
A certified copy of each month's entries and a duplicate
original copy of any instrument acknowledged before the
notary public shall, within the first ten (10) days of the
month following, be forwarded to the Clerk of Court and
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
shall be under the responsibility of such officer. If there is no
entry to certify for the month, the notary shall forward a
statement to this effect in lieu of certified copies herein
required.
Respondents allowed their secretaries to notarize documents
in their stead, in violation of Sections 245 and 246 of the
Notarial Law. It is held that the notary public is personally
accountable for all the entries in his notarial register. They
cannot be relieved of responsibility for the violation of the
aforesaid sections by passing the blame to their secretaries.
(Lingan v. Atty. Calubaquib, A.C. No. 5377, June 15, 2006)
SIGNATURES AND THUMBMARKS
At the time of notarization, the notary's notarial register shall
be signed or a thumb or other mark affixed by each:
(1) principal;
(2) credible witness swearing or affirming to the identity of
a principal; and
(3) witness to a signature by thumb or other mark, or
(4) to a signing by the notary public on behalf of a person
physically unable to sign.
ISSUANCE OF CERTIFIED TRUE COPIES
The notary public shall supply a certified true copy of the
notarial record, or any part thereof, to any person applying
for such copy upon payment of the legal fees.
JURISDICTION OF NOTARY PUBLIC AND
TERM OF NOTARIZATION
A person commissioned as notary public may perform
notarial acts in any place within the territorial jurisdiction of
the commissioning court for a period of two (2) years
commencing the first day of January of the year in which the
commissioning is made, unless earlier revoked or the notary
public has resigned under these Rules and the Rules of
Court.
REVOCATION OF COMMISSION
REVOCATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS
The Executive Judge shall revoke a notarial commission for
any ground on which an application for a commission may
be denied.
In addition, the Executive Judge may revoke the commission
of, or impose appropriate administrative sanctions upon,
any notary public who:
(1) fails to keep a notarial register;
(2) fails to make the proper entry or entries in his notarial
register concerning his notarial acts;
(3) fails to send the copy of the entries to the Executive
Judge within the first ten (10) days of the month
following;
(4) fails to affix to acknowledgments the date of expiration
of his commission;
(5) fails to submit his notarial register, when filled, to the
Executive Judge;
(6) fails to make his report, within a reasonable time, to the
Executive Judge concerning the performance of his
duties, as may be required by the judge;
(7) fails to require the presence of a principal at the time of
the notarial act;
32
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
(8) fails to identify a principal on the basis of personal
knowledge or competent evidence;
(9) executes a false or incomplete certificate under Section
5, Rule IV;
(10) knowingly performs or fails to perform any other act
prohibited or mandated by these Rules; and
(11) commits any other dereliction or act which in the
judgment of the Executive Judge constitutes good cause
for revocation of commission or imposition of
administrative sanction.
Upon verified complaint by an interested, affected or
aggrieved person, the notary public shall be required to file a
verified answer to the complaint. If the answer of the notary
public is not satisfactory, the Executive Judge shall conduct a
summary hearing. If the allegations of the complaint are not
proven, the complaint shall be dismissed. If the charges are
duly established, the Executive Judge shall impose the
appropriate administrative sanctions. In either case, the
aggrieved party may appeal the decision to the Supreme
Court for review. Pending the appeal, an order imposing
disciplinary sanctions shall be immediately executory, unless
otherwise ordered by the Supreme Court.
The Executive Judge may motu proprio initiate administrative
proceedings against a notary public, subject to the
procedures prescribed in paragraph (c) above and impose
the appropriate administrative sanctions on the grounds
mentioned in the preceding paragraphs (a) and (b).
COMPETENT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY
Sec. 12 of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice provide that
the following shall be competent proof of identity:
(1) at least one current identification document issued by
an official agency bearing the photograph and
signature of the individual, such as but not limited to:
passport, driver’s license, Professional Regulations
Commission ID, National Bureau of Investigation
clearance, police clearance, postal ID, voter’s ID,
Barangay certification, Government Service and
Insurance System (GSIS) e-card, Social Security System
(SSS) card, Philhealth card, senior citizen card,
Overseas Workers Welfare Administration (OWWA)
ID, OFW ID, seaman’s book, alien certificate of
registration/immigrant certificate of registration,
government office ID, certification from the National
Council for the Welfare of Disabled Persons (NCWDP),
Department of Social Welfare and Development
(DSWD) certification; and
(2) the oath or affirmation of one credible witness not privy
to the instrument, document or transaction who is
personally known to the notary public and who
personally knows the individual, or of two credible
witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrument,
document or transaction who each personally knows
the individual and shows to the notary public
documentary identification. (De la Cruz v. Dimaano,
supra)
NOTE: Will a cedula/community tax certificate suffice as
competent proof of identity?
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
HELD: It depends. A document notarized before the
effectivity of the 2004 Notarial Rules will be governed by the
relevant provisions of the Revised Administrative Code,
wherein the cedula will suffice as proof of identity.
Otherwise, the requirements of the 2004 Notarial Rules will
apply.
NOTE: What is the liability of a lawyer for notarizing a
document when the affiant is already dead?
HELD: A notary public who notarized a Deed of Donation of
another lawyer one day after his death to the detriment of
the interests of the surviving lawyer-spouse was suspended
by the S.C. (Linco v. Lacebal, A.C. 7241, October 17, 2011)
Respondent’s act of affixing his signature above the printed
name Edwin T. Nevada, without any qualification, veritably
made him a party to the contract of lease in question. Thus,
his act of notarizing a deed to which he is a party is a plain
violation of Rule IV, Sec. 3(a) of the Notarial Rules, for which
he can be disciplinarily sanctioned. Aside from being a
violation of the Notarial Rules, Casuga’s aforementioned act
partakes of malpractice of law and misconduct. (Nevada v
Casuga, supra)
DUTIES OF NOTARY PUBLIC
(1) Explain fully the legal intricacies and consequences of
the subject transaction as would aid the parties in
making an informed decision (Nadayag v. Grageda, Adm.
Case No. 3232, September 27, 1994).
(2) Observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the
performance of their duties (Nunga v. Viray, A.M. No.
4758, April 30, 1999).
(3) Guard against any illegal or immoral arrangements
(Villarin v. Sabate, A.C. No. 3324, February 9, 2000).
A member of the bar who performs an act as a notary public
should not notarize a document unless the persons who
signed the same are the very same persons who executed
and personally appeared before said notary public to attest
to the contents and truth of what are stated therein. The acts
of affiants cannot be delegated to anyone for what are stated
therein are facts they have personal knowledge of and swore
to the same personally and not through any representative.
Otherwise, their representative's names should appear in the
said documents as the ones who executed the same and that
is only the time they can affix their signatures and personally
appear before the notary public for notarization of said
document. (Villarin v. Sabate, A.C. No. 3324, February 9, 2000;
De la Cruz v. Dimaano Jr, A.C.No. 7781, September 12, 2008)
The acknowledgment shall be before a notary public or an
officer duly authorized by law of the country to take
acknowledgments of instruments or documents in the place
where the act is done. The notary public or the officer taking
the acknowledgment shall certify that the person
acknowledging the instrument or document is known to him
and that he is the same person who executed it,
acknowledged that the same is his free act and deed. The
certificate shall be made under the official seal, if he is
required by law to keep a seal, and if not, his certificate shall
so state. (Section 1, Public Act No. 2103.)
33
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises
REQUIREMENT OF AFFIANT’S PERSONAL
APPEARANCE
A person shall not perform a notarial act if the person
involved as signatory to the instrument or document:
(1) is not in the notary’s presence personally at the time of
the notarization; and
(2) is not personally known to the notary public or
otherwise identified by the notary public through
competent evidence of identity as defined by these
Rules. (Rule IV of the Rules on Notarial Practice of 2004,
Section 2b)
The purpose of the requirement of personal appearance by
the acknowledging party before the notary public is to
enable the latter to verify the genuineness of the signature of
the former. It may be added, too, that only by such personal
appearance may the notary public be able to ascertain from
the acknowledging party himself that the instrument or
document is his own free act and deed. Needless to state,
the personal appearances and acknowledgment by the party
to the document are the core of the ritual that effectively
convert a private document into a public document, making
it admissible in court without further proof of its
authenticity. (Flores v. Chua, Adm. Case No. 4500, April 30,
1999)
NATURE OF THE DUTIES OF A NOTARY PUBLIC
Notarization is not an empty, meaningless, and routinary
act. It converts a private document to a public document,
making it admissible in evidence without further proof of its
authenticity. A notarial document is, by law, entitled to full
faith and credit upon its face; for this reason, notaries public
must observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the
performance of their duties. (Gaddi v. Atty. Velasco, A.C. No.
8637, September 15, 2014)
The duties of a notary public is dictated by public policy and
impressed with public interest. It is not a meaningless
ministerial act of acknowledging documents executed by
parties who are willing to pay the fees for notarization.
(Isenhardt v. Real, Adm. Case No. 8254, February 15, 2012)
It is of no moment that the subject SPA was not utilized by
the grantee for the purpose it was intended because the
property was allegedly transferred from complainant to her
brother by virtue of a deed of sale consummated between
them. What is being penalized is respondent’s act of
notarizing a document despite the absence of one of the
parties. By notarizing the questioned document, he
engaged in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
conduct. A notarized document is by law entitled to full
credit upon its face and it is for this reason that notaries
public must observe the basic requirements in notarizing
documents. Otherwise, the confidence of the public in
notarized documents will be undermined. (Isenhardt v. Real,
supra)
SANCTIONS
DISQUALIFICATIONS
A notary public is disqualified from performing a notarial
act if he:
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics
(1) is a party to the instrument or document that is to be
notarized;
(2) will receive, as a direct or indirect result, any
commission, fee, advantage, right, title, interest, cash,
property, or other consideration, except as provided by
these Rules and by law; or
(3) is a spouse, common-law partner, ancestor, descendant,
or relative by affinity or consanguinity of the principal
within the fourth civil degree.
REFUSAL TO NOTARIZE
A notary public shall not perform any notarial act described
in these Rules for any person requesting such an act even if
he tenders the appropriate fee specified by these Rules if:
(1) the notary knows or has good reason to believe that the
notarial act or transaction is unlawful or immoral;
(2) the signatory shows a demeanor which engenders in
the mind of the notary public reasonable doubt as to the
former's knowledge of the consequences of the
transaction requiring a notarial act; and
(3) in the notary's judgment, the signatory is not acting of
his or her own free will.
FALSE OR INCOMPLETE CERTIFICATE
A notary public shall not:
(1) execute a certificate containing information known or
believed by the notary to be false.
(2) affix an official signature or seal on a notarial certificate
that is incomplete.
IMPROPER INSTRUMENTS FOR DOCUMENTS
A notary public shall not notarize:
a blank or incomplete instrument or document; or
an instrument or document without appropriate notarial
certification.
FEES OF NOTARY PUBLIC
IMPOSITION AND WAIVER OF FEES
For performing a notarial act, a notary public may charge the
maximum fee as prescribed by the Supreme Court unless he
waives the fee in whole or in part.
TRAVEL FEES AND EXPENSES
A notary public may charge travel fees and expenses
separate and apart from the notarial fees prescribed in the
preceding section when traveling to perform a notarial act if
the notary public and the person requesting the notarial act
agree prior to the travel.
PROHIBITED FEES
No fee or compensation of any kind, except those expressly
prescribed and allowed herein, shall be collected or received
for any notarial service.
PAYMENT OR REFUND OF FEES
A notary public shall not require payment of any fees
specified herein prior to the performance of a notarial act
unless otherwise agreed upon. Any travel fees and expenses
paid to a notary public prior to the performance of a notarial
act are not subject to refund if the notary public had already
traveled but failed to complete in whole or in part the
notarial act for reasons beyond his control and without
negligence on his part.
34
Legal and Judicial Ethics and Practical Exercises Legal Ethics

NOTICE OF FEES
A notary public who charges a fee for notarial services shall
issue a receipt registered with the Bureau of Internal
Revenue and keep a journal of notarial fees. He shall enter in
the journal all fees charged for services rendered.

A notary public shall post in a conspicuous place in his office

a complete schedule of chargeable notarial fees.

35
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Judicial Ethics

JUDICIAL ETHICS
The branch of moral science which treats of the right and
proper conduct to be observed by all judges and magistrates
in trying and deciding controversies brought to them for
adjudication which conduct must be demonstrative of
impartiality, integrity, competence, independence, and
freedom from improprieties.

JUDGE
A public officer who, by virtue of his office, is clothed with
judicial authority; a public officer lawfully appointed to
decide litigated questions in accordance with law.

DE JURE JUDGE
One who is exercising the office of judge as a matter of right;
an officer of a court who has been duly and legally
appointed, qualified and whose term has not expired.

DE FACTO JUDGE
an officer who is not fully invested with all the powers and
duties conceded to judges, but is exercising the office of a
judge under some color of right.

QUALIFICATIONS

 natural-born citizen of PH
Supreme  at least 40 years of age

JUDICIAL
Court  must have been, for 15 yrs. or more, a
and judge of a lower court engaged in the
Court of practice of law
Appeals  must be a person of proven

ETHICS
Justices competence, probity and
independence
 natural-born citizen of PH
 at least 35 years of age
 for at least 10 yrs. has been engaged
RTC Judges in the practice of law in the PH or has
held a public office in the PH
requiring admission to the practice of
law as an indispensable requisite.
 natural-born citizen of PH
 at least 30 years of age
 for at least 5 yrs. has been engaged in
MTC Judges the practice of law in the PH or has
held a public office in the PH
requiring admission to the practice of
law as an indispensable requisite

SOURCES OF JUDICIAL ETHICS

New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary

(Bangalore Draft)
(1) Promulgated April 27, 2004; effective June 1, 2004.
(2) Based on the Bangalore Draft adopted by the Judicial
Group on Strengthening Judicial Integrity, intended to
be the Universal Declaration of Judicial Standards, as
revised by the Round Table Conference of Chief
Justices held at The Hague on November 25-26, 2002.

PRINCIPLES OF BANGALORE DRAFT

(1) A universal recognition that a competent, independent
and impartial judiciary is essential if the courts are to

36
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Judicial Ethics

fulfill their role in upholding constitutionalism and the Law Center-Institute of Judicial Administration, February 27,
rule of law. 2007)
(2) Public confidence in the judicial system and in the
moral authority and integrity of the judiciary is of An independent judiciary has been described as “one free of
utmost importance in a modern democratic society inappropriate outside influences.” Judges frequently
(3) It is essential that judges, individually and collectively, experience pressure in the exercise of their judicial functions.
respect and honor judicial office as a public trust and Common sources of pressure upon a judge include political
strive to enhance and maintain confidence in the patrons, family members, friends and associates, colleagues
judicial system. (New Code of Judicial Conduct for the on the bench, media, civil society, militant groups, criminals
Philippine Judiciary, 2004) and criminal syndicates, and rebel groups. Canon 1 requires
that judges reject pressure from any source by maintaining
independence in the pursuit of their duties. (New Code of
CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
Promulgated by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on
September, 1989; effective October 20, 1989. Constant company with a lawyer tends to breed intimacy
and camaraderie to the point that favors in the future may be
QUALITIES asked from respondent judge, which he may find hard to
Independence resist. The actuation of respondent judge of eating and
Integrity drinking in public places with a lawyer who has pending
Impartiality cases in his sala may well arouse suspicion in the public
Propriety mind, thus tending to erode the trust of the litigants in the
Equality impartiality of the judge. (Padilla v. Zantua, A.M. No. MTJ-93-
Competence and Diligence 888, October 24, 1994)

Judges working in the same building or justices of collegiate

NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT courts develop what is often referred to as compañerismo, a
kind of camaraderie bound by respect and personal
friendship resulting from sharing a common profession. This
Supersedes the Canons of Judicial Ethics and the Code of
camaraderie often leads judges to seek accommodations
Judicial Conduct heretofore applied in the Philippines to the
from fellow judges ranging from the allowance of
extent that the provisions or concepts therein are embodied
provisional remedies to the issuance of favourable decisions.
in this Code: Provided, however, that in case of deficiency or
This is especially true in the Philippines where “utang na
absence of specific provisions in this New Code, the Canons
loob” is a sacrosanct cultural value. It must be emphasized,
of Judicial Ethics and the Code of Judicial Conduct shall be
therefore, that this behavior is unethical and anathema to the
applicable in a suppletory character.
independent dispensation of judicial functions. Hence,
Sections 2 and 3 are intended to address unethical practices
Promulgated this 27th day of April 2004. The Code took
among judges, the most commonplace and pervasive of
effect on June 1, 2004.
which is the situation described above. (New Code of Judicial
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
CANON 1: INDEPENDENCE
CANON 2: INTEGRITY
TWO CONCEPTS OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE Canon 2 enjoins judges to avoid not just impropriety in their
conduct but even the mere appearance of impropriety. This
INDIVIDUAL JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE
requires of a judge to always show in the discharge of his
focuses on each particular case and seeks to insure his or her
judicial functions, the cold neutrality of an impartial judge,
ability to decide cases with autonomy within the constraints
which is a requirement of due process. (Agpalo)
of the law (In the Matter of the Allegations Contained in the
Columns of Mr. Amado P. Macasaet Published in Malaya Dated
Integrity of a judiciary rests not only upon the fact that it is
Sept. 18-21, 2007, A.M. No. 07-09-13, August 8, 2008)
able to administer justice, but also upon the perception and
confidence of the community that people who run the
system have done justice (Panaligan v. Judge Ibay, A.M. No.
TJ-06-1972, June 21, 2006)
INSTITUTIONAL JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE
It cannot be overemphasized that every employee of the
Focuses on the independence of the judiciary as a branch of
judiciary should be an example of integrity, uprightness, and
government and protects judges as a class (In the Matter of
honesty. Like any public servant, he must exhibit the highest
the Allegations Contained in the Columns of Mr. Amado P.
sense of honesty and integrity not only in the performance of
Macasaet Published in Malaya Dated Sept. 18-21, 2007,
his official duties, but in his personal and private dealings
supra)
with other people, to preserve the Court’s good name and
standing. This is because the image of a court of justice is
The new Canon 1 deals solely with the matter of judicial
necessarily mirrored in the conduct, official or otherwise, of
independence as a “pre-requisite to the rule of law” and a
the men and women who work thereat, from the judge to the
“fundamental guarantee of a fair trial.” (New Code of Judicial
least and lowest of its personnel. Thus, it becomes the
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated by Philippine
imperative sacred duty of each and every one in the court to
Judicial Academy, the ABA – Rule of Law Initiative and the U.P.
maintain its good name and standing as a true temple of

37
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics
justice. (Marquez v. Clores-Ramos, AM No. P-96-1182, July 19,
2000)
Judicial identity does not terminate at the end of the day
when he takes off his judicial robes. Even when garbed in
casual wear outside of the halls of justice, a judge retains the
air of authority and moral ascendancy that he or she wields
inside the sala. As the Court once held: Being the subject of
constant public scrutiny, a judge should freely and willingly
accept restrictions on conduct that might be viewed as
burdensome by the ordinary citizen. A judge should
personify judicial integrity and exemplify honest public
service. The personal behavior of a judge, both in the
performance of official duties and in private life should be
above suspicion. (Decena v Malanyaon, 695 SCRA 264, April 8,
2013)
GROSS MISCONDUCT
“Misconduct” means a transgression of some established
and definite rule of action, willful in character, improper or
wrong behavior. “Gross” has been defined as “out of all
measure, beyond allowance; flagrant; shameful; such
conduct as is not to be excused.” (Tobias v. Judge Limsiaco, Jr.,
A.M. No. MTJ-09-1734, January 19, 2011)
CANON 3: IMPARTIALITY
REMITTAL OF DISQUALIFICATION
The process by which a judge who is disqualified to sit on a
case on any of the grounds enumerated in Section 5, Canon 3
of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary, may purge himself of such a disqualification so
that he may act upon the case. It is effected under Section 6
of the same Canon.
SUB JUDICE RULE
It restricts comments and disclosures pertaining to judicial
proceedings to avoid prejudging the issue, influencing the
court, or obstructing the administration of justice. A
violation of the sub judice rule may render one liable for
indirect contempt under Sec. 3(d), Rule 71 of the Rules of
Court. (Romero v. Estrada, G.R. No. 174105, April 2, 2009)
Judges shall not knowingly, while a proceeding is before or
could come before them, make any comment that might
reasonably be expected to affect the outcome of such
proceeding or impair the manifest fairness of the process;
nor shall judges make any comment in public or otherwise
that might affect the fair trial of any person or issue. (Tormis
v. Paredes, A.M. No. RTJ-13-2366, February 4, 2015)
EXTRA-JUDICIAL SOURCE RULE
Bias and prejudice must be shown to have resulted in an
opinion on the merits on the basis of an extrajudicial source,
not on what the judge learned from participating in the case.
As long as opinions formed in the course of judicial
proceedings are based on the evidence presented and the
conduct observed by the magistrate, such opinion – even if
later found to be erroneous – will not prove personal bias or
prejudice on the part of the judge. While palpable error may
be inferred from the decision or the order itself, extrinsic
evidence is required to establish bias, bad faith, malice or
corrupt purpose. (Gochan v. Gochan, G.R. No. 146089, February
27, 2003)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Judicial Ethics
A judge’s conduct must be clearly indicative of arbitrariness
and prejudice before it can be stigmatized as biased and
partial. (Cruz v. Iturralde, A.M. No. RTJ-03-1775, April 30,
2003)
In disposing of a criminal case, a judge should avoid
appearing like an advocate of either party. It is also
improper for a judge to push actively for amicable settlement
against the wishes of the complainant. A judge’s unwelcome
persistence makes the judge vulnerable to suspicions of
favoritism. (New Code of Judicial Conduct of the Philippine
Judiciary, Annotated)
Judges should not only be impartial but should also appear
impartial. For “impartiality is not a technical conception. It is
a state of mind,” and, consequently the “appearance of
impartiality is an essential manifestation of its reality. It
must be obvious, therefore, that while judges should possess
proficiency in law in order that they can competently
construe and enforce the law, it is now important that they
should act and behave in such a manner that the parties
before them should have confidence in their impartiality.
(Tan v. Gallardo, G.R. No. 41213-14, October 5, 1976)
The rule of impartiality is applied more strictly to municipal,
metropolitan and regional trial court judges. (OCA v.
Liangco, A.C. No. 5355, December 13, 2011)
Note: “Judge’s family” includes a judge’s spouse, son,
daughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, and any other
relative by consanguinity or affinity within the sixth civil
degree, or person who is a companion or employee of the
judge and who lives in the judge’s household. (New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, A.M. No. 03-05-1-
SC)
GROUNDS FOR COMPULSORY INHIBITION OF A
JUDGE
(1) Actual bias or prejudice
(2) Economic interest of judge or his family
(3) Reviewing own cases
(4) Previously served as counsel
(5) Judge has been previously associated with a party as
counsel (Austria v Masaquel, 20 SCRA 1247, August 31,
1967)
(6) Judge notarized the affidavit of a person to be
presented as a witness (Mateo v. Villaluz, G.R. No. 34756-
59, March 31, 1973)
(7) Judge is a material witness to a case (Lewis v. State, 565
S.E.2d 437, November 26, 2002)
(8) Utang na loob
CANON 4: PROPRIETY
Canon 4 stresses the importance of propriety and the
appearance of propriety to the performance of all the
activities of a judge. Respondent judge should bear in mind
that judges should avoid impropriety and the appearance of
impropriety in all of their activities. Furthermore, judges and
members of their families are prohibited from asking for or
accepting any gift, bequest, loan, or favor in relation to
anything done or to be done or omitted to be done by him in
connection with the performance of judicial duties.
38
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics
(Conquilla v. Bernardo, A.M. No. MTJ-09-1737, February 9,
2011)
Judges are prohibited from acquiring property and rights in
litigation or levied upon an execution before the court within
whose jurisdiction or territory they exercise their
jurisdiction. (New Civil Code, Article 1491, para. 5)
The New Code of Judicial Conduct does not prohibit a judge
from joining or maintaining an account in a social
networking site such as Friendster. Section 6, Canon 4 of the
New Code of Judicial Conduct recognizes that judges, like
any other citizen, are entitled to freedom of expression. It,
however, imposes a restriction on judges: in the exercise of
their freedom of expression, they should always conduct
themselves in a manner that preserves the dignity of the
judicial office and the impartiality and independence of the
Judiciary. Respondent judge disregarded the appearance of
propriety required of her when she posted Friendster photos
of herself wearing an “off-shouldered” suggestive dress and
made this available for public viewing. (Lorenzana v. Judge
Austria, A.M. No. RTJ-09-2200, April 2, 2014)
Judge Laron's conduct of carrying on an affair with a
married woman is highly improper. Such charge of
immorality is serious one covered by Section 8, Rule 140 of
the Rules of Court that includes a penalty of dismissal.
(Tuvillo v. Laron, A.M. MTJ-10-1756, October 18, 2016)
While judges are only human, their acceptance of the judicial
position means that more is expected from them than from
ordinary citizens, as their acts, both public and private, color
the public’s perception of the judiciary as a whole. (New Code
of Judicial Conduct of the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
While judges are not expected to live a hermit-like existence
or cease functioning as citizens of the Republic, they should
remember that they do not disrobe themselves of their
judicial office upon leaving their salas. (New Code of Judicial
Conduct of the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
A judge should not practice law. He should also not permit a
law firm, of which he was formerly an active member, to
continue to carry his name in the firm name because that
might create the impression that the firm possesses an
improper influence with the judge.
NOTARIAL WORK
General rule: Municipal judges may not engage in notarial
work.
Exception: They may do so as notaries public ex-officio, in
which case, they may only notarize documents connected
with the exercise of their official functions. As such, they
may not undertake the preparation and acknowledgment of
private documents, contracts and other acts of conveyance,
which bear no relation to the performance of their functions
as judges.
Exception to the exception: In far-flung municipalities which
have neither lawyers nor notaries public, municipal judges
assigned to those municipalities or circuits may, in their
capacity as notaries public ex-officio, perform any act within
the competence of a regular notary public, provided:
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Judicial Ethics
1. All notarial fees charged be for the account of the
Government and turned over to the municipal treasurer; and
2. A certification be made in the notarized documents
attesting to the lack of any lawyer or notary public in such
municipality or circuit. (Tabao v. Asis, RTJ-95-1330, January
30, 1996)
PROHIBITION AGAINST SOLICITING GIFTS
A judge should not accept any presents or favors from
litigants or from lawyers practicing before him. (Canon 29,
Code of Judicial Ethics), but Subject to legal requirements like
public disclosure, they may accept gifts provided that it
might not reasonably be perceived as intended to influence
judge.
CANON 5: EQUALITY
Conducting judicial proceedings in a manner and with an
attitude that affirms the dignity of such proceedings is
crucial to maintaining public confidence in the judiciary.
Judges should not yield to first impression, reach hasty
conclusions, or prejudge matters. They have a duty to ensure
that the minority status of the accused plays no part in their
decisions. Neither should judges insult witnesses in the
hallway or in pleadings filed before the Supreme Court.
Likewise, judges may not use derogatory or condescending
language in their judgment when dealing with a rape
complaint. Due process cannot be satisfied in the absence of
objectivity on the part of a judge sufficient to reassure
litigants that the judicial system is fair and just. (New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
Rule 137, Sec. 1 of the Rules of Court states that no judge shall
sit in any case which he has been a counsel (for a party)
without the consent of all parties in interest, signed by them,
and entered upon the record. The prohibition is not limited
to cases in which a judge hears the evidence but includes as
well cases where he acts by resolving motions, issuing
orders, and the like. (In Re: Inhibition of Judge Rojas, A.M. No.
98-6-185-RTC, October 30, 1998)
Judges have the duty to prevent lawyers from abusing
witnesses with unfair treatment.
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF WITNESSES
(1) To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting
questions and from a harsh or insulting demeanor;
(2) Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice
require;
(3) Not to be examined except as to matters pertinent to the
issues before the court;
(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 the
witness’ reputation, but a witness must answer the fact
of any previous final conviction for a criminal offense.
(Revised Rules of Court, Rule 132, Sec. 3)
CANON 6: COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
DUTY TO EXHIBIT COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
The Supreme Court said that as a matter of public policy, a
judge cannot be subjected to liability for any of his official
acts, no matter how erroneous, as long as he acts in good
faith. To hold otherwise would be to render judicial office
39
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics
untenable, for no one called upon to try the facts or interpret
the law in the process of administering justice can be
infallible in his judgment. The Court held that unfavorable
rulings are not necessarily erroneous. Should any of the
parties disagree with the court’s ruling, there are judicial
remedies available under the Rules of Court. Bad faith on the
part of the trial judge should never be imputed unless the
same can be supported by evidence. (Dulalia v. Judge Cajigal,
A.M. No. OCA IPI No. 10-3492-RTJ, December 4, 2013.)
GROSS IGNORANCE OF THE LAW
To constitute gross ignorance of the law, the subject decision,
order, or actuation of the judge in the performance of his
official duties must not only be contrary to existing law and
jurisprudence but, most importantly, he must be moved by
bad faith, fraud, dishonesty or corruption (De la Cruz v.
Concepcion, A.M. No. RTJ-93-1062, August 25, 1994).
Every judge is required to observe the law. When the law is
sufficiently basic, a judge owes it to his office to simply
apply it; and anything less than that would be constitutive of
gross ignorance of the law. In short, when the law is so
elementary, not to be aware of it constitutes gross ignorance
of the law. (Office of the Court Administrator v. Hon.
Tormis, A.M. No. MTJ-12-1817, March 12, 2013)
When a law or a rule is basic, a judge owes it to his office to
simply apply the law. "Anything less is gross ignorance of
the law.” Competence and diligence are prerequisites to the
due performance of judicial office and every judge is
required to observe the law. There is gross ignorance of the
law when an error committed by the judge was gross or
patent, deliberate or malicious, or when a judge ignores,
contradicts, or fails to apply settled law and jurisprudence
because of bad faith, fraud, dishonesty, or corruption. No
less than the Code of Judicial Conduct mandates that a judge
shall be faithful to the laws and maintain professional
competence. Indeed, competence is a mark of a good judge.
A judge must be acquainted with legal norms and precepts
as well as with procedural rules. When a judge displays an
utter lack of familiarity with the rules, he erodes the public's
confidence in the competence of our courts. Such is gross
ignorance of the law. One who accepts the exalted position
of a judge owes the public and the court the duty to be
proficient in the law. Unfamiliarity with the Rules of Court is
a sign of incompetence. Basic rules of procedure must be at
the palm of a judge's hands. (OCA v. Judge Flores, A.M. No.
RTJ-12-2325, April 14, 2015)
To warrant a finding of gross ignorance of the law, as a
ground for disciplinary action, the error must be so gross
and patent as to produce an inference of bad faith or that the
judge knowingly rendered an unjust decision. The error
must be so grave and so fundamental to a point as to
warrant condemnation of the judge as patently ignorant or
negligent. Otherwise, to hold a judge administratively
accountable for every erroneous ruling or decision he
renders, assuming that the judge erred, would be nothing
short of harassment and that would be intolerable (Hon.
Barillo v. Hon. Lantion, G. R. No. 159117, March 10, 2010)
ERRORS OF JUDGMENT
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Judicial Ethics
An administrative complaint against a judge cannot be
pursued simultaneously with the judicial remedies accorded
to parties aggrieved by an erroneous judgment. For until
complainant’s appeal is resolved and the case is finally
terminated, the Court will have no basis to conclude whether
or not respondent judge is indeed guilty of the charges of
gross ignorance of the law and knowingly rendering an
unjust judgment (Del Rosario v. Cedillo, A.M. No. MTJ-04-
1557, Oct 21, 2004)
The hearing of the application for bail in capital offenses is
absolutely indispensable before a judge can properly
determine whether the prosecution’s evidence is weak or
strong. The Supreme Court held that not only did Judge
Bitas deviate from the requirement of a hearing where there
is an application for bail, he also granted bail to Miralles
without neither conducting a hearing nor a motion for
application for bail. Judge Bitas’ acts are not mere deficiency
in prudence, discretion, and judgment on his part, but a
patent disregard of well-known rules. When an error is so
gross and patent, such error produces an inference of bad
faith, making the judge liable for gross ignorance of the law.
(Jorda v. Bitas, A.M. No. RTJ-14-2376, March 5, 2014)
While a judge may not be held liable for gross ignorance of
the law for every erroneous order that he renders, it is also
axiomatic that when the legal principle involved is
sufficiently basic, lack of conversance with it constitutes
gross ignorance of the law. Indeed, even though a judge may
not always be subjected to disciplinary action for every
erroneous order or decision he renders, that relative
immunity is not a license to be negligent or abusive and
arbitrary in performing his adjudicatory prerogatives. It does
not mean that a judge need not observe propriety,
discreetness, and due care in the performance of his official
functions. This is because if judges wantonly misuse the
powers vested on them by the law, there will not only be
confusion in the administration of justice but also oppressive
disregard of the basic requirements of due process. (Dipatuan
v. Judge Mangotara, AM RTJ-09-2190, April 23, 2010)
KNOWINGLY RENDERING UNJUST JUDGMENT
An unjust judgment is one which is contrary to law or is not
supported by the evidence, or both. The source of an unjust
judgment may be error or ill-will. There is no liability at all
for mere error. (De la Cruz v. Concepcion, supra)
FAILURE TO OBEY EXISTING LAW; INEXCUSABLE
NEGLIGENCE
Being the trier of facts, judges are presumed to be well-
informed of the existing laws, recent enactments, and
jurisprudence, in keeping with their sworn duty as members
of the bar (and bench) to keep abreast of legal
developments… The Court is fully aware that not every
error or mistake of a judge in the performance of his duties is
subject to censure. (People v. Gacott, Jr., G.R. No. 116049,
March 20, 1995)
PROMPT DISPOSITION OF CASES
Respondent Judge’s habitual tardiness amounted to serious
misconduct and inefficiency (Yu-Asensi v. Villanueva, A.M.
No. MTJ-00-1245, Jan 19, 2000)
Delay does not only constitute a serious violation of the
parties constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases, it
40
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics
also erodes the faith and confidence of the people in the
judiciary, lowers its standards, and brings it into disrepute.
(OCA v. Quilatan, A.M. No. MTJ-09-1745, September 27, 2010)
Judges should remain, at all times, in full control of the
proceedings in his sala and to adopt a firm policy against
postponements. (Naguiat v. Capellan, A.M. No. MTJ-11-1782,
March 23, 2011)
The Supreme Court held that pursuant to Rule 3.05, Canon 3
of the Code of Judicial Conduct, prompt disposition of cases is
attained basically through the efficiency and dedication to
duty of judges. In this case, the civil case was already
submitted for resolution. Being an ejectment case, it is
governed by the Rules of Summary Procedure which clearly
sets a period of 30 days from the submission of the last
affidavit or position paper within which a decision must be
issued. In violation of this rule, Judge Regencia rendered
judgment only more than two years later, and failed to
proffer any acceptable reason in delaying the disposition of
the ejectment case, thus, making her administratively liable
for undue delay in rendering a decision (Dulang v. Judge
Regencia, A.M. No. MTJ-14-1841, June 2, 2014
Respondent should be aware of the basic rule that once a
case is submitted for decision, no further pleadings are
required to be filed. Moreover, there is no need to issue an
order declaring a case submitted for decision in order that
the 90-day period in deciding the same shall begin to run.
Failure to promptly decide cases in accordance with the
Constitution or the Rules of Court constitutes gross
inefficiency. (Espanol, etc. v. Toledo-Mupas, AM No. MTJ-03-
1462, February 11, 2011)
MANDATORY 90-DAY PERIOD FOR DECIDING CASES
IN LOWER COURTS [1987 CONST., ART. VIII, SEC.
15(1)]
All cases or matters filed after the effectivity of this
Constitution must be decided or resolved within twenty-
four months from date of submission for the Supreme Court,
and, unless reduced by the Supreme Court, twelve months
for all lower collegiate courts, and three months for all other
lower courts.
It is not the date of signing the decision but the date of
receipt by the Clerk of Court that must be reckoned from the
date of submission of the case for decision in order to
comply with the 90-day period under Sec. 5 of Judiciary Act
(Moya v. Tensuan, A.M. No. 2507-CFI, August 10, 1981)
A judge is responsible, not only for the dispensation of
justice but also for managing his court efficiently to ensure
the prompt delivery of court services. Since he is the one
directly responsible for the proper discharge of his official
functions, he should know the cases submitted to him for
decision or resolution, especially those pending for more
than 90 days. Failure to observe said rule constitutes a
ground for administrative sanction against the defaulting
judge, absent sufficient justification for his non-compliance
therewith. (OCA v. Bustamante, A.M. No. MTJ-12-1806, April
7, 2014)
ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES
A judge cannot simply take refuge behind the inefficiency or
mismanagement of his court personnel. Proper and efficient
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Judicial Ethics
court management is definitely his responsibility. He is
directly responsible for the proper discharge of their official
functions. (Tan v. Madayag, A.M. No.RTJ-93-995, March 11,
1994)
AUTHORITY TO DISCIPLINE
The Supreme Court shall have administrative supervision in
all courts and the personnel thereof. (1987 Constitution, Art.
VIII, Sec. 6)
JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT OVER
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
According to the Supreme Court, for it to acquire jurisdiction
over an administrative proceeding, the complaint must be
filed during the incumbency of the respondent public official
or employee. This is because the filing of an administrative
case is predicated on the holding of a position or office in the
government service. However, once jurisdiction has
attached, the same is not lost by the mere fact that the public
official or employee was no longer in office during the
pendency of the case.
Retirement effectively bars the Court from pursuing the
instant administrative proceeding that was instituted after
the tenure in office, and divested the Court, much less the
Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), of any jurisdiction
to still subject him to the rules and regulations of the
judiciary and/or to penalize him for the infractions
committed while the respondent was still in the
service. (Office of the Court Administrator v. Grageda, A.M. No.
RTJ-10-2235. March 11, 2013)
POWERS AND DUTIES OF COURTS AND JUDICIAL
OFFICERS (RULE 135)
Every court shall have power:
(1) To preserve and enforce order in its immediate
presence;
(2) To enforce order in proceedings before it, or before a
person or persons empowered to conduct a judicial
investigation under its authority;
(3) To compel obedience to its judgments, orders and
processes, and to the lawful orders of a judge out of
court, in a case pending therein;
(4) To control, in furtherance of justice, the conduct of its
ministerial officers, and of all other persons in any
manner connected with a case before it, in every
manner appertaining thereto;
(5) To compel the attendance of persons to testify in a case
pending therein;
(6) To administer or cause to be administered oaths in a
case pending therein, and in all other cases where it
may be necessary in the exercise of its powers;
(7) To amend and control its process and orders so as to
make them conformable to law and justice;
(8) To authorize a copy of a lost or destroyed pleading or
other paper to be filed and used instead of the original,
and to restore, and supply deficiencies in its records
and proceedings. (Rules of Court, Rule 135, Section 5)
PUBLICITY OF PROCEEDINGS
41
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Judicial Ethics

General rule: The sitting of every court of justice shall be

public.
Exception: Any court may, in its discretion, exclude the
public when the evidence to be adduced is of such nature as
to require their exclusion in the interest of morality or
decency. (Rules of Court, Rule 135, Section 2)
ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION OVER
JUDGES AND JUSTICES
REPORT AND ACTION
Within 30 days from termination, the investigating justice or
judge shall submit to the Supreme Court a report containing
his findings of fact and recommendation, accompanied by
the evidence and pleadings filed by the parties. Such report
shall be confidential and shall be for the exclusive use of the
Supreme Court. A copy of the decision or resolution of the
court shall be attached to the record of the respondent in the
OCA [Secs. 5 and 12, Rule 140] The Supreme Court shall take
action on the report as the facts and the law may warrant.

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST JUDGES; AUTOMATIC CONVERSION OF ADMINISTRATIVE

HOW INSTITUTED
Section 1, Rule 140 provides three ways by which
administrative proceedings against judges may be instituted:
(1) motu proprio by the Supreme Court;
(2) upon verified complaint with affidavits of persons
having personal knowledge of the facts alleged therein
or by documents which may substantiate said
allegations; or
(3) upon an anonymous complaint supported by public
records of indubitable integrity. An unverified
complaint against a judge, where the facts alleged are
disputed or are not easily verifiable from public
records, will generally be dismissible for being
unsubstantiated. (Re: Letter-complaint of Atty. Ariel
Samson C. Cayetuna, A.M. OCA IPI No. 08-127-CA-J.
January 11, 2011.)
The complaint shall be in writing and shall state clearly and
concisely the acts and omissions constituting violations of
standards of conduct prescribed for judges.
CASES TO DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
Pursuant to A.M. No. 02-9-02-SC, administrative cases
against justices of the Court of Appeals and the
Sandiganbayan, judges of regular and special courts, and
court officials who are lawyers, shall also be considered a
disciplinary action against them, if they are based on
grounds which are likewise grounds for the disciplinary
action of members of the bar for:
(1) Violation of the Lawyer's Oath;
(2) Violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility;
(3) Violation of the Canons of Professional Ethics; or
(4) Such other forms of breaches of conduct that have been
traditionally recognized as grounds for the discipline of
lawyers.
The respondent is required to comment on the complaint
and show cause why he should not also be suspended,
disbarred or otherwise disciplinarily sanctioned as a
member of the bar. Judgment in both respects may be
incorporated in one decision or resolution.

INITIATION OF COMPLAINT
INVESTIGATION
Upon the filing of the comment of the respondent or upon
the expiration of the period for such filing, which is ten days
from the date of service to him of the copy of the complaint
[Sec. 2, Rule 140], the SC shall:
(1) Refer the matter to the Office of the Court
Administrator (OCA) for evaluation, report, and
recommendation; or
(2) Assign the case for investigation, report, and
recommendation to:
(a) A retired member of the Supreme Court, if the
respondent is a justice of the Court of Appeals and
the Sandiganbayan;
(b) A justice of the Court of Appeals, if the respondent
is a judge of a Regional Trial Court or of a special
court of equivalent rank;
(c) A judge of the Regional Trial Court, if the
respondent is a judge of an inferior court [Sec. 3,
Rule 140].

HEARING AND TERMINATION

The investigating justice of judge shall set a day for the
hearing and send notice to the parties. If the respondent fails
to appear, the investigation shall proceed ex parte. The
investigating justice or judge shall terminate the
proceedings:
(1) Within 90 days from the date of its commencement; or
(2) Within such extension as the Supreme Court may grant.
(Sec. 4, Rule 140)
42
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics
EFFECT OF WITHDRAWAL OR DESISTANCE
The actuations of a judge seriously affect the public interest
inasmuch as they involve the administration of justice. It is
for this reason that a motion to withdraw a complaint will
not justify the dismissal of the administrative case against
the judge. To condition administrative actions upon the will
of every complainant, who may, for one reason or another,
condone a detestable act, is to strip the Supreme Court of its
supervisory power to discipline erring members of the
judiciary. (Anguluan v. Taguba, A.M. No. 1402-MJ, September
14, 1979)
Complainant's desistance is not an obstacle to the taking of
disciplinary action against a judge if the record reveals that
he had not performed his duties properly. (Espayos v. Lee,
A.M. No. 1574, April 30, 1979; Quiachon v. Ramos, A.C. No.
9317, 2014)
Two General Categories of the grounds for suspension or
dismissal:
(1) Those related to the discharge of the functions of the
office concerned
(2) The act or omission may be the object of administrative
action even if the same does not amount to a crime
Ex. Neglect of duty, oppression, corruption, or other forms
of maladministration
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Judicial Ethics
Those NOT related to, or connected with, the functions of
the office
The act or omission should amount to a crime and conviction
by final judgment of the crime involving moral turpitude or
disqualification to hold office, is a pre-requisite for
disciplinary action
Ex. Commission of a crime
Hence, where the crime committed is not essentially
connected with the performance of the official duties, the
officer may not be proceeded administratively based thereon
until after a final judgment of conviction shall have been
rendered by the court of justice and said judgment has
become final and executory. (Provincial Board of Zamboanga
del Norte v. Guzman, G.R. No. L-23523, November 18, 1967, 21
SCRA 957.
PROCEDURE FOR DISCIPLINE OF JUDGES (RULE 140)
QUANTUM OF PROOF
The quantum of proof required is only substantial evidence,
or that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion. (Office of the Court Administrator v. Lopez, A.M.
No. P-10-2788, January 18, 2011.)
BURDEN OF PROOF IN ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCEEDINGS
The burden of proof that respondent committed the acts
complained of rests on the complainant. (Re: Letter-complaint
of Atty. Ariel Samson C. Cayetuna, supra)
EVIDENCE REQUIRED
In order to hold the judge liable for knowingly rendering an
unjust judgment, it must be shown beyond reasonable doubt
that the judgment was made with conscious and deliberate
intent to do an injustice (Judge De Guzman v. Dy, A.M. No.
RTJ-03-1755, July 3, 2003)
The Rules of Court require that if a judge should be
disciplined for grave misconduct or any graver offense, as in
this case, the evidence against him should be competent and
derived from direct knowledge. The Judiciary to which
respondent belongs a demand no less. Before any of its
members could be faulted, competent evidence should be
presented, since the charge is penal in character. Thus, the
ground for the removal of a judicial officer should be
established beyond reasonable doubt. Such is the rule where
the charge on which removal is sought is misconduct in
office, willful neglect, corruption, or incompetence. The
general rules in regard to admissibility of evidence in
criminal trials apply. (Tan v. Judge Usman, A.M. No. RTJ-14-
2390, 13 August 2014)
APPLICATION OF RES IPSA LOQUITOR PRINCIPLE
The Court may impose its authority upon erring judges
whose actuations, on their face, would show gross
incompetence, ignorance of the law or misconduct.
Note: According to Sec. 11, Proceedings shall be private and
confidential but a copy of the decision or resolution of the
Court shall be attached to the record of the judge in the
Office of the Court Administrator.
43
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics
DISQUALIFICATION OF JUSTICES AND
JUDGES (RULE 137)
Note: The meaning of “duty to sit” is that a judge must
ensure that he will not be unnecessarily disqualified from a
case. A decision to inhibit must be based on good, sound or
ethical grounds, or for just and valid reasons.
MANDATORY OR COMPULSORY
DISQUALIFICATION
(1) When he or his wife or child is pecuniarily interested as
heir, legatee, creditor, or otherwise;
(2) When he is related to either party within the 6 th degree
of consanguinity or affinity or to counsel within 4 civil
degree;
(3) When he has been executor, guardian, administrator,
trustee, or counsel;
(4) When he has presided in an inferior court where is
ruling or is decision.
In the case of compulsory disqualification, the law
conclusively presumes that a judge cannot objectively or
impartially sit in a case and, for that reason, prohibits him
and strikes at his authority to hear and decide it, in the
absence of written consent of all parties concerned. (Bilbao v.
People, G.R. No. 175999, July 1, 2015)
Ratio: The rule on compulsory disqualification of a judge to
hear a case rests on the salutary principle that no judge
should preside in a case in which he is not wholly free,
disinterested, impartial and independent. A judge has both
the duty of rendering a just decision and the duty of doing it
in a manner completely free from suspicion as to its fairness
and as to his integrity.
VOLUNTARY DISQUALIFICATION
Ratio: A judge must maintain and preserve the trust and
faith of the parties-litigants. He must hold himself above
reproach and suspicion. At the very first sign of lack of faith
and trust to his actions, whether well-grounded or not, the
judge has no other alternative but inhibit himself from the
case.
A judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion,
disqualify himself for just and valid reasons.
Whether or not to inhibit is left to the sound discretion and
conscience of the trial judge based on his rational and logical
assessment of the circumstances prevailing in the case
brought before him (Gutang v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
124760, July 8, 1998, 292 SCRA 76)
The decision to disqualify himself is not conclusive and his
competency may be determined on application for
mandamus to compel him to act. The judge’s decision to
continue hearing a case in which he is not legally prohibited
from trying, notwithstanding challenge to his objectivity,
may not constitute reversible error.
Filing of an administrative case against a judge does not
disqualify him from hearing a case – the court has to be
shown acts or conduct clearly indicative of arbitrariness or
prejudice before it can brand them with the stigma of bias or
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Judicial Ethics
partiality. (Pagoda Philippines, Inc. v. Universal Canning, Inc.,
G.R. No. 160966, October 11, 2005)
Complainant charged Justice Hernando with manifest bias
because he voluntarily inhibited himself in CA-G.R. CEB SP.
No. 06676 only after the promulgation of the March 28, 2012
and April 13, 2012 resolutions. Complainant alleged that she
should have been informed of the voluntary inhibition. The
Court, however, said that under the internal rules of the
C.A., the same was not necessary. In the spirit of
transparency, the Court held that henceforth all the parties
in any action or proceedings should be immediately notified
of any mandatory disqualification or voluntary inhibition of
the Justice who has participated in any action of the court,
stating the reason for the mandatory disqualification or
voluntary inhibition. The requirement of notice is a measure
to ensure that the disqualification or inhibition has not been
resorted to in order to cause injustice to or to prejudice any
party or cause. (Re: Complaint filed by Lucena B. Rallos against
Justices Gabriel T. Ingles, Pamela Ann Maxino, and Carmelita S.
Manahan, IPI No. 12-203-CA-J/A.M. No. 12-9-08-CA, December
10, 2013)
As to the issue of disqualification [based on the second
paragraph of Section 1, Rule 137 of the Rules of Court], this
Court has ruled that to disqualify or not to disqualify is a
matter of conscience and is addressed primarily to the sense
of fairness and justice of the judge concerned. Thus, the mere
filing of an administrative case against respondent judge is
not a ground for disqualifying him from hearing the case, for
if on every occasion the party apparently aggrieved would
be allowed to either stop the proceedings in order to await
the final decision on the desired disqualification, or demand
the immediate inhibition of the judge on the basis alone of
his being so charged, many cases would have to be kept
pending or perhaps there would not be enough judges to
handle all the cases pending in all the courts. This Court has
to be shown acts or conduct of the judge clearly indicative of
arbitrariness or prejudice before the latter can be branded
the stigma of being biased or partial (Pagoda Philippines, Inc.
v. Universal Canning, Inc, supra)
44
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Judicial Ethics

DISQUALIFICATION UNDER SECTION 5, RULE 136 OF GROUNDS FOR THE DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF
RULES OF COURT THE JUDICIARY
Judges shall disqualify themselves from participating in any
proceedings in which they are unable to decide the matter (1) Under Sec. 87 of the Judiciary Act of 1948 – Serious
impartially, or in which it may appear to a reasonable misconduct and inefficiency.
observer that they are unable to decide the matter (2) Under Sections 8, 9 and 10 of Rule 140: serious, less
impartially. Such proceedings include, but are not limited to, serious and light charges.
instances where:
(1) The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a  Bribery, direct or indirect
party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary  Dishonesty and violations of the Anti-
facts concerning the proceedings; Graft Law (RA 3019)
(2) The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a  Gross misconduct constituting violations
material witness in the matter in controversy; of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
(3) The judge, or a member of his or her family, has an  Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment
economic interest in the outcome of the matter in or order.
controversy; Serious  Conviction of a crime involving moral
(4) The judge served as executor, administrator, guardian, Charges turpitude
trustee or lawyer in the case or matter in controversy,  Willful failure to pay a just debt
or a former associate of the judge served as counsel  Borrowing from lawyers and litigants in a
during their association, or the judge or lawyer was a case pending before the court
material witness therein;  Immorality
(5) The judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of  Gross ignorance of the law or procedure
review  Partisan political activities
(6) The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a  Alcoholism and/or vicious habits
party litigant within the sixth civil degree or to counsel  Undue delay in rendering a decision or
within the fourth civil degree; or order. Or in transmitting the records of
(7) The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has the court
a financial interest, as heir, legatee, creditor, fiduciary,  Frequent and unjustified absences
or otherwise, in the subject matter in controversy or in a without leave or habitual tardiness
Less
party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could  Unauthorized practice of law
be substantially affected by the outcome of the Serious
 Violation of Supreme Court rules,
Charges
proceedings directives, and circulars
 Receiving additional or double
compensation unless
DISCIPLINE OF MEMBERS OF THE  specifically authorized by law.
JUDICIARY  Untruthful statements in the certificate of
service, and
 Simple misconduct
MEMBERS OF THE SUPREME COURT
 Vulgar and unbecoming conduct
 Gambling in public
GROUNDS FOR IMPEACHMENT
Light  Fraternizing with lawyers and litigants
(1) Culpable violation of the Constitution,
Charges with pending cases in court
(2) Treason
 Undue delay in the submission of
(3) Bribery
monthly reports.
(4) Graft and corruption
(5) Other high crimes, or
(6) Betrayal of public trust. (1987 Constitution, Article XI, SANCTIONS IMPOSED BY THE SUPREME COURT ON
ERRING MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY
Section 2)
If the guilty Dismissal from the service, forfeiture of all
LOWER COURT JUDGES AND JUSTICES OF THE
of serious or part of the benefits as the Court may
COURT OF APPEALS AND SANDIGANBAYAN
charge determine, and disqualification from
TENURE reinstatement/ appointment to any public
The members of the Supreme Court and judges of lower office, including GOCCs. Provided,
courts shall hold office during a good behavior until they however, that the forfeiture of benefits
reach the age of seventy years or become incapacitated to shall in no case include accrued leave
discharge the duties of their office. credits
Suspension without salary and other
DISCIPLINING BODY benefits for more than 3 but not exceeding
The Supreme Court en banc shall have the power to 6 mos.
discipline judges of lower courts, or order their dismissal by Fine – more than P20,000 but not exceeding
a vote of majority of the Members who actually took part in P40,000
the deliberations on the issues in the case and voted thereon. If the guilty Suspension without salary and other
(1987 Constitution, Article VIII, Section 11) of less benefits for not less than 1 month nor more
serious than 3 mos.
charge fine – more than P10,000 but not exceeding
45
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics
P20,000
If the guilty fine – not less than P1000 but not exceeding
of light P10,000; and/or
charge censure
reprimand
admonition with warning
GROSS MISCONDUCT; PENALTY
Section 8, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court classifies gross
misconduct constituting a violation of the Code of Judicial
Conduct as a serious charge.
Under Section 11 of the same Rule, the respondent found
guilty of a serious charge may be meted any of the following
sanctions:
Dismissal from the service, forfeiture of all or part of the
benefits as the Court may determine, and disqualification
from reinstatement or reappointment to any public office;
(1) Suspension from office without salary and other
benefits for more than three months but not exceeding
six months; or
(2) A fine of more than P20,000.00 but not
exceeding P40,000.00. (Sy v. Judge Dinopol, A.M. No.
RTJ-09-2189, January 18, 2011)
Making of untruthful statements in the Personal Data Sheet
amounts to dishonesty and falsification of an official
document which is considered a grave offense. It carries the
maximum penalty of dismissal from the service with
forfeiture of retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits,
and perpetual disqualification from reemployment in the
government service. (In the Matter of: Anonymous Complaint
for Dishonesty, Grave Misconduct and Perjury Committed by
Judge Jaime E. Contreras, A.M. No. RTJ-16-2452, March 9, 2016;
Samson v. Caballero, A.M. No. RTJ-08-2138, August 5, 2009)
GROSS IGNORANCE OF THE LAW; PENALTY
Gross ignorance of the law is classified as serious charge
under Section 8, Rule 140 of the Revised Rules of Court.
It is penalized under Section 11 (a), Rule 140 of the same
Rules by:
(1) Dismissal from the service, forfeiture of all or part of
the benefits as the Court may determine, and
disqualification from reinstatement or appointment to
any public office, including government-owned or
controlled corporations. Provided, however, that the
forfeiture of benefits shall, in no case, include accrued
leave credits;
(2) Suspension from office without salary and other
benefits for more than three (3), but not exceeding six
(6) months; or
(3) a fine of more than P20,000.00, but not exceeding
P40,000.00.
A judge’s act of ignoring a rule as elementary as the 20-day
life span of a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) amounts
to gross ignorance of law and procedure, and his violation is
seemingly made worse by the fact that he thereby usurped
the authority of the Supreme Court as the only court with
the power to issue a TRO effective until further orders.
(Pahila-Garrido v. Tortogo, 655 SCRA 541, August 17, 2011)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Judicial Ethics
GROSS INEFFICIENCY; PENALTY
Under Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, as amended by A.M.
No. 01-8-10-SC dated September 11, 2001, violation of
Supreme Court rules, directives and circulars, and gross
inefficiency are categorized as less serious charges.
The sanctions:
(1) suspension from office without salary and other
benefits for not less than one nor more than three
months; or
(2) a fine of more than P10,000.00 but not exceeding
P20,000.00.
A judge cannot by himself choose to prolong the period for
deciding cases beyond that authorized by law. If additional
court assignments or designations unduly prevented the
judge from deciding a case, he could have easily sought
additional time by requesting an extension from the Court,
through the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA).
Without an order of extension granted by the Court, the
failure to decide within the required period constitutes gross
inefficiency. (Olaguer v Ampuan, A.M. MTJ-10-1769, October 6,
2010)
UNDUE DELAY IN DECIDING CASES; PENALTY
An inexcusable failure to decide a case within the prescribed
90-day period constitutes gross inefficiency.
Heavy workload, lack of sufficient time, poor health, and
physical impossibility were not justifications for the delay or
nonperformance, given that a judge could have easily
requested the Court for the extension of his time to resolve
the cases. That he did not so seek additional time reflected
his indifference to the prescription to decide within the time
limits of the law. (Re: Cases Submitted for Decision Before Judge
Damaso A. Herrera, Regional Trial Court, Branch 24, Laguna,
AM No. RTJ-05-1924, October 13, 2010)
This warrants the imposition of administrative sanctions
such as :
(1) suspension from office without pay or
(2) fine on the defaulting judge, depending on the
following factors:
 the number of cases not decided within the
reglementary period;
 the presence of aggravating or mitigating
circumstances;
 the damage suffered by the parties as a result of
the delay;
 the health and age of the judge; and
 other analogous circumstances. (Office of the Court
Administrator v. Judge Fuentes, A.M. No. RTJ-13-
2342, March 6, 2013)
WARNING
"An act or fact of putting one on his guard against an
impending danger, evil consequences or penalties”
46
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Judicial Ethics

judgment rendered by the court in order of its date, and

ADMONITION
"Refers to a gentle or friendly reproof, a mild rebuke,
warning or reminder, counselling, on a fault, error or
oversight, an expression of authoritative advice or warning"
REPRIMAND
A public and formal censure or severe reproof, administered
to a person in fault by his superior officer or a body to which
he belongs
MALICIOUS DELAY IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF
JUSTICE
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period
shall be imposed upon any judge guilty of malicious delay in
the administration of justice. (RPC, Art. 207)
a book of entries of judgments containing at length in
chronological order entries of all final judgments or
orders of the court. (Rules of Court, Rule 136, Section 9)
(8) shall keep an execution book in which he or his deputy
shall record at length in chronological order each
execution, and the officer's return thereon, by virtue of
which real property has been sold.(Rules of Court, Rule
136, Section 10)
(9) shall prepare, for any person demanding the same, a
copy certified under the seal of the court of any paper,
record, order, judgment, or entry in his office, proper to
be certified, for the fees prescribed by these rules.(Rules
of Court, Rule 136, Section 11)
(10) shall keep such other books and perform such other
duties as the court may direct.(Rules of Court, Rule 136,
Section 12)

DUTY OF A STENOGRAPHER
COURT RECORDS AND GENERAL It shall be the duty of the stenographer who has attended a
session of a court either in the morning or in the afternoon,
DUTIES OF CLERKS AND
to deliver to the clerk of court, immediately at the close of
STENOGRAPHER (RULE 136) such morning or afternoon session, all the notes he has
taken, to be attached to the record of the case.
DUTIES OF A CLERK
(1) Issue under the seal of the court all ordinary writs and It shall likewise be the duty of the clerk to demand that the
process incident to pending cases. (Rules of Court, Rule stenographer comply with said duty. The clerk of court shall
136, Section 4) stamp the date on which notes are received by him.
(2) In the absence of the judge:
 receive applications, petitions, inventories, reports When such notes are transcribed, the transcript shall be
 issue all orders and notices that follows as a matter delivered to the clerk, duly initialed on each page thereof, to
of course under these rules, be attached to the record of the case.
(3) When directed by the judge:
 receive the accounts of executors, administrators, Whenever requested by a party, any statement made by a
guardians, trustees, and receivers, and all evidence judge of first instance, or by a commissioner, with reference
relating to them, or to the settlement of the estates to a case being tried by him, or to any of the parties thereto,
of deceased persons, or to guardianship, or to any witness or attorney, during the hearing of such
trusteeships, or receiverships case, shall be made of record in the stenographic notes.
 transmit such reports, accounts, and evidence to (Rules of Court, Rule 136, Section 17)
the judge, together with his findings in relation to
the same, if the judge shall direct him to make
findings and include the same in his report. (Rules
of Court, Rule 136, Sec 5)
(4) receive and file all pleadings and other papers properly
presented, endorsing on each such paper the time when
it was filed, and shall attend all of the sessions of the
court enter its proceedings for each day in a minute
book to be kept by him. (Rules of Court, Rule 136, Section
6)
(5) shall safely keep all records, papers, files, exhibits and
public property committed to his charge, including the
library of the court, and the seals and furniture
belonging to his office. (Rules of Court, Rule 136, Section
7)
(6) shall keep a general docket, each page of which shall be
numbered and prepared for receiving all the entries in a
single case, and shall enter all cases, numbered
consecutively in the order in which they were received,
and, under the heading of each case and complete title
thereof, the date of each paper filed or issued, of each
order or judgment entered, and of each other step taken
in the case so that by reference to a single page the
history of the case may be seen. (Rules of Court, Rule 136,
Section 8)
(7) shall keep a judgment book containing a copy of each

47
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Practical Exercises

PRACTICAL EXERCISES

48
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Practical Exercises

QUITCLAIM AND RELEASE IN LABOR DISPUTES

QUITCLAIM AND RELEASE

COMES NOW the undersigned complainant in the above entitled case before this Office, respectfully manifest:

That for in consideration of the sum of ____________ (P ___________) PESOS in settlement of my claim, receipt of which is
hereby acknowledge to my complete and full satisfaction. I hereby release and discharge the (Name of Employer) and / or its
officer, from any and all by way of unpaid wages, separation pay, overtime pay, differential pay or otherwise as may be due me
incident to my past employment with said establishment. I hereby state further that I have no more claim or cause of action of
whatever nature whether past, present or contingent against the said (Name of Employer) and/or its officer.

In view hereof, I hereby move for dismissal of the above entitled case and further request that the same be dropped from
the business calendar of this office.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the I hereunto have set my hand this ____ day of 2_____, __________, in ___________,
Philippines.

______________________
(complainant)

PAID IN THE PRESENCE OF:

__________________ ______________________

JURAT

SIMPLE CONTRACTS- LEASE, SALE OF REALTY, OR

PERSONAL PROPERTY

FORM: CONTRACT OF LEASE 1 (p.129, Guevara)

CONTRACT OF LEASE

I (full name of lessor), of legal age, single (or married to ______________) at _______________________, for and in the
consideration of the agreements hereinafter mentioned, do hereby LEASE unto (full name of lessee), of legal age, single (or married
to __________), with residence and post-office address at __________, that certain building, together with the lot on which it stands,
situated at _________________, and more particularly described as follows:

(Description of building and lot)

of which lot I am the registered owner, in accordance with the provisions of the Land Registration Act, my title thereto
being evidenced by Transfer (or Original) Certificate of Title No. _____ of the Registry of Deeds of __________;

That the term of this lease is __________, from and after the execution of this contract of lease, renewable at the will of
both parties;

And I, (full name of lessee), for and in consideration of this contract of lease, do hereby bind myself and promise to pay or
cause to be paid unto the said lessor, __________, at the latter’s residence, a monthly rental of __________ PESOS (P__________)
during the period of this lease, payable in advance during the first five days of each and every month;

And it is hereby stipulated: That the lessee shall have no right to sublease the above premises without the written consent
of the lessor; that the water, light, gas, and telephone charges in said premises shall be for the account of the lessee; that all ordinary
expenses incurred or that may arise in the daily use of the toilet facilities and sewers in the premises shall be for account of the
lessee; and that any improvements made by the lessee in the above premises, and existing at the termination of the lease, shall
remain as the property of the lessor, without right to reimbursement to the lessee of the const or value thereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands this ____ day of 2_____, __________, in ___________,
Philippines.

___________________ ______________________
49
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Practical Exercises

(Lessor) (Lessee)
WITNESSES:

__________________ ______________________

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

FORM: CONTRACT OF LEASE 2 (p.130, Guevara)

CONTRACT OF LEASE

(full name of lessor), of age, single/ married with residence and post-office address at _______________, hereby leases
unto ________________ of age, single/ married with residence and post-office address at __________________, that certain premises
at________________ under the following terms and conditions:

1. That the lease term shall be_______________;

2. That the monthly rental of the leased premises shall be _________ payable in advance within the first five (5) days of the
month;
3. That the premises leased have been received by the lessee in good, habitable condition;
4. That all the ordinary repairs within the premises that arise in the daily use of the facilities therein shall be for the sole
account and expense of the lessee, without the right to reimbursement;
5. That the lessee shall use the leased premises exclusively for family dwelling, and shall have no right to use the same for
business purposes;
6. 6 That the lessee is expressly prohibited to sublet the leased premises to anyone without the express consent of the lessor
in writing;
7. That all charges for water, light, gas, telephone, used within the premises shall be at the sole account of the lessee;
8. That the lessee shall be responsible for the observance of sanitary and electrical regulations required of imposed by the
city or government authorities regarding the use and habitation of the leased premises;
9. That the lessee shall notify the lessor at least 30 days in advance should the lessee decide to abandon the leased premises;
10. That violation of any of the above terms and conditions will produce ipso facto the rescission of this contract of lease.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands this ____ day of _______________, 2____, in
____________, Philippines.

___________________ ______________________
(Lessor) (Lessee)
WITNESSES:

__________________ ______________________

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

FORM: CONTRACT OF SALE OF REALTY 12 (p. 64, Guevara)

DEED OF SALE
(OF REGISTERED LAND)

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, (Full name of vendor),

Filipino, single/married to ___________________, of legal age, with residence and post-office address
at_____________________________________,

for and in consideration of the sum of ________________ PESOS (P_________), Philippine currency, to me in hand paid by

1
Every document of transfer or alienation of real property filed with the Register of Deeds shall be accompanied with an extra copy of the same which copy shall be transmitted
by said officer to the city or provincial assessor (R.A. No. 456)
2
See RA 3300
50
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Practical Exercises

(Full name of vendee),

Filipino, of legal age, with residence and post office address at ____________________,

do hereby SELL, TRANSFER, and CONVER, absolutely and unconditionally, unto the said_______________ his/her heirs
and assigns, that certain parcel (or parcels) of land, together with the building and improvements hereon, situated in (city or
municipality, and province), and more particularly described as follows:

(description)

of which I am the registered owner in fee simple in accordance with the Land Registration Act, my title thereto being
evidences by Transfer (or Original) Certificate of Title No. ________________, issued by the Register of Deeds of _________________.

It is hereby mutually agreed that the vendee shall bear all the expenses for the execution and registration of this deed of
sale3.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto signed this deed of sale, this ____ day of __________, 2____, at the (city or
municipality), Phiippines.

______________________
(vendor)

With my consent

______________________
(vendor’s wife)

SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

__________________ ______________________

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

FORM: CONTRACT OF SALE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY (p. 155, Guevara)

BILL OF SALE

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, _____________, of legal age, residing at _______________________________, for and in consideration of the sum of
____________PESOS (p__________), Philippine currency, to me paid by ______________, also of legal age and residing at
__________________, receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, do hereby SELL and CONVEY unto the said
_______________________, his heirs and assigns, the following described personal property;

(description of property)

I further covenant with the said ____________________ that I own, and have the right to sell and transfer the title an
ownership of the above-described property, and I will defend the same against the claims of any and all persons whatsoever.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this _____ day of ______________, 2____, in ___________,
Philippines.

______________________
(vendor)

WITNESSES:

__________________ ______________________

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

3
Art. 1487, Civil Code
51
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Practical Exercises

PROMISSORY NOTES

FORM: PROMISSORY NOTE4 (p.60, Guevara)

_____,______,2____
P_________________

_______________ after date, I ___________, promise to pay to the order of _________________, the sum of
________________ (P___________) PESOS (Philippine Currency)

Signature of maker

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATE OF NON FORUM

SHOPPING

FORM: VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON- FORUM SHOPPING (OF PLEADING) (p. 53, Guevara)

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )

CITY OF __________________ ) S.S.

I, _______________, Filipino, of legal age residing at ____________________, after being sworn to in accordance with law,
deposes and says that:

1. I am the Plaintiff in the above- entitled case;

2. The facts stated in the above complaint are true and correct in the best of my knowledge and authentic records;
3. I have not commences any action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial
agency and, to the best of my knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending in them; and
4. If I should learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is pending after its filing, I shall report that fact
within five (5) days from notice to the court where the complaint of initiatory pleading has been filed.

(Date and venue)

Signature of Affiant

4 See Sec. 184, N.I.L.

52
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Practical Exercises

NOTICE OF HEARING and explanation

FORM: NOTICE OF HEARING5

NOTICE OF HEARING

Name of Counsel
Counsel for Adverse Party
Address: ___________________

Sir / Ma’am:

Please be informed that the undersigned counsel has set the foregoing motion (or petition) for hearing on ______ at 8:30
a.m. for the consideration of the Honorable Court or soon thereafter as counsel may be heard.

Signature of Counsel

FORM: EXPLANATION6

EXPLANATION

This Certifies that personal service was not resorted to for the reason that due to time, distance and manpower
constraints, the same is not practicable.

5 required for petitions and motions before trial courts, not to the CA and the SC.
6 Requirement if service is not done by personal service. See: Rule 13, sections 11and 13.
53
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Practical Exercises

AFFIDAVITS – LOSS, CHANGE OF NAME, JUDICIAL

AFFIDAVITS
FORM: AFFIDAVIT OF LOSS SAMPLE (p 54 , Guevara)

AFFIDAVIT OF LOSS

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )

CITY OF __________________ ) S.S.

I, ___________________, of legal age, single/married, residing at ____________, after being sworn in accordance with law,
depose and say:

1. That I am the true owner of _______________, described as follows to wit:

(Description of property)
2. That the said automobile had been duly registered in my name in the Land Transportation Office in ___________ for the
year (or years) ____________; That the certificate of registration and other pertinent papers of ownership of said
automobile were among those burned and destroyed on ____________ when my house and all my personal belongings
were completely destroyed by fire;
3. That said papers are now beyond recovery.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this ____ day of __________, 2____, at the (city or
municipality), Philippines.

__________________
Affiant
JURAT

FORM: AFFIDAVIT OF CHANGE OF NAME(p 324 Guevara)

AFFIDAVIT

I, _______________ , Filipino citizen, of legal age, single/married to (Insert Name of Spouse if any), and a resident of
_______, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and say:

1. That my present name is _______________

2. (state reason for changing name)
3. That i am requesting that my present name be changes to ____________________

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this ____ day of __________, 2____, at the (city or municipality),
Philippines.

__________________
Affiant
JURAT

FORM: JUDICIAL AFFIDAVITS (General)

AFFIDAVIT

I, (Insert Name of Affiant) , Filipino citizen, of legal age, single/married to (Insert Name of Spouse if any), and a resident of
(Insert Address of Affiant), after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and say:

1. That------
2. -----------
3. -----------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature this ____ day of __________, 2____, at the (city or
municipality), Philippines.

__________________
Affiant

54
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Practical Exercises

FORM: JUDICIAL AFFIDAVITS SAMPLE

JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT OF
PETITIONER ___________________

I, ___________________, of legal age, married, and living at ___________________, petitioner in this case, state under oath
as follows:

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

The person examining me is Atty. ___________________ with address at ___________________. The examination is being
held at the same address. I am answering his questions fully conscious that I do so under oath and may face criminal liability for
false testimony and perjury.

QUESTION AND ANSWER

This affidavit/testimony of petitioner ___________________ is being offered to prove that the respondent
___________________ contracted marriage twice, ___________________ on ___________________, and later with the petitioner
___________________ on ___________________ while the respondent’s previous marriage with ___________________ was still valid
and has not yet legally dissolved. Petitioner will also prove that prior to her marriage with the respondent she was previously
married to ___________________ on ___________________, which marriage was still valid and subsisting at the time she contracted
marriage with the respondent. The petitioner’s testimony is also offered to prove the legal basis for the declaration of nullity of the
petitioner’s marriage with the respondent, the same being bigamous.

1. Q. Please state your name and other personal circumstances for the record.
A. ___________________.

2. Q. Are you the same ___________________, the petitioner in this case?

A. Yes sir.

3. Q.
A.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this _____ day of ___________ 2____, at ___________.

___________________
Affiant

JURAT

SWORN ATTESTATTION
I, ___________________, of legal age, Filipino, with postal address ______________________ after being duly sworn depose
and say:

1. I was the one who conducted the examination of witness ___________________ at my aforementioned office in
___________________;

2. I have faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded the questions I asked and the corresponding answer that the
witness gave;

3. I nor any other person then present or assisting her coached the witness regarding her answers;

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ____ day of ____ 2___, at ___________.

ATTY. __________________
Affiant

JURAT

55
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Practical Exercises

NOTARIAL CERTIFICATES – JURAT AND

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

FORM: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 7 – SIMPLE FORM (p 47, Guevara)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )

CITY OF __________________ ) S.S.

BEFORE ME, this ___ day of ______, 2______ in the City of ___________, personally appeared:

Name Competent Evidence of Identity8 Place and Date of Issue

Known to me to be the same person who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that the same are their free act and
deed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial seal on the sate and place above written.

Doc No. ___; NOTARY PUBLIC for______9

Page No. ___; Commission Serial No. ___
Book No. ___; Until December 31, ____
Series of ___. Roll of Attorney____
IBP No.____/Date/Place of Issue
PTR No.____/Date/Place of Issue

7 See: 2004 Rule on Notarial Practice, Rule II, Sec.1. Acknowledgment is a statutory act such that only those instruments that are required by law to be
acknowledged shall be acknowledged; it is also a personal act such that it cannot be acknowledged by a person other than the one who executed it. (Suarez, 2007)
8 Refers to the identification of an individual based on: a) at least one current identification document issued by an official agency bearing the photo graph and

signature of the individual; b) the oath or affirmation of one credible witness not privy to the instrument, document, or transaction who is personally known to the
notary public and who personally knows the individual, or of two credible witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrumen t, document, or transaction who
each personally knows the individual and shows the notary public documentary identification (Rule II, Section 13, 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice)
9 Sec 2, Rule VIII 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice for the contents of the concluding part of the notarial certificate

56
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018
Legal Ethics and Judicial Ethics Practical Exercises

FORM: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INSTRUMENT CONSISTING OF TWO OR MORE PAGES 10 (p 49, Guevara)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )

CITY OF __________________ ) S.S.

BEFORE ME, this ___ day of ______, 2______ in the City of ___________, personally appeared:

Name Competent Evidence of Identity11 Place and Date of Issue

known to me to be the same person who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that the same are their free act and
deed.

This instrument, consisting of _____ pages, including the page on which this acknowledgement is written, has been
signed on the left margin of each and every page thereof by _____________ and _______________ and their witnesses, and sealed
with my notarial seal.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my Notarial seal on the sate and place above written.

Doc No. ___; NOTARY PUBLIC for______12

Page No. ___; Commission Serial No. ___
Book No. ___; Until December 31, ____
Series of ___. Roll of Attorney____
IBP No.____/Date/Place of Issue
PTR No.____/Date/Place of Issue

FORM: JURAT 13 (p. 52, Guevara)

JURAT

SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me, this ___ day of __________, in the City of __________ by ____________ with
Passport No. ____________ issued on __________ at __________.

Doc No. ___; NOTARY PUBLIC

Page No. ___; Commission Serial No. ___
Book No. ___; Until December 31, ____
Series of ___. Roll of Attorney____
IBP No.____/Date/Place of Issue
PTR No.____/Date/Place of Issue

10 Applicable to deeds affecting lands (Sec. 127, Act No. 496, as amended)
11 Refers to the identification of an individual based on: a) at least one current identification document issued by an official agency bearing the photograph and
signature of the individual; b) the oath or affirmation of one credible witness not privy to the instrument, document, or transaction who is personally known to the
notary public and who personally knows the individual, or of two credible witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrumen t, document, or transaction who
each personally knows the individual and shows the notary public documentary identification (Rule II, Section 13, 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice)
12 Sec 2, Rule VIII 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice for the contents of the concluding part of the notarial certificate

13 See: Rule II, Sec. 6. It is that part of an affidavit in which the officer certifies that the instrument was sworn to before him. It is not part of the affidavit. (Suarez,

2007)
57
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2018