DILATORY TACTICS OF LAWYERS

An obstruction of the administration of justice

by

Kazper Vic Bermejo, Zeus Mapula, Joey Mondero and Jessie

Tabobo
LLB 3A (A.Y. 2016-2017)

INTRODUCTION

The practice of law is a privilege granted only to those who possess the

strict intellectual and moral qualification required of lawyers who are

instruments in the effective and efficient administration of justice.1 It is not a

trade, nor a craft but a profession.2 A continuing requirement; good moral

character is not only a condition precedent for admission to the legal

profession, but it must also remain intact in order to maintain ones good

standing in that exclusive and honored fraternity.3 Both intellectual and

moral qualifications are emphasized by the Supreme Court as the

requirements of great import. Consequently, among the thousands of Bar

Candidates in an annual Bar Examination, only few have passed and able to

engage in the practice of law.

This obligation is not an easy task, and its performance is made

difficult by the ever growing pressure of commercialism in all fields of human

endeavor as well as by the fact that those tenets and principles have steadily

grown through the years from numerous and scattered forces.4

1 In Re: Argosino, 1997

2 Director of Religious Affairs v. Bayot, 74 Phil 749 (1944)

3 Tapucar v. Tapucar, 1998

However, the judicial system is largely deemed as adversarial and somewhat

competitive. Lawyers are expected to comply, at all times, with his fiduciary

duty towards his client. Oftentimes, complexities in the practice of law

compel practitioners to employ dilatory tactics at the expense of the

integrity of the judicial system and the legal profession. This is a

contradiction to that purpose of an attorney as an officer of the court is

called upon to assist in the due administration of justice. Like the court itself,

he is an instrument to advance its cause.5 This practice poses a question of

whether lawyers are indeed mindful of their duty

Unethically, such dilatory tactics exist in the legal profession perhaps

attributable to that impression that his counsel could do anything for the

pleasure of the client to obtain favorable judgment to the extent that his

counsel will go beyond the parameter of judicial remedy prescribed by law.

For the purpose of this paper, dilatory tactics are defined as the

methods by which the rules of procedure are used by a party to a lawsuit in

abusive manner to delay the progress of the proceedings.6 This paper

focuses on the employment of lawyers of different forms of dilatory tactics to

damage the integrity and reputation of the Court and obstruct the

administration of justice. The duty of the lawyer towards the Court will be

also discussed as part of their continuing requirement of moral obligation.

ISSUES

4 Cited in Ruben Agpalo, legal Ethics, 5 th Edition, 1992, p. 1

5 Surigao Mineral Reservation Board v. Cloribel, G.R. No. 11071, January 9, 1972

6 www.thefreedictionary.com
A lawyer shall exert every effort and consider it his duty to assist in the

speedy and efficient administration of justice.7 Several problems linked to

this dictum usually transpire in a lawyers strategy meant to perpetually

forestall execution of an otherwise final and executory judgment. Aside from

clogging court dockets, the strategy is deplorably a common course resorted

to by losing litigants in the hope of evading manifest obligations.8

This paper will contextualize the following issues:

1. Different forms of dilatory tactics employed by lawyers that obstruct

the administration of justice;

2. Factors that influence the lawyers to employ dilatory tactics towards

the Court; and

3. Determine possible recourse to mitigate, if not eliminate, such dirty

tactics of lawyers.

DISCUSSION

A speedy and efficient administration of justice which is mandated by

the Constitution is a joint responsibility of the judges and the lawyers. Other

government officials such as the police, the sheriffs, the prosecutors and

even witnesses have also the responsibility to coordinate and cooperate with

the judicial officers in the administration of justice.

Canon 12 of the Code of Professional Responsibility directs the lawyer

to exert every effort and to consider it his duty to assist in the speedy and

efficient administration of justice.

7 Canon 12 of the Code of Professional Responsibility

8 Sps. Manuel and Yolanda Aguilar v. Manila Banking Corporation, G.R. No. 157911,
Sep. 19, 2006
 The first part of this discussion will help you find out the different

schemes employed by the lawyers that constitute dilatory tactics towards

the Court.

DIFFERENT FORMS OF DILATORY TACTICS

In Sps. Manuel and Yolanda Aguilar vs. Manila Banking Corporation9, a

contract of loan was obtained by petitioner from the respondent bank with

real estate mortgage. Subsequently, there was a failure of payment on the

formers part. The bank filed for foreclosure and the respondent-bank is the

winning bidder. Thus, the Court issued a final and executory decision in their

favor. Instead of redeeming the land, the petitioner filed for annulment of

foreclosure as they are willing to enter into compromise agreement with the

respondent. Despite the execution of compromise agreement, still the

petitioner failed to pay and to comply with the other provisions of the

agreement. The bank filed for Writ of Execution. Then again the petitioner

filed a Manifestation praying for deferment of the Writ because of pending

proposal for settlement of debt. But the settlement never materialized. Thus,

it was held that very litigation must come to an end. Access to the courts is

guaranteed. But there must be a limit thereto. Once a litigants right has

been adjudicated in a valid and final judgment of a competent court, he

should not be granted an unbridled license to come back for another btry.

The prevailing party should not be harassed by subsequent suits. In this

particular case, the dilatory tactic employed by the petitioners counsel is

filing of annulment or deferment of final and executory writ to the prejudice

of the other party. It is also notable that the respondent has agreed to

9 G.R. No. 157911, September 19, 2006

execute a compromise agreement but they also failed to honor such

agreement. The Supreme Court proceeded in saying that: Access to the

courts is guaranteed. But there must be a limit thereto. Once a litigants

rights have been adjudicated in a valid and final judgment of a competent

court, he should not be granted an unbridled license to come back for

another try. The prevailing party should not be harassed by subsequent suits.

For, if endless litigations were to be encouraged, then unscrupulous litigants

will multiply to the detriment of the administration of justice.

In Chua vs. Atty. De Castro10, a collection case was file against Dr.

Concepcion Aguila Memorial College, represented by Atty. De Castro. It took

more than five years to present one witness due to Atty. De Castros

propensity to seek postponements of agreed hearing dates for unmeritorious

excuses. His excuses would vary from simple absences without notice, to

claims of alleged ailment unbacked by any medical certificates, to claims of

not being ready despite sufficient time given to prepare, to the sending of

representative lawyer who would profess non-knowledge of the case to seek

continuance, to a plea for the postponement without providing any reason

thereof. Here, the dilatory tactic is seeking postponement of judicial process

one after the other without justifiable ground. The Supreme Court ruled:

Through maneuvering [sic] obviously orchestrated by [Atty. De Castro], who

was nonchalantly forgotten or otherwise deliberately disregarded

professional commitments, much of the time has been wasted with [Atty. De

Castros] uncharacteristic reliance on postponements for reasons that may

not be termed valid but ones that really border on plain attempts to rile the

other side. Atty. De Castros lack of concern for the other party, that

amounted to obvious disrespect to the Court which has accommodated some

requests for resetting which may not have solid ground to be granted, does

10A.C. No. 10671, November 25, 2015

not speak well of Atty. De Castro attitude towards his lack of concern with the

courts (and adverse parties/counsels) time specially reserved to hear the

case.

In Mariano Siy vs. NLRC and Elena Embang11, Atty. Quevedos, counsel of Siy,

delayed this case and impended the execution of the judgment rendered.

Atty. De Castro appealed the final and executory decision rendered by NLRC,

which in according to the rule an order granting a motion for a writ of

execution is not appealable. The dilatory tactic in this case is the act of

appealing a final, executoy and unappelable decision. The Supreme Court

ruled: Atty. Quevedos client was bound by the finality of our affirmance of

the modified decision of the labor arbiter. He should not have tried, under

the guise of a flimsy appeal to the NLRC, to reopen a case already decided

with finality. Nor should he have raised a new matters previously considered

and issue already laid to rest. Thus, Atty. Quevedos act of deceptively

innocent appeal constituted either a willful disregard or gross ignorance of

basic rules of procedure resulting in the obstruction of justice. It prevented

Embang from enjoying the fruits of her hard earned legal victory.

And perhaps this is the worst case of them all considering the multiple

employment of dilatory tactics in a single case. In an administrative case of

12
RTC Branch IV, Tagbilaran City, Bohol vs. Atty. Occea, this involves a

probate proceeding, there are several dilatory tactics used by Atty. Occea

relative to the mentioned proceeding. First, he caused the delay by willfully

disobeying the lawful court order and by willfully prolonging the litigation

through filing with the Court of Appeals six (6) cases, and with the Supreme

Court one (1) case, assailing the order of the probate court. Atty. Occea's

11 Mariano Siy v. NLRC and Elena Embang, G.R. No. 158971, August 25, 2005

12A.C No. 2841, July 3, 2002

refusal to obey the said orders and elevating the same to the higher courts

unnecessarily delayed the probate proceedings. Second, having no to no

avail of favorable judgment from the probate court, he and his wife filed civil

actions for damages, administrative complaint and criminal charge which

were found to be groundless and unsubstantiated against Judge Ruiz, judge

of the probate court. Both actions were dismissed for lack of merit and lack

of cause of action. Finally, Atty Occena in various occasions did not appear in

hearings. After giving the extension by the court to file answer, he did not

appear in the first hearing. The second hearing was set and again he did not

appear. The third hearing was reset but Atty. Occea did not appear for the

third time. Because of his repeated non-appearance, the the probate court in

its order, considered his failure to appear as a waiver of his right to present

evidence.

The Supreme Court penned that Atty. Occea abused beyond measure

his privilege to practice law.

Acts which amount to obstruction in the administration of justice may

take many forms. They include such as:

In Cantorne vs. Ducosin13, the counsel of the accused instructed a

complaining witness in a criminal action not to appear at the scheduled

hearing so that the case would be dismissed.

In Samar Mining Co. vs. Arnado14, prosecuting clearly frivolous cases or

appeals to drain the resources of the other party and compel him to submit

out of exhaustion.

13 G.R. No. L-38332, December 14, 1933

14 G.R. No. 22304, July 30, 1968

 In Gabriel vs. CA15, the filing of multiple petitions or complaints for a

cause that has been previously rejected in the false expectation of getting

favorable action.

In Bueno vs. Santos16, it was held that asking a client to plead guilty to

a crime which the lawyer knows his client did not commit constitute dilatory

tactic that obstruct the administration of justice.

FACTORS INFLUENCING LAWYERS TO EMPLOY DILATORY TACTICS

But what factors really influence lawyers to act in such a manner as

illustrated in the cited jurisprudence? Here are some probable reasons that

lead to the employment of the different modes of dilatory tactics:

Stress - some laymen erroneously believe that a lawyer in private

practice is the repository of all the problems of his client. Other think

mistakenly that a good lawyer can straighten out that which is crooked as

wheel as twist the devious and make it look straight. Most clients expect

from their lawyers the impossible causing the latter some great degree of

stress. The day to day commitments of an average practicing lawyer to his

profession consisting of, but not limited to, Court appearances, pleading

preparations, conferences with clients, making memoranda, briefs and other

allied activities are more often than not governed by deadlines, recurring

tension couples with physical strains. Stress is indeed inherent in lawyering.

No Sense of Honor - It can be said that there are lawyers who

despite the constant reminder to at all times uphold the integrity and

dignity of legal profession have constantly failed to do so. Despite the

numerous ethical rules and principles that guide the conduct of lawyers such

15 G.R. No. 43757, July 30, 1976

16 58 Phil 557 (1933)

the Code of Professional Responsibility and Lawyers Oath, there are still
17
lawyers like Atty. Enrique S. Chua who utterly and wantonly disregarded

them. The Supreme Court in its decision to disbar Atty Chua considered the

other items of his misconduct enumerated in the report of the Investigating

Commissioner, which in totality brought dishonor to the legal profession.

Competition - it stimulates antagonistic relationship among lawyers.

The professional interaction could be affected by competitive conduct of

lawyers in an adversary system.18 By and large, this seemingly hostile

behavior may be attributed to the Rambo type of lawyering which includes

among others a mindset that litigation is a war and that describe trial

practice in military terms and a conviction that it is invariably in your interest

to make life miserable for your opponent.19

RECOURSES TO ELIMINATE OR MITIGATE DILATORY TACTICS

Here are some possible recourse to eliminate or mitigate such dirty

tactics of lawyers:

Disbarment or Suspension as deterrent to subsequent dilatory

tactics Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court provides that a lawyer

may be removed or suspended on the following grounds: (i) deceit; (ii)

malpractice; (iii) gross misconduct in office; (iv) grossly immoral conduct; (v)

conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude; (vi) violation of lawyers

oath; (vii) willful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court; and

(viii) corruptly or willfully appearing as a lawyer for a party to a case without

authority to do so. Because of such of their deceitful, dishonest, unlawful and

17 Flores vs. Atty. Chua AC No. 4500 April 30, 1999

18Arndt, Thomas; A Lawyers Duty to Opposing Counsel; Dickinson Wright, LLP

19 J. Ortego and L. Maleson, Under Attack: Professionaism in the Practice of Law,

http://www.nixonpeabody.com
grossly immoral conduct, they clearly caused a mockery of the judicial

proceedings and inflicted injury to the administration of justice.

Indirect Contempt - In Mariano Siy vs. NLRC and Elena Embang, the

Supreme Court sanctioned Atty. Quevedo for Indirect Contempt. The power

to punish for contempt and the power to disbar are separate and distinct,

and that the exercise of one does not exclude the exercise of the other. A

contempt proceeding for misbehavior in court is designed to vindicate the

authority of the court; on the other hand, the object of a disciplinary

proceeding is to deal with the fitness of the courts officer to continue in that

office, to preserve and protect the court and the public from the official

ministrations of persons unfit or unworthy to hold such office. The principal

purpose of the exercise of the power to cite for contempt is to safeguard the

functions of the court [while that] of the exercise of disciplinary authority by

the Supreme Court is to assure respect for orders of such court by attorneys

who, as much as judges, are responsible for the orderly administration of

justice.

Emphasis on importance of Ethics in MCLE the mandatory

continuing legal education (MCLE) is required of members of the IBP to

ensure that throughout their career, they keep abreast with law and

jurisprudence, maintain the ethics of the profession and enhance the

standards of the practice of law.20 It is notable of the same rule that among

the continuing legal education activities approved by the MCLE Committee, it

is legal ethics which bears most of credit units with six. The committee must,

after every continuing legal education activities, strictly see to it that they

also inculcate in the mind and heart of attending lawyers the significance of

legal ethics in the practice of law, to the extent they will deter from any

activities which will taint the reputation of the practice of law. It is one of the
20 Rule 1 of B.M. No. 850
characters of every lawyer which separate them from other professions.

They should practice what the MCLE preach.

Improvement of Client Satisfaction In the course of a lawyers

lifetime practice, he must equip himself with proven practices and

techniques, in accordance with the rules and laws of course, on how he could

improve his professional activities. It is his concern to build up a reservoir of

permanent and quality clients that measure up to the kind of clients that his

law office had targeted. A satisfied client is happy about his lawyer and may

continue to engage his professional services. Here are some of the best tips

from 25 Tips for Improving Client Satisfaction21: Speak your clients

language. Whenever you communicate with a client, whether in writing or

verbally, refrain from using legalese. Instead, show your client that you

understand his business by using terms-of-art applicable to your clients

industry; Meet with your client before the engagement begins to find out

your clients business objectives as well as his expectations about your

service; and Keep yourself informed about current trends in business in

general and in your clients industry in particular. Read appropriate trade

publications and business sections of your daily newspaper.

CONCLUSIONS

Lawyers are duty-bound to possess and to display higher standards of

professional conduct. However, it should be recognized that there exist

lawyers who fall short of the required civility necessary to maintain healthy,

collaborative and ethical relationship in the practice of law. Situations arise

where lawyers deviate from the judicial processes and ethical strategies

prescribed by the Code of Professional Responsibility and other relevant

21 Published in THE LAWYERS REVIEW, Vol. XV, March 31, 2001

laws. It is unfortunate that some lawyers employ dilatory tactics to cause

obstruction in the administration of justice. Thus, the same Code seeks to

impose limitations in the exercise of legal profession to protect the integrity

of the legal community and at the same time penalizes those erring lawyers.

Based on the finding of this paper from the above mentioned

jurisprudence, the following conclusions were drawn:

Violation of Code of Professional Responsibility - Specifically, Rule1.03,

Rule 10.3, Rule 12.03, Rule 12.04, Canon 12 and Canon 19 of the same Code

explicitly states:

Rule 1.03 A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage

any suit or proceeding or delay any mans cause.

Rule 10.3 A lawyer shall observe the rules of procedure and shall not

misuse them to defeat the ends of justice

Rule 12.03 A lawyer shall not, after obtaining extensions of time to file

pleadings, memoranda or brief, let the period lapse without submitting the

same or offering an explanation for his failure to do so

Rule 12.04 - A lawyer shall not unduly delay a case, impede the execution of

a judgement or misuse court processes.

Canon 12 - A lawyer shall exert every effort and consider it his duty to assist

in the speedy and efficient administration of justice.

Canon 19 A lawyer shall represent his client with zeal within the bounds of

law.

Violation of the Lawyers Oath the above-cited forms of dilatory

tactics violates the solemn oath of every lawyer when they swore that: 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.

Lastly, in Ong vs. Atty. Unto22, the Court ruled that the ethics of the

legal profession rightly enjoin lawyers to act with the highest standards of

truthfulness, fair play and nobility in the course of the practice of law. Thus,

such attitudes observed by subject lawyers deserve severe condemnation,

wasting, as it does, the time that the courts could well devote to meritorious

cases. It is but proper therefore that subject lawyers shall pay treble costs in

all instances.

RECOMMENDATIONS

We, consequently, recommend imposing severely the method of

disciplining every erring lawyer depending on the gravity of their offenses.

The punishment of suspension being the minimum must be imposed and

perpetual disbarment as its maximum. We also urge the Supreme Court to

consider the recourses mentioned in this paper to mitigate, if not eliminate,

such dilatory tactics, particularly, on the emphasis in Ethics in every MCLE as

this is the most feasible way which they may seek the attention of the

lawyers. We also remind the lawyers that they are mandated to act in

accordance with the rules, not break any law, because foremost, we are

officers of the court. As lawyers you took your oath that you will obey the law

and uphold the Constitution, whether in government or private service,

whether we are in or out of the court.

22 A.C. No. 2417

 If it has to remain an honorable profession and attain its basic ideal,

those enrolled in its ranked should not only master its tenets and principles

but should also, by their lives, accord continuing fidelity to them.