DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations

LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS

AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES
Green Notes 2019
Green Notes 2019 Legal Ethics

I. LEGAL ETHICS
A. Practice of Law (Rule 138) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...1
1. Concept…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………..1
2. Qualifications for admission to the Bar (Bar Matter No. 1153)……………………………………………………………………………………. 2
3. Continuing requirements for membership in the bar…………………………………………………………………………………………………3
4. Appearance of Non-Lawyers………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………4
a. Law student practice rule (Rule 138-A) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….4
b. Non-lawyers in courts and/or administrative tribunals………………………………………………………………………………4
c. Proceedings where lawyers are prohibited from appearing as counsels………………………………………………………5
5. Prohibited practice of non-lawyers and appearance without authority ……….…………………………………………………………….5
6. Public officials and the practice of law; prohibitions and disqualifications………………………………………………………………….6
7. The Lawyer’s Oath…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………..7
B. Duties and responsibilities of a 1awyer under the Code of Professional Responsibility…………………………………………………………..7
1. To society (Canons 1 to 6) …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………….7
2. To the legal profession………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………..11
a. Canon 7 to 9…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………….11
b. Integrated Bar of the Philippines (Rule 139-A) ……………………………………………………………………………………………12
i. Membership and dues………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..13
3. To the courts (Canons 10 to 13) …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………13
4. To the clients…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….16
a. Canon 14 to 22…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….16
b. Attorney’s fees………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………22
i. Acceptance fees…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………22
ii. Contingency fee arrangements…………………………………………………………………………………………………………22
iii. Attorney’s liens………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….23
iv. Fees and controversies with clients…………………………………………………………………………………………………..23
v. Quantum meruit………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..24
C. Suspension, disbarment and discipline of lawyers………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..26
1. Nature and characteristics of disciplinary action against lawyers……………………………………………………………………………..26
2. Grounds…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….…..27
3. Proceedings (Rule 139-B, Rules of Court, as amended) ……………………………………………………………………………………………...28
4. Recoverable amounts; intrinsically linked to professional engagement……………………………………………………………………..29
D. Readmission to the Bar…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………29
1. Lawyers who have been suspended…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..29
2. Lawyers who have been disbarred…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….30
E. Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (Bar Matter No. 850, as amended) …………………………………………………………………………30
1. Requirements……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………31
2. Compliance……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….31
3. Exemptions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….31
4. Sanctions…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..31
F. Notarial Practice (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC, as amended) …………………………………………………………………………………………………………..32
1. Qualifications of a notary public………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..33
2. Term of office of a notary public……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….33
3. Powers and limitations…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…33
4. Notarial Register……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….34
5. Jurisdiction of notary public and place of notarization……………………………………………………………………………………………..35
6. Competent evidence of identity………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..35
7. Sanctions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…..36
8. Relation to Code of Professional Responsibility…………………………………………………………………………………………………………37

II. JUDICIAL ETHICS

A. Sources
1. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary (Bangalore Draft)…………………………………………………………...39
2. Code of Judicial Conduct…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..39
B. Disqualifications of judicial officers (Rule 137) ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..46
1. Compulsory………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………46
2. Voluntary………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….47
C. Administrative jurisdiction of the Supreme Court over Judges and Justices (all levels) ……………………………………………………….47

III. PRACTICAL EXERCISES

A. Demand and authorization letters…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………….50
B. Simple contracts; lease and sale…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...52
C. Special power of attorney…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….56
D. Verification and certification of non-forum shopping………………………………………………………………………………………………………….57
E. Notice of hearing and explanation in motions………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………58
F. Judicial Affidavits…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………...59

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations

Green Notes 2019 Legal Ethics

G. Notarial Certificates; jurat and acknowledgment…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………63

H. Motions for extension of time, to dismiss, and to declare in default…………………………………………………………………………………….66

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations

Green Notes 2019 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

LEGAL 1.
2.
3.
1987 Constitution
Rules of Court
Code of Professional Responsibility

ETHICS 4.
5.
Code of Judicial Conduct
Lawyer’s Oath
6. Supreme Court decisions
7. Revised Penal Code
8. New Civil Code
9. Local Government Code

PRACTICE OF LAW (RULE 138)

CONCEPT

DEFINITION
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.

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 1

Green Notes 2019 Legal Ethics

(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, 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)
ADMISSION TO PHILIPPINE BAR
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, A.C. No. 99-634, June 10, 2002)
POWER TO CONTROL AND REGULATE
THE PRACTICE OF LAW
The Supreme Court has the power to promulgate rules
concerning the protection and enforcement of
constitutional rights, pleading, practice and procedure in
all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the
Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged.
(1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5 (5))
THE POWER OF 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)
QUALIFICATIONS FOR ADMISSION TO
THE BAR (BAR MATTER NO. 1153)
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)
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
satisfactorily 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)
7. Pass the Bar Examinations;
8. Must have complied with the Academic
requirements;
9. Take the Lawyer’s Oath; and
10. Sign the Roll of Attorneys.
CITIZENSHIP
The practice of all professions in the Philippines shall be
limited to Filipino citizens save in cases prescribed by law.
(Sec. 14 (2), 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 R.A. 9225. (Petition to Resume
Practice of Law of Dacanay, B.M. 1678, December 17, 2007)
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.
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.
GOOD MORAL CHARACTER
Good moral character is a continuing qualification
required of every member of the bar, it is not only a

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 2

Green Notes 2019
qualification precedent to the practice of law. (Narag v.
Narag, A.C. 3405, June 29, 1998)
Absence of a proven conduct or act which has been
historically and traditionally considered as a manifestation
of a moral turpitude. The act or conduct need not amount
to a crime; and even if does not 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 the 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:
a. Satisfactorily show that they have successfully
completed all the prescribed courses for the degree
of Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent degree,
Prescribed courses: Civil law, commercial law,
remedial law, criminal law, public and private
international law, political law, labor and social
legislation, medical jurisprudence, taxation and legal
ethics
b. In a law school or university officially recognized by
the Philippine Government or by the proper
authority in the foreign jurisdiction where the
degree has been granted. Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec.
5, as amended by Bar Matter No. 1153)
REQUIREMENTS FOR A FILIPINO CITIZEN WHO
GRADUATED FROM A FOREIGN LAW SCHOOL
He shall be admitted to the bar examination only upon
submission to the Supreme Court of certifications
showing:
a. Completion of all courses leading to the degree of
Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent degree;
b. Recognition or accreditation of the law school by the
proper authority; and
c. Completion of all the fourth-year subjects in the
Bachelor of Laws academic program in a law school
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
duly recognized by the Philippine government.
d. Present proof of having completed a separate
bachelor’s degree course. (Rules of Court, Rule 138,
Secs. 5 & 6, as amended by Bar Matter No. 1153)
CONTINUING REQUIREMENTS FOR
MEMBERSHIP IN THE BAR
1. Good and Regular Standing;
2. Membership in the IBP;
3. Payment of IBP Dues;
4. Payment of Professional Tax;
5. Compliance with the Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education (MCLE);
6. Possession of Good Moral Character;
7. Citizenship.
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)
RE-ACQUISITION OF THE PRIVILEGE TO PRACTICE
LAW UNDER REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9225
A Filipino lawyer who has lost and reacquired his
citizenship under RA 9225 or the 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 membership dues
in the IBP;
b. Payment of professional tax;
c. Completion of at least 36 credit hours of MCLE;
d. Retaking of the Lawyer’s Oath (In Re: Petition for
Leave to Resume Practice of Law, Benjamin Dacanay,
B.M. No. 1678, December 17, 2007)
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
3
Green Notes 2019
down by the Court for the practice of law, the Office of Bar
Confidant 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;
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.
(In Re: Petition to Re-acquire the Privilege to Practice
Law in the Philippines, Epifanio Muneses, B.M. No.
2112, July 24, 2012)
APPEARANCE OF NON-LAWYERS
General Rule: Only those who are licensed to practice law
can appear and handle cases in court.
Exceptions: The following are also allowed in exceptional
circumstances:
a. Law students;
b. By an agent/friend;
c. By the litigant himself.
LAW STUDENT PRACTICE RULE (RULE 138-A)
A law student who has successfully completed his third
year of the regular four-year prescribed law curriculum
and is enrolled in a recognized law school’s clinic 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
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)
Note: The phrase “direct supervision and control” requires
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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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.
Threefold Rationale behind Law Student Practice Rule
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. (In Re: Need that Law Student Practicing under
Rule 138-A be Actually Supervised during Trial, Bar
Matter No. 730, June 13, 1997)
Note: A law student appearing before the RTC under Rule
138-A should at all times be accompanied by a supervising
lawyer. (Bar Matter No. 730, supra)
NON-LAWYERS IN COURTS
The following are the instances whereby non-lawyers may
appear in court:
1. Before 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 of
an attorney. (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 34)
2. Before 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)
3. 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. A resident of the province; and
b. Of good repute for probity and ability, to
defend the accused. (Rules of Court, Rule 116,
Sec. 7)
APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL DE OFICIO
A counsel de oficio 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 116, Sec. 7)
A counsel de oficio is 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)
RIGHT OF A PARTY TO SELF-REPRESENTATION
A party’s representation on his own behalf is not
considered to be a practice of law as “one does not practice
law by acting for himself, any more than he practices
4
Green Notes 2019
medicine by rendering first aid to himself.” (Maderada v.
Mediodea, A.M. No. MTJ-02-1459, October 14, 2003)
A person can conduct the litigation of the cases personally.
He is not engaged in the practice of law if he represents
himself in cases in which he is party. By conducting the
litigation of his own cases, he acts not as a counsel or
lawyer but as a party exercising his right to represent
himself. He does not become a counsel or lawyer by
exercising such right. (Santos v. Judge Lacurom, A.M. No.
RTJ-04-1823, August 28, 2006)
Note: Section 34, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court does not
distinguish between civil and criminal cases.
1. In civil cases, an individual litigant has the right to
conduct his litigation personally. (Rules of Court, Rule
138, Sec. 34)
2. In criminal cases, in grave and less grave offenses,
an accused who is a layman must always appear by
counsel; he cannot conduct his own defense, as his
right to counsel may not be waived without violating
his right to due process of law.
a. 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.” (Rules of Court, Rule 115,
Sec. 1(c))
b. The gravity of the offense and the difficulty of
the questions that may arise should be
considered in determining whether a counsel
de oficio should be appointed, or whether a
counsel de parte should be required.
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.
NON-LAWYERS IN ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS
The following are the instances whereby non-lawyers may
appear in administrative tribunals:
1. Under the Labor Code, non-lawyers may appear
before the Commission or any Labor Arbiter only:
a. If they represent themselves; or
b. If they represent their organization or
members thereof. (Labor Code, Art. 222 (1))
2. 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. (The
Cadastral Act, Act No. 2259, Sec. 9)
Note: Under the 2011 NLRC Rule of Procedure which was
promulgated pursuant to Art. 218 (a), the Labor Code
allows:
1. Non-lawyers, who are not necessarily a party to the
case, to represent a union or members thereof;
2. 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
3. Non-lawyer owners of establishments, to appear
before it.
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
A non-lawyer may represent a party before the
Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
(DARAB). (Pineda)
LIMITATIONS ON THE APPEARANCE OF NON-
LAWYERS BEFORE THE COURTS
1. He should confine his work to non-adversary
contentions and should not undertake purely legal
work (i.e., examination of witness, presentation of
evidence);
2. His services should not be habitually rendered;
3. 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. (Rules of
Procedure in Small Claims Cases, Sec. 17)
Note: 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 Katarungang Pambarangay Proceedings, parties
must appear in person without the assistance of
counsel or representative, except for minors and
incompetent who may be assisted by their next of kin
who are not lawyers. (Local Government Code, Sec.
415)
PROHIBITED PRACTICE OF NON-
LAWYERS AND APPEARANCE WITHOUT
AUTHORITY
PERSONS NOT LAWYERS
A person who has been refused admission to the bar by
order of the Supreme Court but nonetheless attempts to
practice law is guilty of indirect contempt. (2014 Bar
Examination)
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)
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)
Note: 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)
LAWYERS WITHOUT AUTHORITY
Under Sec. 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, corruptly or
willfully appearing as an attorney for a party to a case
5
Green Notes 2019
without authority to do so is a ground for disbarment or
suspension. (Vargas v. Ignes, A.C. No. 8096, July 5, 2010)
REMEDIES AGAINST UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF
LAW BY PERSONS WHO ARE NOT LAWYERS
1. Petition for Injunction;
2. Contempt of Court;
3. Criminal Complaint for Estafa for falsely
representing himself to be an attorney.
REMEDIES AGAINST PRACTICE OF LAW
WITHOUT AUTHORITY
1. Petition for Injunction;
2. Contempt of Court;
3. Disqualification and complaints for disbarment;
4. Administrative complaint against erring lawyer or
government official; and
5. Declaratory Relief. (Agpalo)
PRIVILEGES OF ATTORNEY
1. A lawyer has the privilege and right to practice law
during good behavior before any judicial, quasi-
judicial, or administrative tribunal;
2. He 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;
3. 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 second grade eligibility
for any other government position not requiring
proficiency in the law. (Agpalo)
PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND THE PRACTICE
OF LAW; PROHIBITIONS AND
DISQUALIFICATIONS
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:
1. the private practice is authorized by the
Constitution or by the law; and
2. 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 Sec. 7 (b) (2) of R.A. No. 6713 or the
Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials
and Employees, 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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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
PRACTICE OF LAW
1. Judges and other officials or employees of the
superior court (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 35);
2. Officials and employees of the Office of the Solicitor
General (Ibid);
3. Government Prosecutors (People v. Villanueva, G.R.
No. L-19450, May 27, 1965, 14 SCRA 109);
4. President, Vice-President, members of the cabinet,
their deputies and assistants (1987 Constitution, Art.
VII, Sec. 13);
5. Chairmen and 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)
8. Civil service officers or employees whose duties
require them to devote their entire time at the
disposal of the government. (Catu v. Rellosa, A.C. No.
5738, February 19, 2008); and
9. Those prohibited by special law.
RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS TO
ENGAGE IN THE PRACTICE OF LAW
1. No Senator or member of the House of
Representative may personally appear as counsel
before any court of justice as before the Electoral
Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative
bodies. (1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec. 14)
2. Under the Local Government Code, Sanggunian
members may practice their professions provided
that if they are members of the Bar, they shall not:
a. 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;
b. 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;
c. Collect any fee for their appearance in
administrative proceedings involving the local
government unit of which he is an official; and
d. Use property and personnel of the government
except when the sanggunian member
concerned is defending the interest of the
government. (R.A. No. 7160, Sec. 90)
3. A retired justice or judge receiving pension from the
government, cannot act as counsel:
a. In any civil case in which the government, or
any of its subdivision or agencies is the adverse
party; or
b. In a criminal case wherein an officer or
employee of the government is accused of an
offense in relation to his office; or
6
Green Notes 2019
c. Collect any fee for his/her appearance in any
administrative proceedings to maintain an
interest to the government, national, provincial
or municipal, or to any of its legally constituted
officers. (R.A. 910, Sec. 1, as amended)
LAWYERS AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT THE
GOVERNMENT
Any official or other person appointed or designated in
accordance with law to appear for the Government of the
Philippines shall have all the rights of a duly authorized
member of the bar to appear in any case in which said
government has an interest direct or indirect. (Rules of
Court, Rule 138, Sec. 33)
Note: Solicitor General, State Prosecutors, Members of the
Office of the Government Corporate Counsel, Private
lawyer retained by government entities with the approval
of OSG or GOCC and the Commission on Audit.
THE LAWYER’S OATH
I, __(name)__, of __(permanent address)__do solemnly
swear that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the
Philippines; I will support its 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 in court; I will not wittingly or willingly
promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit, nor
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 obligation without any
mental reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE LAWYER’S OATH
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 of 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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
everyone concerned. (In Re: Al C. Argosino, B.M. No. 712,
March 19, 1997)
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
TO SOCIETY (CANONS 1 TO 6)
CANON 1: RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL PROCESSES
RULE 1.01
An act constituting immoral or deceitful conduct is one
that involves moral turpitude. It includes any act done
contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good morals.
(Malcolm)
IMMORAL CONDUCT
It is a conduct that is willful, flagrant or shameless, and
which shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the
good and respectable members of the community.
(Estrada v. Escritor, A.M. No. P-02-1651, August 4, 2003)
DECEITFUL CONDUCT
It is having the proclivity for fraudulent and deceptive
misrepresentation, artifice, device that is used upon
another who is ignorant of the true facts, to the prejudice
and damage of the party imposed upon. (Manaquiz v.
Emelo, A.C. No. 8968, September 26, 2017)
UNLAWFUL CONDUCT
It is an act or omission which is against the law. Dishonesty
involves lying or cheating. (Agpalo)
DISHONEST CONDUCT
It refers to the disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, defraud,
or betray; be unworthy; lacking in integrity, honesty,
probity, integrity in principle, fairness, and
straightforwardness. (Manaquiz v. Emelo, supra)
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 GROSSLY IMMORAL ACTS
1. Wanton disregard for the sanctity of marriage as
shown when the lawyer pursued a married woman
7
Green Notes 2019
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)
3. Acts of engaging in illicit relationships with two
different women during the subsistence of his
marriage. (Dantes v. Dantes, A.C. No. 6486, September
22, 2004)
4. A lawyer who is a married man with children, taking
advantage of his position as the chairman of the
College of Medicine of his school in enticing a
student in the college to have carnal knowledge with
him under the threat that she would flunk in all her
subjects should she refuse. (Delos Reyes v. Aznar,
Adm. Case No. 1334, November 28, 1989, 179 SCRA 653)
5. The act of having an affair with his client’s wife.
(Tiong v. Florendo, A.C. No. 4428, December 12, 2011)
EXAMPLES OF ACTS WHICH ARE 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)
MORAL TURPITUDE
An act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private
duties which a man owes his fellow men, or to society in
general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of
right and duty between man and woman or conduct
contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals.
(Dela Torre v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 121592, July 5, 1996)
EXAMPLES OF CRIMES INVOLVING MORAL
TURPITUDE
1. Estafa;
2. Bribery;
3. Murder;
4. Bigamy;
5. Seduction;
6. Abduction;
7. Concubinage;
8. Smuggling;
9. Falsification of public documents;
10. Violation of B.P. 22. (Pineda)
CASES:
Respondent’s refusal to marry the complainant was not so
corrupt nor unprincipled as to warrant disbarment. (Arciga
v. Maniwang, A.M. No. 1608, August 14, 1981)
Even though respondent repeatedly engaged in 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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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. (Zaguirre v. Castillo, A.C. No. 4921, March
6, 2003)
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
It is 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. (Linsangan v. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672,
September 4, 2009)
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)
Ratio: To save the client from additional expenses and help
prevent clogging of the docket.
Even assuming 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
8
Green Notes 2019
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. (Agpalo)
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
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.
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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.
Ratio: To allow a lawyer to advertise his talent or skill is to
commercialize the practice of law, lower the profession in
public confidence and lessen its ability to render efficiently
that high character of service to which every member of
the bar is called. (Director of Religious Affairs v. Bayot, A.C.
No. L-1117, March 20, 1944)
Exceptions:
1. Writing legal articles;
2. Publication in reputable law lists, but only of brief
biographical data and informative data;
3. Use of ordinary simple professional cards;
4. The publication of a simple announcement of the
opening of the firm or of changes in the partnership,
associates, firm name or office address;
5. Listing in a telephone directory;
6. Notice to local lawyers and publishing in a legal
journal of his availability to serve other lawyers;
7. Seeking of appointment to public office which can be
filled up only by a lawyer;
8. Activity of an association for the purpose of legal
representation;
9. The offer of free legal services to the indigent even
when broadcasted over the radio. (Agpalo)
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
A lawyer is not authorized to use a name other than the
one inscribed in the Roll of Attorneys in his practice of law.
(Pangan v. Ramos, A.M. No. 1053, September 7, 1979)
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
9
Green Notes 2019
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
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. (Agpalo)
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
While the lawyer’s task in contributing to the improvement
of the legal system is not a matter of strict duty, it is a duty
nonetheless which flows from the lawyer’s sense of public
responsibility. (Pineda)
Examples:
1. Petitions with the SC for amendment or introduction
of the Rules of Court;
2. Presenting position papers or resolutions for the
introduction of pertinent bills in Congress;
3. Asking for exemption from the payment of filing,
docket and other fees of clients (Re: Request of
National Committee on Legal Aid to Exempt Legal Aid
Clients from Paying Filing, Docket and other Fees, A.M.
No. 08-11-7-SC, August 28, 2009)
4. Writing legal publications or books as an avenue of
improving 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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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)
Attorney should familiarize themselves with the rules and
comply with their requirements. They are also chargeable
with notice of changes in the rules which have been held
as including not only express reglementary provisions but
also a regular practice under the Rules of Court. (Zualo v.
CFI of Cebu, CA-G.R. No. 27718-R, July 7, 1961)
THREE-FOLD OBLIGATION OF A LAWYER
1. He owes it to himself to continue improving his
knowledge of the law;
2. He owes it to his profession to take an active interest
in the maintenance of high standards of legal
education; and
3. He owes it to the lay public to make the law a part of
their social consciousness. (Pineda)
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.
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
He is 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. (Suarez v. Platon, G.R. No. 46371,
February 7, 1940, 69 Phil. 556)
RULE 6.02
The 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.
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)
10
Green Notes 2019 Legal Ethics

This restriction covers engagement or employment, which CANON 7: UPHOLDING THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY
means that he cannot accept any work or employment OF THE PROFESSION
from anyone that will involve or relate the matter in which
he intervened as a public official, except on behalf of the RULE 7.01
body or authority which he served during his public Consequences of knowingly making a false statement or
employment. (Comment of IBP that drafted the Code, pp.32- suppression of a material fact in the application for
33) admission to the Bar:
1. If the false statement or suppression of material fact
Government lawyers may leave government service is discovered before the candidate should take the
through retirement, resignation, expiration of term of bar examinations, he will be denied permission to
office, abandonment, and dismissal. take the examinations.
2. If the false statement or suppression of material fact
General Rule: Practice of profession is allowed was discovered after the candidate had passed the
immediately after leaving public service. examinations, but before having taken his oath, he
will not be allowed to take his oath as a lawyer.
Exceptions: The lawyer cannot practice as to matters with 3. If the discovery was made after the candidate had
which he had connection during his term. This prohibition taken his oath as a lawyer, his name will be stricken
lasts: from the Roll of Attorneys. (Pineda)
1. For one year, if he had not intervened;
2. Permanently, if he had intervened. RULE 7.02
A lawyer should aid in guarding the Bar against admission
The Code 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility to the profession of candidates unfit or unqualified for
cannot apply to respondent because his alleged being deficient in either moral character or education.
intervention is an intervention on a matter different from (Canons of Professional Ethics, Canon 29)
the matter involved in the Civil case of sequestration. The
applicable meaning as the term “intervention” is an act of A lawyer who violates Rule 7.02 is liable for disciplinary
a person who has the power to influence the subject action. The act of supporting the application to the Bar of
proceedings. The evil sought to be remedied by the Code any person known to him to be unqualified constitutes
do not exist where the government lawyer does not act gross misconduct in office. (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 27)
which can be considered as innocuous such as “drafting,
enforcing, or interpreting government or agency RULE 7.03
procedures, regulations or laws or briefing abstract The commission of fraud or falsehood in the lawyer’s
principles of law.” private dealings may badly reflect on his fitness to practice
law, and he may administratively disciplined therefor.
The “matter” contemplated are those that are adverse- (Agpalo)
interest conflicts (substantial relatedness and adversity
between the government matter and the new client’s An attorney may be removed, or otherwise disciplined, not
matter in interest) and congruent-interest representation only for malpractice and dishonesty in the profession, but
conflicts. “Intervention” should be significant and also for gross misconduct not connected with his
substantial which can or have affected the interest of professional duties, making him unfit for the office and
others (PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 151809-12, April unworthy of the privileges which his license and the law
12, 2005). confer upon him. Having been tasked to sell such
valuables, Casuga was duty-bound to return them upon
ADVERSE-INTEREST CONGRUENT-INTEREST Nevada’s demand. His failure to do so renders him subject
CONFLICTS REPRESENTATION to disciplinary action. To be sure, he cannot use, as a
CONFLICTS defense, the lack of a lawyer-client relationship as an
It exists where the matter It prohibits lawyers from exonerating factor. (Nevada v. Casuga, A.C. No. 7591, March
in which the former representing a private 20, 2012)
government lawyer practice client even if the
represents a client in interests of the former In disciplinary proceedings against lawyers, the only issue
private practice is government client and the is whether the officer of the court is still fit to be allowed
substantially related to a new client are entirely to continue as a member of the Bar. The only concern is
matter that the lawyer parallel. the determination of respondent’s administrative liability.
dealt with while Furthermore, disciplinary proceedings against lawyers do
employed by the Note: This is unique to not involve a trial of an action, but rather investigations by
government and the government lawyers and the Court into the conduct of one of its officers. The
interests of the current apply primarily to former issuance of checks which were later dishonored for having
and former are adverse. government lawyers. been drawn against a closed account indicates a lawyer’s
(PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, unfitness for the trust and confidence reposed on her.
supra) (Heenan v. Espejo, A.C. No. 10050, April 13, 2013)

CANON 8: COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND CANDOR

TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION
TOWARD PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES
(CANONS 7 TO 9)

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 11

Green Notes 2019
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 face 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, August 25, 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.
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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
husband in a Civil Case 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)
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)
RULE 9.02
A lawyer can only divide or stipulate to divide fees for legal
services with another lawyer who had rendered legal
services with him in a case or legal work. (Pineda)
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 non-
lawyers are also not subject to disciplinary action. (Pineda)
Exceptions to Rule 9.02:
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.
INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES
RULE 139-A
It is composed of all persons whose names appear in the
Roll of Attorneys of the Supreme Court.
Purpose — To elevate the standards of the legal profession,
improve the administration of justice, and enable the Bar
to discharge its public responsibility more effectively.
(Rules of Court, Rule 139-A, Sec. 2)
INTEGRATION OF THE BAR
The IBP means 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
12
Green Notes 2019
and the retention of his name in the Roll of Attorneys of
the Supreme Court. (In the Matter of the Integration of the
Bar of the Philippines, January 9, 1973)
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)
STRUCTURE OF THE IBP
Nine Governors shall be elected by the House of Delegates
from the nine Regions on the representation basis of one
Governor from each Region. Each Governor shall be
chosen from a list of nominees submitted by the Delegates
from the Region, provided that not more than one nominee
shall come from any Chapter. The President and the
Executive Vice President, if chosen by the Governors from
outside of themselves as provided in Section 7 of this Rule,
shall ipso facto become members of the Board. (Rules of
Court, Rule 139-A, Sec. 6)
IBP OFFICERS
1. President;
2. Executive Vice President who shall be chosen by the
Governors immediately after the latter’s election;
either from among themselves or from other
members of the Integrated Bar, by the vote of at least
five Governors. Each of the regional members of the
Board shall be ex officio Vice President for the Region
which he represents;
3. Secretary;
4. Treasurer; and
5. Such other officers and employees as may be
required by the Board of Governors, to be appointed
by the President with the consent of the Board, and
to hold office at the pleasure of the Board or for such
term as it may fix. Said officers and employees need
not be members of the Integrated Bar. (Rules of
Court, Rule 139-A, Sec. 7)
MEMBERSHIP AND DUES
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 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. (Rules
of Court, Rule 139-A, Sec. 9)
Effect of non-payment of dues – Default in the payment
of annual dues for six months shall warrant suspension of
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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. (Rules of Court, Rule 139-A, Sec. 10)
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. (In the Matter of the
Integration of the Bar of the Philippines, supra)
TO THE COURTS (CANONS 10 TO 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)
A lawyer should not conceal the truth from the court, nor
mislead the court in any manner, no matter how
demanding his duties to his clients may be. His duties to
his client should yield to his duty to deal candidly with the
court. For no client is entitled to receive from the lawyer
any service involving dishonesty to the courts. (Comments
of IBP Committee that drafted the Code)
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, March 28, 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);
5. Making it appear that the complaint and reply have
been filed. (Samonte v. Abellana, A.C. No. 3452, June
23, 2014)
RULE 10.02
A lawyer is prohibited from:
1. Knowingly misquoting or misrepresenting ---
a. contents of a paper,
b. language or argument of opposing counsel,
c. text of a decision or authority;
2. Knowingly citing as law, a provision already rendered
inoperative by repeal or amendment; or
3. Asserting as a fact that which has not been proved.
13
Green Notes 2019
When a lawyer makes a quotation of a decision in his
pleadings, he should quote the same verbatim to avoid
misleading the court. (Pineda)
RULE 10.03
This rule is ever timely and should always be inculcated
among lawyers because the rules of procedure offer
innumerable opportunities and means for delay and to
defeat the ends of justice. Procedural rules are
instruments in the speedy and efficient administration of
justice. They should be used to achieve such end and not
to derail it. (Gabriel v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-43757,
July 30, 1976)
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)
RULE 10.04
Reason: To avoid surprises and back-stabbing. Cards of the
lawyers must be laid on the table for openness, candidness
and transparency. (Pineda)
CANON 11: RESPECT FOR COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL
OFFICERS
RULE 11.01
If a lawyer dresses improperly, he may be cited for
contempt. (Agpalo)
Proper Attire for Counsel:
1. Male -Barong Tagalog or a coat and tie;
2. Female – Semi-formal attires
3. Judges – appear in the same attire in addition to
black robes.
RULE 11.02
A lawyer should show respect due the court and judicial
officer by appearing during the trial of a case punctually
and in proper attire. Inexcusable absence from, or
repeated tardiness in, attending a pre-trial or hearing may
not only subject the lawyer to disciplinary action, but may
also prejudice his client who, as a consequence thereof,
may be non-suited, declared in default or adjudged liable
ex parte, as the case may be. (Agpalo)
RULE 11.03
A lawyer who uses intemperate, abusive, abrasive or
threatening language betrays disrespects to the court,
disgraces the Bar and invites the exercise by the court of
its disciplinary power. (Andres v. Cabrera, SBC 585,
February 29, 1984)
A lawyer’s language should be dignified, and in keeping
with the dignity of the legal profession. (Surigao Mineral
Reservation Board v. Cloribel, G.R. No. L-27072, January 9,
1970)
RULE 11.04
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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.
It is the cardinal condition of all such criticism that it shall
be bona fide, and shall not spill over the walls of decency
and propriety. (In the Matter of Proceedings for Disciplinary
Action against Atty. Raul Almacen, G.R. No. L-27654,
February 18, 1970)
Any serious accusation against a judicial officer that is
utterly baseless, unsubstantiated and unjustified shall not
be countenanced. (Go v. Abrogar, G.R. No. 145213, March 28,
2006)
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
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)
A lawyer is not adequately prepred unless he has a mastery
of the facts of his case, the law and jurisprudence
applicable thereto and upon which he can appropriately
anchor his theory or stance. He must have collated every
piece of evidence essential to establish his case and
essential to demolish the pretenses of the opponent’s
theory and capable of presenting and offering his evidence
in an orderly and smooth manner without provoking valid
objections. (Pineda)
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 SHOPPING
The improper practice of going from one court to another
in the hope of securing a favorable relief in one court
14
Green Notes 2019
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
favorable opinion in another forum, other than appeal or
certiorari.
The test to determine forum shopping is whether the
elements of litis pendentia are present or whether a final
judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in the
other. (Heirs of Sotto v. Palicte, G.R. No. 159691, February 17,
2014)
REQUISITES OF LITIS PENDENTIA
1. Identity of parties, or at least such parties represent
the same interests in both actions;
2. Identity of rights asserted and reliefs 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. No. 159590, October 18, 2014)
REQUISITES OF RES JUDICATA
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. (Alejandrino v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 114151, September 17, 1998)
SANCTION FOR THE VIOLATION OF RULE AGAINST
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
Postponement is not a matter of right but a sound judicial
discretion. (Edrial v. Quilat-Quilat, G.R. No. 133625,
September 6, 2000)
Lawyers should never presume that their motion for
extension or postponement will be granted or that they
will be granted the length of time they pray for. (Ramos v.
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
Dajoyag, Jr. Adm. Case No. 5174, February 28, 2002)
RULE 12.04
Where a lawyer uses his opposition to the motion for
execution as a device to reopen the case or delay the
execution of a decision which has long been final and
executory, there is a prima facie violation of this Rule.
(Hoehne v. Plata, MTJ-02-1458, October 10, 2002)
Once a judgment becomes final and executory, the
prevailing party should not be denied the fruits of his
victory by some subterfuge devised by the losing party.
Unjustified delay in the enforcement of a judgment sets at
naught the role of the courts in disposing justiciable
controversies with finality. (Aguilar v. Manila Banking
Corporation, G.R. No. 157911, September 19, 2006)
RULE 12.05
Ratio: To uphold and maintain fair play with the other
party and to prevent the examining lawyer from being
tempted to coach his own witness to suit his purposes.
(Pineda)
RULE 12.06
The witness who commits the misrepresentation or
impersonation is criminally liable for “False Testimony”
either under Arts. 181, 182 or 183 of the Revised Penal Code
depending upon the nature of the case. And the lawyer
who induces a witness to commit the false testimony is
equally guilty as the witness.
The lawyer who presented a witness knowing him to be a
false witness is criminally liable for “Offering False
Testimony in Evidence” under Art. 184 of the Revised Penal
Code. (Pineda)
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 12.07
It is one of the duties of a lawyer to abstain from all
offensive personality and to advance no fact prejudicial to
the honor or reputation of a party or witness unless
required by the justice of the cause with which he is
charged. (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 20 (f))
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. The lawyer will find it hard to
disassociate his relation to his client as an attorney and his
relation to the party as a witness. (Jacobs v. Weissinger, 211
Mich. 47, 178 N.W. 65, 1920)
INSTANCES WHEN A LAWYER IS ALLOWED TO
TESTIFY IN BEHALF OF HIS CLIENT
15
Green Notes 2019
1. On Formal matters, such as the mailing,
authentication or custody of an instrument and the
like; or
2. On Substantial matters, in cases where his testimony
is essential to the ends of justice.
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
Reason: To protect the good name and reputation of the
judge and the lawyer. If a lawyer extends extraordinary
attention or hospitality to a judge (like the opening of the
door of his office or his car, carrying his things in going to
his chambers, lighting his cigarettes, serving him food in
social gathering, spending for his birthday parties and
similar others), will surely lead to misconstructions of
motive on the part of both the judge and the lawyer. (Code
of Professional Ethics, Canon 3)
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
Reason: Newspaper publications by a lawyer concerning a
pending litigation may interfere with a fair trial in court,
prejudice the impartial administration of justice and likely
to create an adverse attitude in the public mind respecting
the alleged actions of the defendants to the pending
proceedings. (Agpalo)
Once a litigation is concluded, the judge who decided it is
subject to the same criticism as any other public official
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)
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. (Re: Request Radio-TV Coverage of the Trial in the
Sandiganbayan of the Plunder Cases against Former
President Joseph Estrada, A.M. No. 01-4-03-SC, September
13, 2001)
RULE 13.03
Reason: A lawyer who brooks or invites interference by
another branch or agency of government in the normal
course of judicial proceedings endangers the
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
independence of the judiciary. (Comments of the IBP
Committee that drafted the Code)
The Rule should be distinguished from Rule 11.05. The
latter rule refers to complaints against judges themselves
which must be coursed to the proper authorities only.
(Pineda)
TO THE CLIENTS (CANONS 14 TO 22)
NATURE OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP
1. Strictly personal;
2. Highly confidential; and
3. Fiduciary.
RETAINER
It refers to the act of a client by which he engages the
services of an attorney to render legal advice, or to defend
or prosecute his cause in court. (Agpalo)
TYPES OF RETAINER
1. General – the purpose of which is to secure
beforehand the services of an attorney for any legal
problem that may afterward arise.
2. Special – a fee for a specific case handled or special
services rendered by the lawyer for a client. (Traders
Royal Bank Employees Union-Independent v. NLRC,
G.R. No. 120592, March 14, 1997)
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 shall not decline, except for serious and
sufficient cause, an appointment as counsel de oficio
or as amicus curiae, or a request from the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines or any of its chapters for
rendition of free legal aid (Rule 14.02); and
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. (R.A. No. 9999 or Free Legal Assistance
Act of 2010)
16
Green Notes 2019
Note: Rule 14.01 is applicable only in criminal cases.
RULE 14.02
A counsel de oficio 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. (Pineda)
An amicus curae means a friend of the court. Experienced
and impartial attorneys may be invited by the Court as
amicus curae to help in the disposition of issued submitted
to it. (Pineda)
As counsel de oficio, the lawyer is duty bound to exert his
best efforts and professional ability in behalf of the person
assigned to his care. (In the Matter of Attorney Lope
Adriano, G.R. No. L-26868, February 27, 1969)
CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH A COUNSEL DE
OFICIO MAY BE APPOINTED
If it appears from the record of the case as transmitted
that:
1. the accused is confined in prison;
2. is without counsel de parte on appeal, or
3. 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)
RULE 14.03
An indigent is:
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)
The Rule allows two exceptions:
1. Lack of competence – if the lawyer is inexperienced
on the nature of the case for which he is being
engaged, he must be open and candid enough to tell
the prospective client about it. It is dangerous for the
client to be represented by someone who is
incompetent.
2. Conflict of Interests – if the lawyer would be
confronted with possible conflict of interests in
accepting a case. Rule 15.03 prohibits
representations of conflicting of interests. (Pineda)
RULE 14.04
If a lawyer accepts a case for a client and the client is
unable to pay the lawyer’s professional fees, he must still
represent the client with utmost fidelity, competence and
diligence. The profession is not a money-raking trade but
a noble involvement in the administration of justice.
(Pineda)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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)
A lawyer will be representing conflicting interests when, in
behalf of the client, it is his duty to contend for that which
duty to another client (previous, present or potential), he
is required to oppose. (Pineda)
The failure of the attorney to disclose his prior
engagement or interest is a good ground for the client to
discharge the attorney. (McArthur v. Fry, 10 Kan. 233)
Note: Rule 15.03 provides the possible exception to the rule
against representing conflicting interests.
RULE 15.02
A confidential communication 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. (Mercado v. Vitriolo,
A.C. No. 5108, May 26, 2005)
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 COMMUNICATION
An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client, be
examined as to any communication made by the client to
him, or his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a
view to, professional employment, nor can an attorney’s
secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the
consent of the client and his employer, concerning any fact
the knowledge of which has been acquired in such
capacity. (Rules of Court, Rule 130, Sec. 24 (b))
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.
(Mercado v. Vitriolo, supra)
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.
17
Green Notes 2019
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)
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. No. 5804, July 1, 2003)
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)
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.
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)
KINDS OF CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
1. Concurrent Representation (Multiple) – occurs
when a lawyer represents clients whose objectives
are adverse to each other, no matter how slight or
remote such adverse interests may be.
2. Sequential Representation (Successive) – occurs
when a law firm takes a present client who has an
interest adverse to the interest of a former client of
the same law firm. (Pineda)
TESTS TO DETERMINE CONFLICT OF INTEREST
(2009 BAR QUESTION)
1. Conflicting duties - 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.
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
2. Invitation of Suspicion – 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. Use of Prior Knowledge Obtained - 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.
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.
Note: 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.
RULE 15.04
Consent in writing is required to prevent future
controversy on the authority of the lawyer to act as
mediator, conciliator or arbitrator. However, a lawyer who
acts as mediator, conciliator or arbitrator in settling a
dispute, cannot represent any of the parties to it. (Report
of the IBP Committee)
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 15.05
It is incumbent upon an attorney to give a candid and
honest opinion on the merits and probable results of his
client’s case with the end in view of promoting respect for
the law and legal processes. (Choa v. Chiongson, Adm.
Matter No. MTJ-95-1063, February 9, 1996)
The Court has repeatedly admonished lawyers from
making bold assurances to their clients. A lawyer who
guarantees the successful outcome of a litigation will exert
heavy pressure and employ any means to win the case at
all costs. But when the case is lost, he will blame the courts,
placing them under a cloud of suspicion. (Mercado v.
Security Bank Corporation, G.R. No. 160445, February 16,
2006)
RULE 15.06
It is improper for a lawyer to show in any way that he has
connections and can influence any tribunal or public
18
Green Notes 2019
official, like justices, judges, prosecutors, congressmen
and others, specially so if the purpose is to enhance his
legal standing and to entrench the confidence of the client
that his case or cases are assured of victory. (Pineda)
Lawyers must be reminded that “the practice of law does
not include influence-peddling.” (Report of IBP Committee)
RULE 15.07
The rule 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)
A lawyer who advised his client not to obey the order of
the court is guilty of contempt and misconduct. (Conge v.
Deret, CA- G.R. No. 08848-CR, March 25, 1974)
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)
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, Adm. Case No.
2040, March 4, 1998)
CANON 16: CLIENT’S MONEYS AND PROPERTIES
RULE 16.01
Ratio: The lawyer merely holds said money or property in
trust.
OBLIGATIONS OF A LAWYER UNDER RULE 16.01
1. When a lawyer collects or receives money from his
client for a particular purpose, he should promptly
account to the client how the money was spent.
2. If he does not use the money for its intended
purpose, he must immediately return it to the client.
3. A lawyer has the duty to deliver his client’s funds or
properties as they fall due or upon demand. (Trenas
v. People, G.R. No. 195002, January 25, 2012)
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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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)
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).
RULE 16.02
Reason: To prevent confusion and possible
misappropriation of funds and properties, and appearance
of impropriety. If the funds are kept in a separate account,
the temptation to convert them to personal use is one step
removed. (Report of IBP Committee)
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)
RULE 16.03
A lawyer’s failure to return upon demand the funds held by
him on behalf of his client gives rise to the presumption
that he has appropriated the same for his own use in
violation of the trust reposed in him by his client. Such act
is a gross violation of general morality as well as of
professional ethics. It impairs public confidence in the
legal profession and deserves punishment. (Dhaliwal v.
Dumaguing, A.C. No. 9390, August 1, 2012)
CHARGING LIEN
It is the right which the attorney has upon all judgments
for the payment of money and executions issued in
pursuance of said judgments, which he has secured in a
litigation of his client. (Rustia v. Abeto, G.R. No. 47914, April
30, 1941)
To enforce a charging lien, it is necessary that the lawyer
shall have caused a statement of such lien to be entered
upon the records of the court which rendered the
favorable judgment with written notice to the client and to
the adverse party. (Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 37)
RULE 16.04
A lawyer, who as guardian, borrowed money for his benefit
using the property of the ward as collateral without court
approval is guilty of misconduct. (In Re: Pelayo, 44 Phil. 569)
A lawyer’s act of asking a client for a loan, as what
respondent did, and her failure to pay the same, is very
unethical. (Frias v. Lozada, 477 SCRA 393)
PROHIBITIONS UNDER RULE 16.04
1. A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client.
19
Green Notes 2019
Reason: To prevent the lawyer from taking advantage of
his influence over the client. (Junio v. Grupo, Adm. Case No.
5020, December 18, 2001)
Exception: The lawyer is allowed to borrow money from
his client provided the interests of the client are fully
protected by the nature of the case or by independent
advice. (Rule 16.04)
Example: A lawyer may borrow money from a client bank,
because the client’s interests are fully protected by the
bank’s rules and regulations. (Pineda)
2. A lawyer shall not lend money to a client.
Reason: To assure the lawyer’s independent professional
judgment. If the lawyer acquires a financial interest in the
outcome of the case, the free exercise of his judgment may
be adversely affected. (Report of IBP Committee)
Exception: The lawyer may lend money to a client, when it
is necessary in the interest of justice to advance necessary
expenses in a legal matter he is handling for the client,
subject to reimbursement. (Pineda)
CANON 17: FIDELITY TO CLIENT’S CAUSE
Reason: Fidelity to the cause of the client is the essence of
the legal profession. Without this fidelity, the profession
will not survive, for in the long run, no one will engage any
lawyer anymore. (Pineda)
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
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
Diligence is the attention and care required of a person in
a given situation and is the opposite of negligence. It is
axiomatic in the practice of law that the price of success is
eternal diligence to the cause of the client (Edquibal v.
Ferrer, A.C. No. 5687, February 3, 2005)
The competence referred to in the Canon goes beyond
formal qualification of the lawyer to practice law. It has to
do with sufficiency of the lawyer’s qualifications to deal
with the matter in question and includes knowledge and
skill and the ability to use them efficiently in the interest
of the client. (Report of IBP Committee)
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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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)
RULE 18.01
When a lawyer accepts a case, his acceptance is an implied
representation that he possesses the requisite academic
learning, skill and ability to handle the case. The lawyer has
the duty to exert his best judgment in the prosecution or
defense of the case entrusted to him and to exercise
reasonable and ordinary care and diligence in the pursuit
or defense of the case. (Pariñas vs. Paguinto, A.C. No. 6297,
July 13, 2004)
General Rule: A lawyer should not accept a case, which he
knows or should know he is not qualified to render.
Exception: If his client consents, the lawyer can take as
collaborating counsel another lawyer who is competent on
the matter.
A collaborating counsel is one who is subsequently
engaged to assist a lawyer already handling a particular
case for a client. When a case is complicated, it is not
unusual for the handling lawyer to suggest to the client to
allow him to take another lawyer to assist or collaborate
with him in the case. (Pineda)
RULE 18.02
The adequate preparation required of the lawyer in the
handling of a case covers a wide dimension in law practice.
It includes:
1. Sufficient knowledge of the law and jurisprudence;
2. Ability in trial technique; and
3. High proficiency in the formulation of pleadings.
(Pineda)
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)
RULE 18.03
When a lawyer takes a client’s cause, he covenants that he
will exercise due diligence in protecting the latter’s rights.
Failure to exercise that degree of vigilance and attention
expected of a good father of a family makes the lawyer
unworthy of the trust reposed on him by his client and
makes him answerable not just to his client but also to the
legal profession, the courts and society. His workload does
20
Green Notes 2019
not justify neglect in handling one’s case because it is
settled that a lawyer must only accept cases as much as he
can efficiently handle. (Del Mundo v. Capistrano, A.C. No.
6903, April 16, 2012)
Lawyer's neglect of a legal matter entrusted to him by his
client constitutes inexcusable negligence which merits
administrative liability. (Agot v. Rivera, A.C. No. 8000,
August 5, 2014)
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)
RULE 18.04
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)
A lawyer has the duty to apprise his client of the status and
developments of the case and all other relevant
information. Respondent cannot justify his noncompliance
by shifting the blame to complainant for failing to meet
with him, especially so that he failed to inform his client of
the pleadings she needed to sign. (Sison v. Valdez, A.C. No.
11663, July 31, 2017)
As an officer of the court, it is the duty of an attorney to
inform his client of whatever information he may have
acquired which it is important that the client should have
knowledge of. He should notify his client of any adverse
decision to enable his client to decide whether to seek an
appellate review thereof. Keeping the client informed of
the developments of the case will minimize
misunderstanding and loss of trust and confidence in the
attorney. Indeed, the relationship of lawyer-client being
one of confidence, there is ever present the need for the
lawyer to inform timely and adequately the client of
important developments affecting the client’s case. The
lawyer should not leave the client in the dark on how the
lawyer is defending the client’s interests. (Mejares v.
Romana, A.C. No. 6196, March 17, 2004)
CANON 19: REPRESENTATION WITH ZEAL AND LEGAL
BOUNDS
A lawyer owes “entire devotion to the interest of the client,
warm zeal in the maintenance and defense of his rights and
the exertion of his utmost learning ability,” to the end that
nothing be taken or be withheld from him, save by the rules
of law, legally applied. (Pineda)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
RULE 19.01
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)
RULE 19.02
As a lawyer, he 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)
A lawyer should use his best efforts to restrain and to
prevent his client from perpetrating acts which he himself
out not to do, particularly with reference to their conduct
towards courts, judicial officers, witnesses. If the client
persists in such wrongdoings, the lawyer should terminate
their relation. (Canons of Professional Ethics, Canon 16)
A lawyer should not allow his client to perpetrate fraud.
However, the lawyer shall not volunteer the information
concerning the client’s commission of fraud to anyone for
that will run counter to his duty to maintain at all times the
client’s confidences and secrets. (Canons of Professional
Ethics, Canon 21)
RULE 19.03
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)
CONTROL OVER THE CASE
1. As to matters of procedure - it is the client who
yields to the lawyer and not the lawyer yielding to
the client. The lawyer must not accede, but instead
must resist his client’s unlawful requests or
instructions. (Crespo v. Amurao, Adm. Case No. 109,
August 24, 1954)
Reason: The lawyer is trained and skilled in the law. The
client has no knowledge of procedure.
2. As to the subject matter of the case – it is the client.
When the client’s requests are proper and lawful, the
lawyer has the duty to oblige. Thus, on matters of
compromise, the client’s instructions are generally
followed. The decision to settle or not to settle belongs to
the client, although the lawyer is urged to encourage his
clients to avoid, end, or settle the controversy if it will
admit of a fair settlement. The client decides whether to
21
Green Notes 2019
appeal or not to appeal an adverse decision. If he decides
not to appeal, the lawyer must not insist otherwise.
(Pineda, 2009)
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
Basis: The fact of employment as lawyer by the client
constitutes the legal basis of the lawyer’s right to demand
payment for his services. No formal contract is necessary
to effectuate employment. (Pineda)
The requisites for the accrual of attorney’s fees are:
1. Existence of attorney-client relationship; and
2. Rendition by the lawyer of services to the client.
(Agpalo)
RULE 20.01
There are two concepts of attorney’s fees:
1. Ordinary Concept – the reasonable compensation
paid to a lawyer for the legal services he has
rendered to the latter.
2. Extraordinary Concept – the amount of damages
which the court may award to be paid by the losing
party to the prevailing party. (Agpalo)
PROPER TIME FOR FIXING ATTORNEY’S FEES
The proper time for fixing the attorney’s fees is at the
commencement of the lawyer-client relationship. (De
Fajardo v. Bugaring, A.C. No. 5113, October 7, 2004)
ACCEPTANCE 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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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.
CONTINGENCY FEE ARRANGEMENTS
It is not prohibited by law and is impliedly sanctioned. It is,
however, closely supervised by the court to safeguard the
client from unjust charges or abuse on the part of his
counsel. (Licudan v. CA, G.R. No. 91958, January 24, 1991)
A contingent fee contract is generally valid and binding,
unless it is obtained by fraud, imposition or suppression of
facts, or the fee is so clearly excessive as to amount to an
extortion. (Ulanday v. Manila Railroad Co., Nos. 20117-
20130, December 20, 1923)
If under the circumstances f the case, the court finds that
the contingent fee is unconscionable, it will disregard the
contract and fix the reasonable compensation for services
rendered on quantum meruit basis. (Amalgamated Laborers
Association v. CIR, No. L-23467, March 27, 1968)
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)
CHAMPERTOUS CONTRACT
It is an agreement whereby an attorney undertakes to pay
the expenses of the proceedings to enforce the client’s
rights in exchange for some bargain to have a part of the
thing in dispute. (Baltazar v. Bañez, A.C. No. 9091, December
11, 2013)
CONTINGENT CHAMPERTOUS
Payable in cash Payable in kind only
Lawyers do not Lawyers undertake to pay
undertake to pay all all expenses of litigation
expenses of litigation
Valid Void
(Pineda)
KINDS OF RETAINER AGREEMENT
22
Green Notes 2019 Legal Ethics

Lawful possession of Securing of a favorable

1. 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.
2. 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.
ATTORNEY’S LIENS
A retaining lien is a passive lien and may not be actively
enforced. It amounts to a mere right to retain the papers
as against the client until the lawyer is fully paid. (Pineda)
REQUISITES OF A RETAINING LIEN
In order that the exercise of a retaining lien may be valid:
1. Existence of client-lawyer relationship;
2. The claims for attorney’s fees are not satisfied; and
3. That counsel is in possession of the subject papers,
documents and funds.
Note: The possession must be lawful otherwise, the lawyer
cannot exercise his right to a retaining lien. (Pineda, supra)
A charging lien is an equitable right to have the fees and
lawful disbursements due a lawyer for his services in a suit
secured to him out of judgment for the payment of money
and executions issued in pursuance thereof in a particular
suit. (Agpalo)
REQUISITES OF A CHARGING LIEN
In order that the exercise of a charging lien may be valid:
1. Existence of client-lawyer 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; and
5. A statement of his claim has been duly recorded in
the case with notice thereof served upon the client
and the adverse party. (Agpalo)
RETAINING LIEN CHARGING LIEN
Nature
Passive Lien. Active Lien.
It cannot be actively It can be enforced by
enforced. It is a general execution. It is a special
lien. lien.
Basis
papers, documents, and money judgment for the
property belonging to the client.
client.
Coverage
Covers papers, Covers all judgments for
documents, and the payment of money
properties in the lawful and execution issued in
possession of the pursuance of such
attorney by reason of his judgment; proceeds of
professional judgment in favor of
employment. client; proceeds of
compromise settlement.
Effectivity
As soon as the attorney As soon as the claim for
gets possession of the attorney’s fees had been
papers, documents, or entered into the records
property. of the case.
Notice
Client need not be Notice must be served
notified to make it upon client and adverse
effective. party.
Applicability
May be exercised before Generally, exercisable
judgment or execution or only when the attorney
regardless thereof. had already secured a
favorable judgment for
his client.
Extinguishment
When possession lawfully When the client loses the
ends, as when the lawyer action as the lien may
voluntarily parts with the only be enforced against a
funds, documents and judgment awarded in
papers, but NOT when favor of the client, the
the documents have been proceeds thereof or
improperly or illegally executions thereof.
taken from lawyer’s (Pineda and Agpalo)
custody.
FEES AND CONTROVERSIES WITH CLIENTS
Lawyer should avoid controversies over fees with this
client and should try to settle amicably any differences on
the subject. (Report of IBP Committee)
A lawyer shall not, without the full knowledge and consent
of the client, accept any fee, reward, costs, commission,
interest, rebate or forwarding allowances or other
compensation whatsoever related to his professional
employment from anyone other than the client. (Rule
20.03)
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
"controversies 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)

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 23

Green Notes 2019
QUANTUM MERUIT
It means as much as the lawyer deserves or such amount
which his services merit. The recovery of attorney’s fees
based on quantum meruit is authorized:
1. When there is no express contract for payment of
attorney’s fees;
2. When although there is a formal contract for
attorney’s fees, the fees stipulated are found
unconscionable or unreasonable by the court;
3. When the contract for attorney’s fees is void die to
purely formal defects of execution;
4. When the lawyer, for justifiable cause, was not able
to finish the case to its conclusion;
5. When the lawyer and the client disregard the
contract for attorney’s fees; and
6. When the client dismissed his counsel before the
termination of the case or the latter withdrew
therefrom for valid reasons. (Agpalo)
The doctrine of quantum meruit is a device to prevent
undue enrichment based on the equitable postulate that it
is unjust for a person to retain benefit without paying for
it. (Traders Royal Bank Employees Union-Independent v.
NLRC, G.R. No. 120592. March 14, 1997)
GUIDES IN DETERMINING ATTORNEY’S FEES ON
QUANTUM MERUIT BASIS
1. Time spent and extent of the services rendered or
required;
2. Novelty and difficulty of questions involved;
3. Importance of subject matter;
4. Skill demanded of a lawyer;
5. Probability of losing other employment;
6. Customary charges for similar services and schedule
of fees of IBP;
7. Amount involved in the controversy and benefits
resulting to the client from the service;
8. Contingency or certainty of compensation;
9. Character of employment, whether occasional or
established’
10. Professional standing of the lawyer. (Rule 20.01)
In the determination of the reasonableness of a lawyer’s
attorney’s fees anchored on the factors enumerated in the
Rule, full-blown trial is necessarily needed because the
factors must be established by evidence. (Metropolitan
Bank and Trust Co. v. CA, G.R. Nos. 86100-03, January 23,
1990)
RULE 20.02
Under the lawyer-referral system, if another counsel is
referred to the client, and the latter agrees to take him as
collaborating counsel, and there is no express agreement
on the payment of his attorney’s fees, the said counsel (or
substituting counsel, if the first lawyer withdraws) will
receive attorney’s fees in proportion to the work
performed and responsibility assumed. The proportion
may be agreed upon by the lawyers and the client. In case
of disagreement, the court may fix the proportional
division of fees. (Pineda, 2009)
If the lawyers were engaged at different stages of the case,
and there are no specific contracts executed, the lawyer
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
who bore the brunt of the prosecution of the case to its
successful end is entitled to the full amount of his fees
despite the fact that the client has retained another lawyer
as “exclusive” counsel who appeared only after the
rendition of a favorable judgment. (Cruz v. CIR, G.R. No.
18277, August 31, 1963)
It is improper for a lawyer to receive any compensation for
merely recommending another lawyer to his client and
render no legal service at all in the pursuit or defense of
the client’s case. This practice if allowed and abetted, will
commercialize the legal profession for the recommending
lawyers will be acting like “agents” for the others. (Pineda,
supra)
RULE 20.03
Ratio: To secure the fidelity of the lawyer to his clients’
cause.
There should be no room for suspicion on the part of the
client that his lawyer is receiving compensation in
connection with the case from third persons with hostile
interests. (Report of IBP Committee)
The only exception whereby a lawyer may receive
compensation from a person other than his client is when
the latter has full knowledge and approval thereof. (Rules
of Court, Rule 138, Sec. 20 (e))
RULE 20.04
Lawyer should avoid controversies over fees with this
client and should try to settle amicably any differences on
the subject. (Report of IBP Committee)
Exceptions:
1. To prevent imposition;
2. To prevent fraud;
3. To prevent injustice.
JUDICIAL ACTIONS TO RECOVER ATTORNEY’S FEES
1. In the same case – he may enforce his attorney’s fees
by filing an appropriate motion or petition as an
incident in the main action where he rendered legal
services. (Lichauco v. CA, G.R. No. L-23842, March 13,
1975)
2. In a separate civil action.
With respect to the first situation, the remedy for
recovering attorney’s fees as an incident of the main action
may be availed of only when something is due to the client.
Attorney’s fees cannot be determined until after the main
litigation has been decided and the subject of the recovery
is at the disposition of the court. The issue over attorney’s
fees only arises when something has been recovered from
which the fee is to be paid.
While a claim for attorney’s fees may be filed before the
judgment is rendered, the determination as to the
propriety of the fees or as to the amount thereof will have
to be held in abeyance until the main case from which the
lawyer’s claim for attorney’s fees may arise has become
final. Otherwise, the determination to be made by the
courts will be premature. Of course, a petition for
attorney’s fees may be filed before the judgment in favor of
24
Green Notes 2019
the client is satisfied or the proceeds thereof delivered to
the client. (Rosario v. De Guzman, G.R. No. 191247, July 10,
2013)
CANON 21: PRESERVATION OF CLIENT’S
CONFIDENCES
Rationale of the Canon: The reason of the lawyer-client
privilege is to encourage and inspire clients to tell all about
the facts of their cases. Unless the clients are so assured
that what they disclose to their lawyers will not be
revealed to third persons, they will keep and suppress
matters which they consider unfavorable to them such
that the edited facts presented will be distorted and the
legal advice proffered thereon will become misleading and
inaccurate. Trial may even be conducted along false lines
or theories, and this will open the lawyer to damaging
surprises which may be too late to correct. Such surprises
could be avoided if the clients could candidly tell all
without suppression of facts from the start. (Pineda, 2009)
“Confidence” refers to information protected by the
attorney-client privilege under the Revised Rules of Court.
(Report of IBP Committee)
“Secret” refers to other information gained in the
professional relationship that the client has requested to
be held inviolate or disclosure of which would be
embarrassing or would likely be detrimental to the client.
(Id.)
RULE 21.01
General Rule: A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or
secrets of his client.
Exceptions:
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. He may disclose the affairs of a client of the firm to
partners or associates thereof unless prohibited by
the client.
Ratio for Strict Prohibition: A lawyer becomes familiar
with all the facts connected with his client’s case. He learns
from his client the weak points of the action as well as the
strong ones. Such knowledge must be considered sacred
and guarded with care. No opportunity must be given him
to take advantage of the client’s secrets. (Maturan v.
Gonzales, A.C. No. 2597, March 12, 1998)
RULE 21.02
If the lawyer makes the prohibited disclosure – that is, the
revelation does not fall under any of the exceptions – he
will be subjected to disciplinary action for breach of trust.
(Pineda)
RULE 21.03
Ratio: The work product of a lawyer, such as his effort,
research and thought and the records of his client,
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
contained in his files are privileged matters. (People v. Sy
Juco, G.R. No. L-41957, August 28, 1937)
RULE 21.04
The rule is that professional employment of a law firm is
equivalent to the retainer of the members thereof even
though only one of them is consulted; conversely, the
employment of one member of a law firm is generally
considered as employment of the law firm. (Hilado v.
David, G.R. No. L-961, September 21, 1949)
In a law firm, partners or associates usually consult one
another involving their cases and some work as a team.
Consequently, it cannot be avoided that some information
about the case received from the client may be disclosed
to the partners or associates. (Pineda)
RULE 21.05
The lawyer is obliged to exercise care in selecting and
training his employees so that the sanctity of all
confidences and secrets of his clients may be preserved.
(Report of IBP Committee)
RULE 21.06
Reason: To better preserve the client’s confidences and
secrets. (Agpalo)
A lawyer must not only preserve the confidences and
secrets of his clients in his law office but also outside
including his home. He should avoid committing
calculated indiscretion, that is, accidental revelation of
secrets obtained in his professional employment. Reckless
or imprudent disclosure of the affairs of his clients may
jeopardize them. Not every member of the lawyer’s family
has the proper orientation and training for keeping client’s
confidences and secrets. (Pineda)
RULE 21.07
Reason: The disclosure and the lawyer’s opinion create an
attorney-client relationship, even though the lawyer does
not eventually accept the employment. (Hilado v. David,
supra)
CANON 22: WITHDRAWAL OF SERVICES
The attorney-client relationship may be terminated by the:
1. Act of the client;
2. Act of the attorney;
3. Death of the client;
4. Death of the attorney; or
5. 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
25
Green Notes 2019
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)
RULE 22.01
Appearance refers to the act of submitting or presenting
oneself to the court, either as plaintiff or defendant,
personally or through counsel, and seeking general reliefs
or special reliefs from the court. (Pineda)
CASES WHEN LAWYER MAY WITHDRAW
1. Client pursuing an illegal or immoral course of
conduct;
2. Client’s insistence that lawyer pursues acts violative
of the canons and rules;
3. Inability of lawyer to work with co-counsel;
4. Mental and physical inability of counsel to handle
case effectively;
5. Client’s deliberate failure to pay attorney’s fees
agreed upon;
6. Election or appointment of lawyer to public office;
7. Other similar cases.
Note: The enumeration is not exclusive.
RULE 22.02
The following are the duties of a discharged lawyer or one
who withdraws:
1. He must immediately turn over all papers and
property to which the client is entitled; and
2. He shall cooperate with the succeeding lawyer in the
orderly transfer of the case.
Note: The turnover of all papers and property is subject to
the lawyer’s retainer lien.
SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND
DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS
The practice of law is not a right, but a privilege bestowed
by the State upon those who show that they possess, and
continue to possess, the qualifications required by law for
the conferment of such privilege. Membership in the bar is
a privilege burdened with conditions. (Alcantara v. De Vera,
A.C. No. 5859, November 23, 2010)
PURPOSE OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
1. To ascertain if a lawyer, in view of the imputed
misconduct, still possess the qualifications which are
conditions precedent for the continuous practice of
law;
2. To deter others from similar misconduct;
3. To protect the court and the public from the
misbehavior of its officers;
4. To safeguard the administration of justice from
incompetence and dishonesty of lawyers;
5. To preserve the purity of the legal profession.
(Agpalo)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
FORMS OF DISCIPLINARY MEASURES
1. Warning – an act of fact of putting one on his guard
against an impending danger, evil consequences or
penalties;
2. Admonition – refers to a gentle or friendly reproof,
mild, rebuke, warning or reminder, counselling, on a
fault, error or oversight, an expression of
authoritative advice or warning;
3. 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. It is
more than just a warning or an admonition. (Tobias v.
Veloso,
4. Suspension – temporary withholding of the lawyer’s
privilege to practice his profession for a certain
period, or for an indefinite period of time.
a. Definite
b. Indefinite – qualified disbarment. The lawyer
determines for himself how short or how long
his suspension shall last by proving to court
that he is once again fit to resume practice of
law.
5. Interim Suspension – the temporary suspension of
a lawyer from the practice of law pending imposition
of final discipline. It includes:
a. Suspension upon conviction of a serious crime;
b. Suspension when the lawyer’s continuing
conduct is likely to cause immediate and
serious injury to a client or public
6. Censure – official reprimand;
7. Disbarment – act of the Supreme Court in
withdrawing from an attorney the privilege to
practice law. The name of the lawyer is stricken out
from the Roll of Attorneys;
8. Probation – a sanction that allows a lawyer to
practice law under specified conditions; (Pineda)
QUANTUM OF PROOF
In administrative cases for disbarment or suspension
against 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, November 11, 2004)
NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS OF
DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS AGAINST
LAWYERS
SUI GENERIS IN NATURE
A case of suspension or disbarment is sui generis and not
meant to grant relief to a complainant as in a civil case, but
is intended to cleanse the ranks of the legal profession of
its undesirable members in order to protect the public and
the courts. (Alicias, Jr. v. Baclig, A.C. No. 9919, July 19, 2017)
Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers are sui generis.
They are distinct from and may proceed independently of
civil and criminal cases. It is:
1. Neither purely civil nor purely criminal, they are
investigations by the Court into the conduct of its
officers.
26
Green Notes 2019
2. Not a civil action because there is neither plaintiff
nor respondent. Public interest is its primary
objective and involves no private interest;
3. Not a criminal prosecution because it is not intended
to inflict punishment. The real question for
determination is whether or not the attorney is still
a fit person to be allowed the privileges as such. (In
Re Almacen, G.R. No. L-27654, February 18, 1970)
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)
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. (Rules of Court, Rule 139, Sec. 10)
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)
MAY BE INITIATED MOTU PROPRIO
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)
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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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)
GROUNDS
The following are specific grounds for suspension or
disbarment of a lawyer under the Rules:
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 oath of office;
6. Willful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior
court;
7. Corrupt or willful appearance as an attorney for a
party to a case without authority to do so. (Rules of
Court, Rule 138, Sec. 27)
Note: The enumeration of the statutory grounds for
suspension or disbarment of a lawyer is not exclusive.
Question: May a lawyer be disbarred for causes other than
those mentioned in the statute? When? (1977 Bar)
Held: YES. It is already a settled rule that the statutory
enumeration of the grounds for disbarment or suspension
is not to be taken as a limitation on the general power of
courts to suspend or disbar a lawyer. The inherent powers
of the court over its officers cannot be restricted.
(Quingwa v. Puno, A.C. No. 389, February 28, 1967)
DECEIT
It is a fraudulent and deceptive misrepresentation, artifice,
or device, used by one or more persons to deceive and
trick another, who is ignorant of the true facts, to the
prejudice and damage of the party imposed upon.
To constitute deceit, the statement must be untrue, made
with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless and conscious
ignorance thereof. (Black’s Law Dictionary)
MALPRACTICE OR OTHER GROSS MISCONDUCT
Malpractice refers to any malfeasance or dereliction of
duty committed by a lawyer. (Tan Tek Beng, Adm. Case No.
1261, December 29, 1983)
27
Green Notes 2019
1. Legal Malpractice – consists of failure of an attorney
to use such skill, prudence and diligence as lawyers
of ordinary skill and capacity commonly possess and
exercise in performance of tasks which they
undertake, and when such failure proximately causes
damage it gives rise to an action in tort. (Black’s Law
Dictionary)
2. Gross Misconduct – any inexcusable, shameful or
flagrant unlawful conduct on the part of the persons
concerned in the administration of justice which is
prejudicial to the rights of the parties or to the right
determination of a cause, a conduct that is generally
motivated by a premeditated, obstinate or
intentional purpose. (Yumol, Jr. vs. Ferrer, Sr, A.C. No.
6585, April 21, 2005)
PROCEEDINGS (RULE 139-B, RULES OF
COURT, AS AMENDED)
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.
BAR MATTER NO. 1960 (MAY 1, 2000)
AMENDMENT OF SEC. 1, RULE 139-B OF THE
REVISED RULES OF COURT
Proceedings for disbarment, suspension or discipline of
attorneys may be taken by the:
1. Supreme Court motu proprio; or
2. Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) upon the
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.
COMPLAINT
The complaint must be:
1. Verified;
2. The facts complained of must be stated clearly and
concisely;
3. Supported by affidavits of the persons having
personal knowledge of the facts alleged and/or by
such documents as may substantiate it; and
4. Six copies 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. (B.M.
No. 1960, Sec. 1)
PROCEDURE FOR DISBARMENT IN THE IBP
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
1. The Board of Governors shall appoint from among
the IBP members an investigator or when special
circumstances so warrant, a panel of 3 investigators
to investigate the complaint;
2. If the complaint is meritorious, the respondent shall
be served with a copy requiring him to answer within
15 days from service.
3. The respondent shall file a verified answer
containing the original and five (5) legible copies;
4. After receipt of the answer or lapse of the period to
do so, the Supreme Court, may, motu proprio or at
the instance of the IBP Board of Governors, upon
recommendation by the investigator, suspend an
attorney from practice, for any of the causes under
Rule 138, Sec. 27, during the pendency of the
investigation
5. After joinder of the issues or failure to answer, the
respondent shall be given full opportunity to defend
himself. But if the respondent fails to appear to
defend himself in spite of notice, the investigator
may proceed ex parte. The investigation shall be
terminated within 3 months from commencement
unless extended for good cause by the Board of
Governors upon prior application.
6. The investigator shall submit a report to the IBP
Board of Governors within 30 days from termination
of the investigation which report shall contain his
findings and recommendations together with the
stenographic notes and transcript and all the
evidence presented during such investigation.
7. The Board of Governors shall have the power to
review the decision of the investigator. Its decision
shall be promulgated within a period not exceeding
30 days from the next meeting of the Board following
the submittal of the Investigator’s report.
a. If the Board, by the vote of a majority of its total
membership, determines that the respondent
should be suspended from the practice of law
or disbarred, it shall issue a resolution setting
forth its findings and recommendations which,
together with the whole record of the case,
shall forthwith be transmitted to the Supreme
Court for final action.
b. If the respondent is exonerated by the Board or
the disciplinary sanction imposed by it is less
than suspension or disbarment (such as
admonition, reprimand, or fine) it shall issue a
decision exonerating respondent or imposing
such sanction. The case shall be deemed
terminated unless upon petition of the
complainant or other interested party filed
with the Supreme Court within fifteen (15) days
from notice of the Board’s resolution, the
Supreme Court orders otherwise. (Rules of
Court, Rule 139-B, as amended by B.M. 1645,
October 1, 2015)
PROCEDURE FOR DISBARMENT BEFORE THE
SUPREME COURT
1. In proceedings initiated motu proprio by the
Supreme Court or in other proceeding when the
interest of justice so requires, the Supreme Court
may refer the case for investigation to the Solicitor
General or to any officer of the Supreme Court or
judge of a lower court, in which case the
28
Green Notes 2019
investigation shall proceed in the same manner
provided in Sections 6 to 11 of Rule 139-B, RRC, save
that the review of the report of investigation shall be
conducted directly by the Supreme Court. (Rules of
Court, Rule 139-B, Sec. 13)
2. Based upon the evidence adduced at the
investigation, the Solicitor General or other
Investigator designated by the Supreme Court shall
submit to the Supreme Court a report containing his
findings of fact and recommendations together with
the record and all the evidence presented in the
investigation for the final action of the Supreme
Court. (Rules of Court, Rule 139-B, Sec. 14)
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES IN DISBARMENT
1. Good faith in the acquisition of a property of the
client subject of litigation;
2. Inexperience of the lawyer;
3. Age;
4. Apology;
5. Lack of intention to slight or offend the Court
(Pineda)
6. Absence of prior disciplinary record;
7. Absence of dishonest or selfish motive;
8. Personal or emotional problems;
9. Timely good faith effort to make restitution or to
rectify consequences of misconduct;
10. Full and free disclosure to disciplinary board or
cooperative attitude toward the proceedings;
11. Character or reputation;
12. Physical or mental disability or impairment;
13. Delay in disciplinary proceedings;
14. Interim rehabilitation;
15. Imposition of other penalties or sanctions;
16. Remorse;
17. Remoteness of prior offenses. (IBP Guidelines 9.32)
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES IN DISBARMENT
1. Prior disciplinary offenses;
2. Dishonest or selfish motive;
3. A pattern of misconduct;
4. Multiple offenses;
5. Bad faith obstruction of the disciplinary proceeding
by intentionally failing to comply with rules or orders
of the disciplinary agency;
6. Submission of false evidence, false statements, or
other deceptive practices during the disciplinary
process;
7. Refusal to acknowledge wrongful nature of conduct;
8. Vulnerability of victim;
9. Substantial experience in the practice of law;
10. Indifference to making restitution. (IBP Guidelines
9.22).
RECOVERABLE AMOUNTS;
INTRINSICALLY LINKED TO
PROFESSIONAL ENGAGEMENT
The Court cannot order the lawyer to return money to
complainant if he or she acted in a private capacity
because its findings in administrative cases have no
bearing on liabilities which have no intrinsic link to the
lawyer’s professional engagement. In disciplinary
proceedings against lawyers, the only issue is whether the
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
officer of the court is still fit to be allowed to continue as a
member of the Bar. The only concern of the Court is the
determination of respondent’s administrative liability. Its
findings have no material bearing on other judicial actions
which the parties may choose against each other. (Foster v.
Agtang, A.C. No. 10579, December 10, 2014)
READMISSION TO THE BAR
REINSTATEMENT
In disbarment proceedings, reinstatement means the
restoration to a disbarred lawyer, the privilege to practice
law. It is nothing more than readmission to membership in
the Bar. (Pineda)
The Supreme Court has the exclusive authority to
reinstate a disbarred or indefinitely suspended lawyer to
the office of attorney-at-law. It may reinstate him for
reasons and upon assurances satisfactory to the court. (In
re Adriatico, No. 2532, November 17, 1910, 17 Phil 324)
The court’s authority to reinstate, like the power to admit
a person to the bar or to remove one therefrom, stems
from its constitutional prerogative to issue rules and
regulations concerning the admission to the practice of
law. (1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5 (5))
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN
SUSPENDED
LIFTING OF SUSPENSION IS NOT AUTOMATIC
The lifting of a lawyer’s suspension is not automatic upon
the end of the period stated in the Court’s decision, and an
order from the Court lifting the suspension at the end of
the period is necessary in order to enable [him] to resume
the practice of his profession. Thus, according to the OBC,
a suspended lawyer must first present proof(s) of his
compliance by submitting certifications from the IBP and
from the Executive Judge that he has indeed desisted from
the practice of law during the period of suspension.
Thereafter, the Court, after evaluation, and upon a
favorable recommendation from the OBC, will issue a
resolution lifting the order of suspension and thus allow
him to resume the practice of law. (Maniago v. De Dios, A.C.
No. 7472, March 30, 2010)
GUIDELINES IN LIFTING AN ORDER OF SUSPENCION
The following guidelines shall be observed in the matter of
the lifting of an order suspending a lawyer from the
practice of law:
1. After a finding that respondent lawyer must be
suspended from the practice of law, the Court shall
render a decision imposing the penalty;
2. Unless the Court explicitly states that the decision is
immediately executory upon receipt thereof,
respondent has 15 days within which to file a motion
for reconsideration thereof. The denial of said
motion shall render the decision final and executory;
3. Upon expiration of the period of suspension,
respondent shall file a Sworn Statement with the
Court, through the Office of the Bar Confidant,
stating therein that he or she has desisted from the
29
Green Notes 2019
practice of law and has not appeared in any court
during the period of his or her suspension;
4. Copies of the Sworn Statement shall be furnished to
the Local Chapter of the IBP and to the Executive
Judge of the courts where respondent has pending
cases handled by him or her, and/or where he or she
has appeared as counsel;
5. The Sworn Statement shall be considered as proof of
respondent’s compliance with the order of
suspension;
6. Any finding or report contrary to the statements
made by the lawyer under oath shall be a ground for
the imposition of a more severe punishment, or
disbarment, as may be warranted. (Maniago v. De
Dios, supra)
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN DISBARRED
Effect of Reinstatement: Reinstatement to the roll of
attorneys wipes out the restrictions and disabilities
resulting from a previous disbarment. (Cui v. Cui, G.R. No.
L-18727, August 31, 1964)
A disbarred member may be reinstated provided he
sufficiently complies with the guidelines for judicial
clemency.
GUIDELINES IN RESOLVING REQUESTS
FOR JUDICIAL CLEMENCY
1. There must be proof of remorse and reformation;
2. Sufficient time have lapsed from the imposition of
the penalty to ensure a period of reform;
3. The age of the person asking for clemency must
show that he still has productive years ahead of him
that can be put into good use;
4. There must be a promise as well as potential for
public service; and
5. There must be other relevant factors and
circumstances to justify clemency. (Macarubbo v.
Macarubbo, Adm. Case No. 6148, January 22, 2013)
CRITERIA FOR REINSTATEMENT
1. Appreciation of the significance of his dereliction;
2. Assurance to the court that he now possesses the
requisite probity and integrity necessary to
guarantee his worthiness to be restored to the
practice of law;
3. Time elapsed between disbarment and application
for reinstatement;
4. Good conduct and honorable dealing subsequent to
his disbarment;
5. Active involvement in civic, educational and religious
organizations;
6. Favorable indorsement of IBP as well as local
government officials and citizens of his community;
and
7. Pleas of his mother and wife for the sake and fortune
of his family. (Tan v. Sabandal, Bar Matter No. 44,
February 10, 1989)
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
admission to the bar, satisfy the Court that he is a person
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
of good moral character, a fit and proper person to
practice law. The Court will take into consideration the
applicant’s character and standing prior to the disbarment,
the nature and character of the charge/s for which he was
disbarred, his conduct subsequent to the disbarment, and
the time that has elapsed between the disbarment and the
application for reinstatement. (Que v. Revilla, Jr., A.C. No.
7054, December 4, 2009)
EFFECT OF EXECUTIVE PARDON
If during the pendency of a disbarment proceeding, the
respondent was granted executive pardon, the dismissal of
the case on that sole basis will depend on whether the
executive pardon is absolute or conditional.
1. If pardon is absolute or unconditional – disbarment
case will be dismissed.
2. If pardon is conditional – disbarment case will not
be dismissed on the basis thereof. (Pineda)
LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN
REPATRIATED
CONDITIONS BEFORE A LAWYER WHO REACQUIRES
FILIPINO CITIZENSHIP PURSUANT TO RA 9225 CAN
RESUME LAW PRACTICE
He must first secure from this Court the authority to do so,
conditioned on:
1. the updating and payment in full of the annual
membership dues in the IBP;
2. the payment of professional tax;
3. the completion of at least 36 credit hours of
mandatory continuing legal education; this is
especially significant to refresh the
applicant/petitioner’s knowledge of Philippine laws
and update him of legal developments and
4. the retaking of the lawyer’s oath which will not only
remind him of his duties and responsibilities as a
lawyer and as an officer of the Court, but also renew
his pledge to maintain allegiance to the Republic of
the Philippines. (Petition for Leave to Resume Practice
of Law, Benjamin M. Dacanay, B.M. No. 1678,
December 17, 2007)
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL
EDUCATION (BAR MATTER NO. 850, AS
AMENDED)
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.
COMPOSITION OF THE MCLE BOARD
It shall be composed of five (5) members:
1. A retired Justice of the Supreme Court, as Chair; and
2. Four (4) members, 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. (B.M. No. 850, Rule 15,
Sec. 1)
Note: The members of the Committee shall be of proven
probity and integrity. They shall be appointed by the
30
Green Notes 2019
Supreme Court for a term of three (3) years and shall
receive such compensation as may be determined by the
Court.
REQUIREMENTS
It shall be completed every 3 years, at least thirty-six (36)
hours of continuing legal education activities approved by
the MCLE Committee. Of the 36 hours:
• At least six (6) hours- legal ethics
• At least four (4) hours- trial and pre-trial skills
• At least five (5) hours- alternative dispute resolution
• At least (9) hours- updates on substantive and
procedural laws and jurisprudence
• At least four (4) hours- legal writing and oral
advocacy
• At least two (2) hours- international law and
international conventions
• Remaining six (6) hours- such other subjects
prescribed by the MCLE committee. (B.M. No. 850,
Rule 2, Sec. 2)
COMPLIANCE
INITIAL COMPLIANCE PERIOD
The initial compliance period shall be from April 15, 2001
up to April 14, 2004. All succeeding compliance periods
shall begin the day after the end of the preceding
compliance period.
The initial compliance period for members newly admitted
or readmitted to the IBP shall begin on the first day of the
month of admission or readmission and shall end on the
same day as that of all other members. (MCLE
Implementing Regulations, Sec. 3)
COMPLIANCE GROUPS
GROUP SCOPE
Compliance Group 1 Members in the National
Capital Region (NCR) or
Metro Manila
Compliance Group 2 Members in Luzon outside
NCR
Compliance Group 3 Members in Visayas and
Mindanao
EXEMPTIONS
PARTIES EXEMPTED FROM MCLE
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;
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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. (B.M. No. 850, Rule 7, Sec. 1)
OTHER PARTIES EXEMPTED FROM 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. (B.M. No.
850, Rule 7, Sec. 2)
OTHER EXEMPTIONS OR MODIFICATIONS
For good cause (such as physical disability, illness, post-
graduate study abroad, proven expertise in law and similar
ground) and subject to approval by the Committee, a
member may file a verified request for exemption from
compliance, or modification of any of the MCLE
requirements, including extension of time for compliance.
(MCLE Implementing Regulations, Sec. 6)
NON-COMPLIANCE OF MCLE
The following shall constitute non-compliance:
1. Failure to complete education requirement within
the compliance period;
2. Failure to provide attestation of compliance or
exemption;
3. Failure to provide satisfactory evidence of
compliance (including evidence of exempt status)
within the prescribed period;
4. Failure to satisfy the education requirement and
furnish evidence of such compliance within sixty (60)
days from receipt of a non-compliance notice;
5. Any other act or omission analogous to any of the
foregoing or intended to circumvent or evade
compliance with the MCLE requirements. (MCLE
Implementing Regulations, Sec. 12 (c))
SANCTIONS
A member who is in non-compliance at the end of the
compliance period shall pay a non-compliance fee of
P1,000.00 and shall be listed as a delinquent member of IBP
Board of Governors upon the recommendation of the
MCLE Committee, in which case Rule 139-B of the Court
shall apply. (Bar Matter No. 850, as amended, Sec. 12 (e))
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
31
Green Notes 2019
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)
BAR MATTER NO. 2012
RULE ON MANDATORY LEGAL AID SERVICE
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. (B.M. No.
2012, Sec. 2)
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. (B.M. No. 2012, Sec. 3)
Free Legal Aid Services – refer to 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. (B.M. No. 2012, Sec. 4 (d))
Practicing Lawyers - are 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:
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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
(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 1 to 3
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. (B.M. No.
2012, Sec. 4 (a))
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. (B.M. No. 2012, Sec. 5 (a))
NOTARIAL PRACTICE
(A.M. NO. 02-8-13-SC, AS AMENDED)
PURPOSE OF THE NOTARIAL LAW
1. To promote, serve and protect public interest;
2. To simplify, clarify, and modernize the rules
governing public; and
3. To foster ethical conduct among notaries public.
(Rule I, Sec. 2)
EFFECT OF NOTARIZED DOCUMENT
The notarization by a notary public converts a private
document into 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. (Dela Cruz v. Zabala, A.C. No. 6294, November
14, 2004)
DUTIES OF A 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).
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)
32
Green Notes 2019
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)
QUALIFICATIONS OF A NOTARY PUBLIC
A “notary public” and “notary” refer to any person
commissioned to perform official acts under these Rules.
(Rule II, Sec. 9)
To be eligible for commissioning as notary public, the
petitioner must possess the following:
1. A citizen of the Philippines;
2. Over twenty-one (21) years of age;
3. 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. 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;
5. Not have been convicted in the first instance of any
crime involving moral turpitude. (Rule III, Sec. 1)
DISQUALIFICATION OF NOTARY PUBLIC FROM
PERFORMING NOTARIAL ACT
1. If he is a party to the instrument or document that is
to be notarized;
2. If he 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. If he is a spouse, common-law partner, ancestor,
descendant, or relative by affinity or consanguinity
of the principal within the fourth civil degree. (Rule
IV, Sec. 3)
FUNCTION OF A NOTARY PUBLIC
The function of a notary public is, among others, to guard
against any illegal or immoral arrangements. That function
would be defeated if the notary public were one of the
signatories to the instrument. For then, he would be
interested in sustaining the validity thereof as it directly
involves himself and the validity of his own act. It would
place him in an inconsistent position, and the very purpose
of the acknowledgment, which is to minimize fraud, would
be thwarted. (Vallez v. Arzaga-Quijano, A.M. No. P-99-1338,
November 18, 1999)
TERM OF OFFICE OF A NOTARY PUBLIC
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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)
POWERS AND LIMITATIONS
POWERS OF NOTARY PUBLIC
A notary public is:
1. Empowered to perform the following notarial acts:
a. Acknowledgements;
b. Oaths and affirmations;
c. Jurats;
d. Signature witnessings;
e. Copy certifications; and
f. Any other act authorized by these Rules
2. Authorized to certify the affixing of a signature
thumb or other mark on an instrument or document
presented for notarization if:
a. The thumb or other mark is affixed in the
presence of the notary public and of two (2)
disinterested and unaffected witnesses to the
instrument or document;
b. Both witnesses sign their own names in
addition to the thumb or other mark;
c. The notary public writes below the thumb or
other mark: “Thumb or Other Mark affixed by
(name of signatory by mark) in the presence of
(names and addresses of witnesses) and
undersigned notary public"; and
d. The notary public notarizes the signature by
thumb or other mark through an
acknowledgment, jurat, or signature
witnessing.
3. 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:
a. The notary public is directed by the person
unable to sign or make a mark to sign on his
behalf;
b. The signature of the notary public is affixed in
the presence of two disinterested and
unaffected witnesses to the instrument or
document;
c. Both witnesses sign their own names;
d. The notary public writes below his signature:
“Signature affixed by notary in presence of
(names and addresses of person and two (2)
witnesses)”; and
e. The notary public notarizes his signature by
acknowledgment or jurat. (Rule IV, Sec. 1)
Acknowledgment – refers to 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
33
Green Notes 2019
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. (Rule II, Sec. 1)
Affirmation or Oath – refers to act in which an individual
on a single occasion:
1. appears in person before the notary public;
2. is personally known to the notary public or 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. (Rule II, Sec.
2)
Jurat – refers to 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. (Rule II, Sec. 6)
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)
Signature Witnessing– refers to a notarial 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 public. (Rule II, Sec. 14)
Copy Certification – refers to 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.
(Rule II, Sec. 4)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
LIMITATIONS OF NOTARY PUBLIC
A notary public shall:
1. Not perform a notarial act outside his regular place
of work or business.
However, on certain exceptional occasions or
situations, a notarial act may be performed at the
request of the parties in the following sites locates
within his territorial jurisdiction:
a. Public offices, convention halls, and similar
places where oaths of office may be
administered;
b. Public function areas in hotels and similar
places for the signing of instruments or
documents requiring notarization;
c. Hospitals and other medical institutions where
a party to an instrument or document is
confined for treatment; and
d. Any place where a party to an instrument or
document requiring notarization is under
detention.
2. Not perform a notarial act if the person involved as
signatory to the instrument or document is -
a. Not in the notary’s presence personally at the
time of the notarization; and
b. 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, Sec. 2)
MANDATORY REFUSAL TO NOTARIZE
1. If the transaction is unlawful or immoral;
2. If the signatory shows signs that he does not
understand consequences of the act, per the notary’s
judgment;
3. If the signatory appears not to act of his own free
will, per the notary’s judgment;
4. If the document or instrument to be notarized is
considered as an improper document by these Rules.
(Rule IV, Sec. 4)
Note: Improper Instrument or Document is a blank or
incomplete instrument or document without appropriate
notarial certification. (Rule IV, Sec. 6)
NOTARIAL REGISTER
It refers to a permanently bound book with numbered
pages containing a chronological record of notarial acts
performed by a notary public. (Rule II, Sec. 5)
The register shall be kept in books to be furnished by the
Solicitor General to any notary public upon request and
upon payment of the cost thereof. The register shall be
duly paged, and on the first page, the Solicitor General
shall certify the number of pages of which the book
consists. (Rule VI, Sec. 1 (a))
Note: A notary public shall keep only one active notarial
register at any given time. (Rule VI, Sec. 1 (b))
ENTRIES IN THE NOTARIAL REGISTER
34
Green Notes 2019
1. For every notarial act, the notary shall record in the
notarial register at the time of notarization the
following:
a. vthe entry number and page number;
b. the date and time of day of the notarial act;
c. the type of notarial act;
d. the title or description of the instrument,
document or proceeding;
e. the name and address of each principal;
f. the competent evidence of identity as defined
by these Rules if the signatory is not
personally known to the notary;
g. the name and address of each credible witness
swearing to or affirming the person's identity;
h. the fee charged for the notarial act;
i. the address where the notarization was
performed if not in the notary's regular place
of work or business; and
j. any other circumstance the notary public may
deem of significance or relevance.
2. Reasons and circumstances for not completing a
notarial act.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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 shall be under
the responsibility of such officer. If there is no entry
to certify for the month, the notary shall forward a
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
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)
JURISDICTION OF NOTARY PUBLIC AND
PLACE OF NOTARIZATION
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. (Rule III, Section 11)
General Rule: A notary public shall not perform a notarial
act outside his jurisdiction and his regular place of work or
business.
Exceptions: A notarial act may be performed at the
request of the parties in the following sites, other than his
regular place of work or business, 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;
3. Hospitals and other medical institutions where a
party to an instrument or document is confined for
treatment;
4. Any place where a party to an instrument or
document requiring notarization is under detention.
(Rule IV, Sec. 2)
5. Such other places as may be dictated because of
emergency.
COMPETENT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY
It refers to the identification of an individual based on:
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:
a. Passport;
b. Driver's license;
c. Professional Regulation Commission ID;
d. National Bureau of Investigation clearance;
e. Police clearance;
f. Postal ID;
g. Voter's ID;
h. Barangay certification;
i. Government Service and Insurance System
(GSIS) e-card;
j. Social Security System (SSS) card;
k. Philhealth card;
l. Senior citizen card;
35
Green Notes 2019
m. Overseas Workers Welfare Administration
(OWWA) ID;
n. Overseas Filipino Worker ID;
o. Seaman's book;
p. Alien certificate of registration/immigrant
certificate of registration;
q. Government office ID;
r. Certification from the National Council for the
Welfare of Disabled Persons (NCWDP);
s. Department of Social Welfare and
Development (DSWD) certification.
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.
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. (Rule II,
Sec. 12)
Note: A community tax certificate or cedula is no longer
considered as a valid and competent evidence of identity
not only because it is not included in the list of competent
evidence of identity under the Rules; but moreso, it does
not bear the photograph and signature of the persons
appearing before them, which the Rules deem as the more
appropriate and competent means by which notaries
public can ascertain the person's identity. (Baysac v.
Aceron-Papa, A.C. No. 10231, August 10, 2016)
However, 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.
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)
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Legal Ethics
SANCTIONS
PUNISHABLE ACTS
The Executive Judge shall cause the prosecution of any
person who:
1. knowingly acts or otherwise impersonates a notary
public;
2. knowingly obtains, conceals, defaces, or destroys the
seal, notarial register, or official records of a notary
public; and
3. knowingly solicits, coerces, or in any way influences
a notary public to commit official misconduct. (Rule
XII, Sec. 1)
REVOCATION OF COMMISSION AND
DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS
1. The Executive Judge shall revoke a notarial
commission for any ground on which an application
for a commission may be denied.
2. In addition, the Executive Judge may revoke the
commission of, or impose appropriate administrative
sanctions upon, any notary public who:
a. fails to keep a notarial register;
b. fails to make the proper entry or entries in his
notarial register concerning his notarial acts;
c. fails to send the copy of the entries to the
Executive Judge within the first ten (10) days of
the month following;
d. fails to affix to acknowledgments the date of
expiration of his commission;
e. fails to submit his notarial register, when filled,
to the Executive Judge;
f. 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;
g. fails to require the presence of a principal at
the time of the notarial act;
h. fails to identify a principal on the basis of
personal knowledge or competent evidence;
i. executes a false or incomplete certificate
under Section 5, Rule IV;
j. knowingly performs or fails to perform any
other act prohibited or mandated by these
Rules; and
k. 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.
3. 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.
36
Green Notes 2019 Legal Ethics

4. The Executive Judge may motu proprio initiate

administrative proceedings against a notary public,
subject to the procedures prescribed in paragraph
(3) above and impose the appropriate administrative
sanctions on the grounds mentioned in the
preceding paragraphs (1) and (2). (Rule XI, Sec. 1)

RELATIONS TO CODE OF PROFESSIONAL

RESPONSIBILITY
The attempt to escape administrative sanctions by pinning
the blame on his secretary cannot be condoned as case law
instructs that in these instances, the lawyer himself, not
merely his secretary, should be held accountable for these
kinds of misdeeds. Worse, he himself caused the
intercalation of the notarized SPA by inserting
handwritten alterations therein which changed its
meaning; thus, violating Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility, which provides that “a lawyer
shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or
deceitful conduct.” (Miller v. Miranda, A.C. No. 8507,
November 10, 2015)

Performing a notarial act without such commission is a

violation of the lawyer’s oath to obey the laws, more
specifically, the Notarial Law. Then, too, by making it
appear that he is duly commissioned when he is not, he is,
for all legal intents and purposes, indulging in deliberate
falsehood, which the lawyer’s oath similarly proscribes.
These violations fall squarely within the prohibition of Rule
1.01 of Canon 1 of the CPR which provides that a lawyer
shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or
deceitful conduct and mandates the obedience of every
lawyer to laws and legal processes. (Maniquez v. Emelo, A.C.
No. 8968, September 26, 2017)

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 37

Green Notes 2019 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. (Pineda)

JUDGE
A public officer who, by virtue of his office, is clothed with

JUDICIAL judicial authority. He is a public officer lawfully appointed

to decide litigated questions in accordance with law.
(People v. Manantan, G.R. No. L-14129, July 31, 1962)

ETHICS DE JURE JUDGE

One who is exercising the office of a judge as a matter of
right. He is an officer of the law fully vested with all the
powers and functions, conceded under the law to a judge,
which relate to the administration of justice within the
jurisdiction over which he presides. (Luna v. Rodriguez,
G.R. No. 12647, November 26, 1917)

DE FACTO JUDGE
An officer who is not fully invested with all of the powers
and duties conceded to judges, but is exercising the office
of judge under some color of right. A judge de facto may be
said to be one who has the reputation of being the officer
he assumes to be yet is not a good officer in point of law,
that is, there exists some defect in his appointment or
election and in his right to exercise judicial functions at the
particular time. (Luna v. Rodriguez, supra)

QUALIFICATIONS OF JUDGES AND JUSTICES

Natural-born citizen of the
Philippines;

At least 40 years old;

Supreme Court
and Court of Must have been for 15 years
more, a judge of a lower court
Appeals Justices
engaged in the practice of law;

A person of proven competence,

integrity, probity, and
independence. (1987
Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 7)
Natural-born citizen of the
Philippines;

At least 35 years old;

RTC Judges For at least 10 years, has been

engaged in the practice of law or
has held a public office in the
Philippines requiring admission
to the practice of laws as an
indispensable requisite. (B.P. 129,
Sec. 15)
MTC Judges Natural-born citizen of the
Philippines;

At least 30 years old;

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 38

Green Notes 2019
For at least 5 years, has been
engaged in the practice of law or
has held a public office in the
Philippines requiring admission
to the practice of laws as an
indispensable requisite. (B.P. 129,
Sec. 26)
SOURCES
1. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary (NCJC);
2. Code of Judicial Conduct (CJC)
NEW CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT FOR
THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIARY
(BANGALORE DRAFT)
A.M. NO. 03-05-01
PRINCIPLES OF BANGALORE DRAFT
1. A universal recognition that a competent,
independent and impartial judiciary is essential if the
courts are to fulfill their role in upholding
constitutionalism and the rule of law.
2. Public confidence in the judicial system and in the
moral authority and integrity of the judiciary is of
utmost importance in a modern democratic society.
3. It is essential that judges, individually and
collectively, respect and honor judicial office as a
public trust and strive to enhance and maintain
confidence in the judicial system. (New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, 2004)
The New Code of Judicial Conduct (NCJC) for the
Philippine Judiciary which took effect on June 1, 2004
supersedes the Canons of Judicial Ethics and the Code of
Judicial Conduct. Provided, however, that in case of
deficiency or absence of specific provisions in this New
Code, the Canons of Judicial Ethics and Code of Judicial
Conduct shall be applicable in a suppletory character
(2007, 2009 Bar).
PURPOSE OF BANGALORE DRAFT
1. To update and correlate the Code of Judicial Conduct
and the Canons of Judicial Ethics adopted for the
Philippines;
2. To stress the Philippines’ solidarity with the
universal clamor for a universal code of judicial
ethics.
CANONS UNDER THE NEW CODE OF
JUDICIAL CONDUCT
Canon 1: Independence
Canon 2: Integrity
Canon 3: Impartiality
Canon 4: Propriety
Canon 5: Equality
Canon 6: Competence and Diligence
CANON 1: INDEPENDENCE
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Judicial Ethics
TWO CONCEPTS OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE
1. Individual judicial independence - focuses on each
particular case and seeks to insure his or her ability
to decide cases with autonomy within the
constraints of the law. (In the Matter of the
Allegations Contained in the Columns of Mr. Amado P.
Macasaet Published in Malaya Dated Sept. 18-21, 2007,
A.M. No. 07-09-13, August 8, 2008).
2. Institutional judicial independence - focuses on the
independence of the judiciary as a branch of
government and protects judges as a class. (In the
Matter of the Allegations Contained in the Columns of
Mr. Amado P. Macasaet Published in Malaya Dated
Sept. 18-21, 2007, supra)
The new Canon 1 deals solely with the matter of judicial
independence as a “pre-requisite to the rule of law” and a
“fundamental guarantee of a fair trial.” (New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated by
Philippine Judicial Academy, the ABA – Rule of Law
Initiative and the U.P. Law Center-Institute of Judicial
Administration, February 27, 2007)
SECTION 1
An independent judiciary has been described as “one free
of inappropriate outside influences.” Judges frequently
experience pressure in the exercise of their judicial
functions. Common sources of pressure upon a judge
include political patrons, family members, friends and
associates, colleagues on the bench, media, civil society,
militant groups, criminals 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 Judicial Conduct for
the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
A judge must decide a case based on its merits. For this
reason, a judge is expected to be fearless in the pursuit to
render justice, to be unafraid to displease any person,
interest or power, and to be equipped with a moral fiber
strong enough to resist temptation lurking in her office.
Here, it is improper for a judge to have decided a case
based only on a directive from a government official and
not on the judge’s own ascertainment of facts and
applicable law (Ramirez v. Corpuz-Macandog, A.M. No. R-
351-RTJ, September 26, 1986)
SECTION 2
Every judge must decide independently, even in collegial
court. While there may be discussions and exchange of
ideas among judges, the judge must decide on the basis of
his own, sole, judgment. (Funa, 2009)
SECTION 3
Judges working in the same building or justices of
collegiate 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 camaraderie often leads judges to seek
accommodations from fellow judges ranging from the
allowance of provisional remedies to the issuance of
favourable decisions. This is especially true in the
Philippines where “utang na loob” is a sacrosanct cultural
value. It must be emphasized, therefore, that this behavior
39
Green Notes 2019
is unethical and anathema to the independent
dispensation of judicial functions. Hence, Sections 2 and 3
are intended to address unethical practices among judges,
the most commonplace and pervasive of which is the
situation described above. (New Code of Judicial Conduct
for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
SECTION 4
Ratio: To ensure that judges are spared from potential
influence of family members by disqualifying them even
before any opportunity for impropriety presents itself.
(New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary,
Annotated)
The term “judge’s family includes:
1. Spouse;
2. Son/daughter;
3. Son-in-law or daughter-in-law;
4. Other relatives by consanguinity or affinity within
the sixth civil degree, or
5. Any 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,
Annotated)
Constant company with a lawyer tends to breed intimacy
and camaraderie to the point that favors in the future may
be asked from respondent judge, which he may find hard
to resist. The actuation of respondent judge of eating and
drinking in public places with a lawyer who has pending
cases in his sala may well arouse suspicion in the public
mind, thus tending to erode the trust of the litigants in the
impartiality of the judge. (Padilla v. Zantua, A.M. No. MTJ-
93-888, October 24, 1994)
SECTION 5
While it is true that Justice Sabio could not have possibly
known prior to his brother's call that his brother intended
to speak to him about the Meralco-GSIS case, the fact
remains that Justice Sabio continued to entertain a call
from his brother, who also happens to be an officer of the
executive branch, despite realizing that the conversation
was going to involve a pending case. In his Motion, Justice
Sabio asks the Court if he should have immediately
slammed the phone on his brother. Certainly, such boorish
behavior is not required. However, as soon as Justice Sabio
realized that his brother intended to discuss a case
pending before him or in his division, Justice Sabio should
have respectfully but firmly ended the discussion.
Justice Sabio had no business discussing with his brother
court matters (such as his assignment to a particular case,
the possibility of issuance of a TRO, etc.) which by his own
account are not yet "official" and more importantly, he
should not have allowed the conversation to progress to a
point that his brother was already discussing the merits of
the case and persuading him (Justice Sabio) to rule in favor
of one of the parties. (Re: Letter of Presiding Justice Conrado
Vasquez, A.M. No. 08-8-11-CA, October 15, 2008)
SECTION 6
The judge’s act of sending a member of his staff to talk with
complainant and show copies of his draft decisions, and his
act of meeting with litigants outside the office premises
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Judicial Ethics
beyond office hours violate the standard of judicial
conduct required to be observed by members of the
Bench. They constitute gross misconduct which is
punishable under Rule 140 of the Revised Rules of Court.
(Tan v. Rosete, A.M. No. MTJ-04-1563, September 8, 2004)
SECTION 7
The judges shall encourage and uphold safeguards for the
discharge of judicial duties in order to maintain and
enhance the institutional and operational independence of
the Judiciary.
SECTION 8
The first duty of judges is to conduct themselves at all
times in a manner that is beyond reproach. In whatever
atmosphere or environs they may happen to be, judges
must remain conscious of their character and reputation
as judges and should avoid anything which will indignify
their public positions and demean the institution to which
they belong. (New Code of Judicial Conduct for the
Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
CANON 2: INTEGRITY
The integrity of the Judiciary rests not only upon the fact
that it is able to administer justice but also upon the
perception and confidence of the community that the
people who run the system have done justice. At times, the
strict manner by which we apply the law may, in fact, do
justice but may not necessarily create confidence among
the people that justice, indeed, is served. Hence, in order
to create such confidence, the people who run the
judiciary, particularly judges and justices, must not only be
proficient in both the substantive and procedural aspects
of the law, but more importantly, they must possess the
highest integrity, probity, and unquestionable moral
uprightness, both in their public and private lives. Only
then can the people be reassured that the wheels of justice
in this country run with fairness and equity, thus creating
confidence in the judicial system. (Talens-Dabon v. Arceo,
A.M. No. RTJ-96-1336, July 25, 1996)
It cannot be overemphasized that every employee of the
judiciary should be an example of integrity, uprightness,
and honesty. Like any public servant, he must exhibit the
highest sense of honesty and integrity not only in the
performance of his official duties, but in his personal and
private dealings with other people, to preserve the Court’s
good name and standing. This is because the image of a
court of justice is necessarily mirrored in the conduct,
official or otherwise, of the men and women who work
thereat, from the judge to the least and lowest of its
personnel. Thus, it becomes the imperative sacred duty of
each and every one in the court to maintain its good name
and standing as a true temple of 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
40
Green Notes 2019
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)
SECTION 1
Sections 1 and 2 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for
the Philippine Judiciary underscore the importance of
public perception in the maintenance of judicial integrity.
The personal behavior of a judge should be free from the
appearance of impropriety, and his personal behavior, not
only in the bench and in the performance of judicial duties,
but also in his everyday life, should be beyond reproach.
(Galang v. Santos, MTJ-99-1197, May 26, 1999)
Judge Marcos’ conduct of flaunting his mistress is a
conduct unbecoming of a judge. Keeping a mistress is
certainly not an act one would expect of a judge who is
expected to possess the highest standard of morality and
decency. If a judge fails to have high ethical standards, the
confidence and high respect for the judiciary diminishes as
he represents the judiciary. (Re: Complaint of Mrs. Rotilla
A. Marcos and Her Children against Judge Ferdinand J.
Marcos, RTC, Br. 20, Cebu City, A.M. No. 97-2-53 RTC, July
6, 2001).
SECTION 2
More than simply projecting an image of probity, a judge
must not only appear to be a "good judge"; he must also
appear to be a "good person." (Dawa v. De Asa, A.M. No.
MTJ-98-1144, July 22, 1998)
SECTION 3
It is thus incumbent upon a judge to manage his court with
a view to the prompt and convenient disposition of its
business and he should not tolerate abuses, indifference or
neglect by clerks, sheriffs and other officers of the court.
(Ramirez v. Corpuz-Macandog, A.M. No. R-351-RTJ,
September 26, 1986)
Oftentimes, such leniency provides the court employees
the opportunity to commit minor transgressions of the
laws and slight breaches of official duty ultimately leading
to vicious delinquencies. The judge should constantly keep
a watchful eye on the conduct of his employees. He should
realize that big fires start small. His constant scrutiny of
the behavior of his employees would deter any abuse on
the part of the latter in the exercise of their duties. Then,
his subordinates would know that any misdemeanor will
not remain unchecked. The slightest semblance of
impropriety on the part of the employees of the court in
the performance of their official duties stirs ripples of
public suspicion and public distrust of the judicial
administrators. The slightest breach of duty by and the
slightest irregularity in the conduct of court officers and
employees detract from the dignity of the courts and
erode the faith of the people in the judiciary.
(Buenaventura v. Benedicto, A.C. No. 137-J, March 27, 1971)
While scolding an employee in front of litigants may not
have been the most appropriate course of action, it is well
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Judicial Ethics
within the ambit of his judicial prerogative to discipline his
staff for negligence and/or mistake. He should, however,
not make a habit of showing fits of temper and resorting to
verbal abuse against erring employees. He should be
mindful of the need to maintain professional and
harmonious relations with his court personnel with a view
to the speedy and efficient administration of justice. (Re:
Suspension of Clerk of Court Jocobo, A.M. No. 93-10-1296-
RTC, August 12, 1998)
CANON 3: IMPARTIALITY
It is essential to the proper discharge of the judicial office.
It applies not only to the decision itself but also to the
process by which the decision is made.
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)
COLD NEUTRALITY OF AN IMPARTIAL JUDGE
In fact, that due process of law requires a hearing before
an impartial and disinterested tribunal, and that every
litigant is entitled to nothing less than the cold neutrality
of an impartial judge. (Gutierrez v. Santos, L-15824, May 30,
1961, 2 SCRA 249)
A judge should strive be at all times "wholly free,
disinterested, impartial and independent. Elementary due
process requires a hearing before an impartial and
disinterested tribunal. 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.” (Azucena v. Muñoz, Adm. Case No.
13N, June 30, 1970, 33 SCRA 722)
SECTION 1
Judges are the visible representations of law and justice.
They are required not only to be objective, but also to
appear objective; indeed, every litigant is entitled to
nothing less than the cold neutrality of an impartial judge.
Due process would be meaningless if the ultimate decision
in a controversy is rendered by a partial or biased judge.
(Abundo v. Manio, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1416, August 6, 1999)
NOTATU DIGNUM
Notatu dignum is the presumption of regularity in the
performance of a judge’s functions, hence, bias, prejudice
and even undue interest cannot be presumed, especially
weighed against a judge’s sacred allegation under oath of
office to administer justice without respect to any person
and do equal right to the poor and the rich. (Datuin v.
Soriano, A.M. RTJ-01-1640, October 15, 2002)
ALLEGATIONS OF BIAS AND PREJUDICE
MUST BE PROVED
Bias and prejudice, to be considered valid reasons for the
voluntary inhibition of judges, must be proved with clear
and convincing evidence. Bare allegations of partiality and
prejudgment will not suffice. These cannot be presumed,
especially if weighed against the sacred obligation of
judges whose oaths of office require them to administer
justice without respect to person and to do equal right to
41
Green Notes 2019
the poor and the rich. (Estrada v. Desierto, G.R. Nos. 146710-
15, March 2, 2001)
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)
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)
SECTION 2
A judge may not be legally prohibited from sitting in a
litigation. But when suggestion is made of record that he
might be induced to act in favor of one party or with bias
or prejudice against a litigant arising out of circumstances
reasonably capable of inciting such a state of mind, he
should conduct a careful self- examination. He should
exercise his discretion in a way that the people's faith in
the courts of justice is not impaired. (Pimentel v. Salanga,
G.R. No. L-27934, September 18, 1967, 21 SCRA 160)
SECTION 3
Judges may, in their exercise of sound discretion, restrict
themselves voluntarily from sitting in a case, but such a
decision should be based on good, sound or ethical
grounds, or for just and valid reasons. It is not enough that
a party casts some tenuous allegations of partiality at the
judge. No less than imperative is that it is the judge's
sacred duty to administer justice without fear or favor.
(New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary,
Annotated)
DUTY TO SIT
It is imperative that judges ensure that they would not be
unnecessarily disqualified from a case. (Id.)
Note: The duty to sit is imposed because permitting judges
to disqualify themselves for frivolous reasons or for no
reason at all would contravene public policy by unduly
delaying proceedings, increasing the workload of other
judges, and fostering impermissible judge-shopping. (Id.)
SECTION 4
This Section warns judges against making any comment
that might reasonably be expected to affect the outcome
of the proceedings before them or "impair the manifest
fairness of the process.” (Id.)
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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Judicial Ethics
violation of the subjudice 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)
SECTION 5
The phrase “any proceeding” includes, but not limited to
instances where:
1. The judge has actual bias or prejudice concerning a
party or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary
facts concerning the proceedings;
2. The judge previously served as a lawyer or was a
material witness in the matter in controversy;
3. The judge, or a member of his or her family, has an
economic interest in the outcome of the matter in
controversy;
4. The judge served as executor, administrator,
guardian, trustee or lawyer in the case or matter in
controversy, or a former associate of the judge
served as counsel during their association, or the
judge or lawyer was a material witness therein;
5. The judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of
review;
6. The judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a
party litigant within the 6th civil degree or to counsel
within the 4th civil degree;
7. The judge knows that his or her spouse or child has
a financial interest as heir, legatee, creditor, fiduciary
or otherwise, in the subject matter in controversy or
in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest
that could be substantially affected by the outcome
of the proceedings.
Note: The reasons for disqualification of a judge
enumerated under Sec. 5 of Canon 3 are not exclusive. The
provision provides that it is not limited to the grounds
therein provided. However, those enumerated are
instances of mandatory prohibition. (New Code of Judicial
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
Strict compliance of the rule is required so as to protect
the rights of the parties and assure an impartial
administration of justice, as well as to prevent erosion of
the people's confidence in the judiciary. (Marfil v. Cuachon,
A.M. No. 2360-MJ, August 31, 1981)
SECTION 6
The judge should disclose on the record the basis for his
disqualification. Perhaps prompted by a cultural sense of
delicadeza, some magistrates state only "personal reasons"
as the ground for inhibiting themselves. The parties
affected often would often not question such
disqualification, usually for fear of incurring the judge’s ire.
However, such vague reasoning is not acceptable, as it
would effectively place voluntary disqualification at the
whim of the judge. This kind of latitude is not the intended
42
Green Notes 2019
effect of the rule. (New Code of Judicial Conduct for the
Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
Note: The decision to continue hearing the case, despite
the existence of reasons for disqualification should be:
1. coupled with a bona fide disclosure to the parties-
in-litigation; and
2. subject to express acceptance by all the parties of
the cited reason as not material or substantial. (Id.)
CANON 4: PROPRIETY
Propriety and the appearance of propriety are essential to
the performance of all the activities of a judge.
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.
(Conquilla v. Bernardo, A.M. No. MTJ-09-1737, February 9,
2011)
SECTION 1
Reason: The community holds judges to higher standards
of integrity and ethical conduct than attorneys or other
persons not invested with the public trust. (Office of the
Court Administrator v. Estacion Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-87-104,
August 23, 1995)
INSTANCES WHICH ARE NOT ILLEGAL BUT STILL
VIOLATE THE CODE OF JUDICIAL ETHICS
1. A judge who heard cases on a day when he was
supposed to be on official leave (Re: Anonymous
Complaint Against Judge Edmundo T. Acuña A.M. No
RTJ-04-1891, July 28, 2005);
2. A judge who heard a motion while on vacation, in his
room dressed in a polo jacket. (Ignacio v. Valenzuela,
Adm. Case No. 2252-CFI. January 18, 1982);
3. Even if there was no clear evidence of sexual
congress between a judge and one of his
subordinates, photos showing the two of them
coming out of a hotel together was enough to give
rise to the appearance of impropriety. (Liwanag v.
Lustre A.M. No. MTJ-98-1168, April 21, 1999)
4. A joking remark made by a judge to a litigant
suggesting that the litigant prove he harbored no ill
feelings towards the judge. (Co v Plata A.M. No. MTJ-
03-1501, March 14, 2005)
5. A judge, after conducting a marriage ceremony,
commented that the bride and groom should
sexually satisfy each other so that they will not go
astray. (Hadap vs. Lee, Adm. Matter No. 1665-MJ. June
19, 1982)
SECTION 2
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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Judicial Ethics
whole. (Re: Anonymous Complaint Against Judge Edmundo
T. Acuña, supra.)
A judicial officer is subject to scrutiny for both public and
private conduct. Such scrutiny is an unavoidable
consequence of occupying a judicial position. (Cañeda vs.
Alaan A.M. No. MTJ-01-1376, January 23, 2002)
SECTION 3
Judges should refrain from inviting counsel for one side
into their chambers after or prior to sessions in court
without disclosing to the other counsel the reason for such
meetings. (Martinez vs. Gironella G.R. No. L-37635, July 22,
1975)
Constant company with a lawyer tends to breed intimacy
and camaraderie to the point that favors in the future may
be asked from the judge which he may find it hard to resist.
If a judge is seen eating and drinking in public places with
a lawyer who has cases pending in his or her sala, public
suspicion may be aroused, thus tending to erode the trust
of litigants in the impartiality of the judge. (Padilla v.
Zantua, A.M. No. MTJ-93-888, October 24, 1994)
A judge was found guilty of impropriety and failure to
behave in a manner that would promote public confidence
in the integrity and impartiality of judiciary. Respect for
the office required him to avoid fraternizing and drinking
excessively with lawyers who have pending cases in his
court. (Omañ a v. Yulde, A.M. MTJ-01-1345, August 26, 2002)
On the other hand, a judge should not be too thin-skinned
in his relationship with lawyers. A judge should not hold a
lawyer in contempt for an expression of concern about the
impartiality of the judge, even if the judge may have been
insulted. (Felongco v. Dictado, A.M. No. RTJ-86-50, June 28,
1993)
SECTION 4
This rule rests on the principle that no judge should
preside in a case in which the judge 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 fairness
and integrity. The purpose is to preserve the people’s faith
and confidence in the courts of justice. (New Code of
Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
A judge violated the same rule when she did not recuse
herself in a criminal case where the accused was her
brother in law, regardless of the fact that it was only after
the case had been submitted for decision that the accused
became her brother-in-law. (Ubarra v. Mapalad, A.M. No.
MTJ-91-622, March 22, 1993)
SECTION 5
The high tribunal held that it was inappropriate for a judge
to have entertained a litigant in his house particularly
when the case is still pending before his sala. (J. King and
Sons v. Hontanosas, A.M. RTJ-03-1802, September 21, 2004)
SECTION 6
While judges are not expected to live a hermit-like
existence or cease functioning as citizens of the Republic,
43
Green Notes 2019
they should remember that they do not disrobe
themselves of their judicial office upon leaving their salas.
In the exercise of their civil liberties, they should be
circumspect and ever mindful that their continuing
commitment to upholding the judiciary and its values
places upon them certain implied restraints to their
freedom. (Sison vs. Caoibes, Jr. A.M. No. RTJ-03-1771, May 27
2004)
A judge was admonished for the appearance of engaging in
partisan politics when he participated in a political rally
sponsored by one party, even though he only explained the
mechanics of block voting to the audience. (Macias vs.
Araula, Adm. Matter No. 1895-CFI, July 20, 1982)
The court reprimanded a judge who used expletives like
“putris” and “putang ina,” even thought they were not
directed to any particular individual. (Re: Anonymous
Complaint Against Judge Edmundo T. Acuña A.M. No RTJ-
04-1891, July 28, 2005)
The judge displayed unbecoming behavior by sarcastically
commenting upon a complainant’s ability to read English
and using phrases such as “moronic attitude,” “stupid,” and
“putang inamo” to describe the complainant. (Seludo v.
Fineza, A.M. No. RTJ-04-1864. December 16, 2004)
SECTION 7
This section of the New Code of Judicial Conduct should
be read in conjunction with Section 7 of the Republic Act
6713, which prohibits certain personal fiduciary and
financial conflicts.
“A judge shall refrain from financial and business dealings
that tend to reflect adversely on the court's impartiality,
interfere with the proper performance of judicial activities,
or increase involvement with lawyers or persons likely to
come before the court.” (Catbagan v. Barte, A.M. No. MTJ-
02-1452, April 6, 2005)
SECTION 8
The two prohibitions under this section:
1. A judge may not use judicial office to advance private
interests.;
2. A judge may not give the impression that he or she
can be influenced to use the judicial office to advance
the private interests of others. (New Code of Judicial
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
SECTION 9
A judge's act of personally furnishing a party copies of
orders issued, without passing them through the court
docket, was considered to be highly irregular, giving rise
to the suspicion that the judge was partial to one of the
parties in the case. (Co v. Calimag, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1493,
June 20, 2000)
SECTION 10
This section allows the judge to participate in legal
academia and public discourse on legal matters with the
proviso that there shall be no interference in the
performance of the judge’s primary functions with respect
to his or her jurisdiction.
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Judicial Ethics
However, in dealing with the media, the Philippine Judicial
Academy suggests that a judge or court should avoid
acrimonious debate with reporters and the public. (New
Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary,
Annotated)
SECTION 11
The prohibition is based on the inherent incompatibility of
the rights, duties and functions of the office of an attorney
with the powers, duties and functions of a judge. (Carual v.
Brusola, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1500, October 20, 1999)
While municipal judges can administer oaths or execute
certificates on matters related to their official functions,
they cannot notarize private documents. (Tabao v. Asis,
Adm. Mat. No. RTJ-95-1330, January 30, 1996)
However, it should be noted that judges assigned to
municipalities and circuits may act as notaries public
provided that:
1. All notarial fees charged be to the government’s
account; and
2. Certification be made in the notarial documents
attesting to the lack of lawyers or notary in the
municipality or circuit. (Doughlas v. Lopez Jr., A.M.
No. MTJ-96-1076, February 9, 2000)
SECTION 12
The rule also recognizes the difference between
membership in associations of judges and membership in
associations of other legal professionals. While attendance
at lavish events hosted by lawyers might create an
appearance of impropriety, participation in a judges-only
organization does not. (New Code of Judicial Conduct for
the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
SECTION 13
This section should be read in conjunction with Section
7(d) of R.A. 6713 which prohibits public officials from
soliciting or accepting gifts. According to this provision:
“Public officials and employees shall not solicit or accept,
directly or indirectly, any gift, gratuity, favor,
entertainment, loan or anything of money value from any
person in the course of their official duties or in
connection with any operation being regulated by, or any
transaction which may be affected by the functions of their
office.” (Id.)
The act of demanding and receiving money or property
from a litigant violates this provision of the Act. (Legaspi v.
Garrete, Adm. Mat. No. MTJ-92-713, March 27, 1995)
SECTION 14
This section complements the previous section and
assures that what the judge cannot do directly, may not be
done indirectly through the use of employees or staff
members. (New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary, Annotated)
SECTION 15
Judges are allowed to accept token gifts, awards, or
benefits when given as a consequence of a special
occasion.
44
Green Notes 2019
GIFTS AND GRANTS ALLOWED FROM FOREIGN
COUNTRIES
1. The acceptance and retention by a public official
or employee of a gift of nominal value tendered
and received as a souvenir or mark of courtesy;
2. The acceptance by a public official or employee
of a gift in the nature of a scholarship or
fellowship grant or medical treatment; or
3. The acceptance by a public official or employee
of travel grants or expenses for travel taking
place entirely outside the Philippines (such as
allowances, transportation, food and lodging) of
more than nominal value if such acceptance is
appropriate or consistent with the interest of the
Philippines, and permitted by the head office,
branch or agency to which the judge belongs.
(R.A. No. 6713, Sec. 7 (d))
CANON 5: EQUALITY
Ensuring equality of treatment to all before the courts is
essential to the due performance of the judicial office.
As the guardians of justice, courts must adhere to the
principle of equality. People expect the courts to be
unaffected by differences in social status, degree of
education, and even physical abilities. (New Code of Judicial
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
SECTION 1
To render substantial justice and maintain public
confidence in the judicial system, judges are expected to
be aware of the diversity in society that results from an
increased worldwide exchange of people and ideas. Judges
must be able to avoid the infiltration of preconceptions
into their decisions. They should be mindful of the various
international instruments and treaties ratified by the
Philippines, which affirm the equality of all human beings
and establish a norm of non-discrimination without
distinction as to race, sex, language or religion. (Id.)
SECTION 2
Judges should avoid private remarks, hasty conclusions, or
distasteful jokes that may give even erroneous impressions
of prejudice and lead the public to believe that cases before
them are being prejudged. (Castillo v. Juan, G.R. No. 39516,
January 28, 1975)
SECTION 3
As arbiters of the law, judges should be conscientious,
studious, courteous, patient and punctual in the discharge
of their judicial duties, recognizing that time of litigants,
witnesses and counsel is of value. In addressing litigants,
witnesses and counsel, judges should avoid a controversial
tone. Judges should be aware that undue interference,
impatience or participation in the examination of
witnesses, especially those who are excited or nervous
about the unusual circumstances of a trial, may tend to
prevent the presentation of a case or the determination of
the truth. (New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary, Annotated)
SECTION 4
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Judicial Ethics
Judges should organize their courts to ensure the prompt
and convenient dispatch of business and should not
tolerate misconduct by clerks, sheriffs and other assistants
who are sometimes prone to expect favors or special
treatment due to their professional relationship with the
judge. (Canon of Judicial Ethics, Canon 8)
Judges and clerks of court must therefore take proper
action against the misdeeds of employees. While the
traditional value of pakikisama often fosters harmony and
good relationships in the workplace, it cannot be allowed
to frustrate or prejudice the administration of justice.
(Lacurom v. Magbanua, A.M. No. P-02-1646, January 22,
2003)
SECTION 5
Judges should conduct proceedings in court with dignity
and in a manner that reflects the importance and
seriousness of proceedings. They should maintain order
and proper decorum in the court. (Code of Judicial Conduct,
Canon 3, Rule 3.03)
Judges have the duty to prevent lawyers from abusing
witnesses with unfair treatment. (New Code of Judicial
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
CANON 6: COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
Competence and diligence are pre-requisites to the due
performance of judicial office.
SECTION 1
“Though a judge has a duty to not sit where disqualified, a
judge has an equally strong duty not to recuse himself
when the circumstances do not require recusal.” [ABA
Annotated Model Code of Judicial Conduct (2004),
Commentary, Canon 3 B (1), citing Laird v. Tatum, (1972)
SECTION 2
This section is often violated due to failure to keep records
or handle funds in compliance with court rules. (New Code
of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
SECTION 3
Judges are regarded as persons learned in the law and it is
in part their masterful grasp of the law that sustains public
trust in their work and in the confidence of the people and
the legal profession. (New Code of Judicial Conduct for the
Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
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
45
Green Notes 2019
ignorance of the law. (Office of the Court Administrator v.
Hon. Tormis, A.M. No. MTJ-12-1817, March 12, 2013)
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)
SECTION 4
Norms of international law become the concern of judges
because they form part of legal standards by which their
competence and diligence required by the New Code of
Judicial Conduct are to be measured. (New Code of Judicial
Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
SECTION 5
The essence of the judicial function is expressed in Section
1, Rule 124 of the Revised Rules of Court which provides
that “justice shall be impartially administered without
unnecessary delay.” This principle permeates the whole
system of judicature and supports the legitimacy of the
decrees of judicial tribunals. (New Code of Judicial Conduct
for the Philippine Judiciary, Annotated)
Delay does not only constitute a serious violation of the
parties constitutional right to speedy disposition of cases,
it 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)
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)
REGLEMENTARY PERIOD TO RENDER JUDGMENTS
1. 24 months for the Supreme Court
2. 12 months for all lower collegiate courts, unless
reduced by the Supreme Court;
3. 3 months for all other lower courts. (1987
Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 15, par. 1)
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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Judicial Ethics
comply with the 90-day period under Sec. 5 of Judiciary
Act. (Moya v. Tensuan, A.M. No. 2507-CFI, August 10, 1981)
SECTION 6
As an administrative officer of the court, a judge should
organize and supervise the court personnel to ensure the
prompt and efficient dispatch of business and require at all
times the observance of high standard of public service
and fidelity. A delay of three years in the transmission of
court records to the appellate court, where a period of 30
days is required, is inexcusable. (Pantaleon v. Gudez, A.M.
No. RTJ-00-1525. January 25, 2000)
A magistrate must exhibit that hallmark judicial
temperament of utmost sobriety and self-restraint which
are indispensable qualities of every judge. (Rodriguez v.
Bonifacio, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1510, November 6, 2000)
SECTION 7
A judge neglected his duty when he failed to exercise extra
care in ensuring that records of the cases and official
documents in his custody were intact. The Supreme Court
reiterated that “judges must adopt a system of record
management and organize their dockets in order to bolster
the prompt and efficient dispatch of business. (Beso vs.
Daguman, A.M. No. MTJ-99-1211, January 28, 2000)
DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDICIAL
OFFICERS (RULE 137)
COMPULSORY
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.
MANDATORY OR COMPULSORY
DISQUALIFICATION
1. When the judge, or his wife or child is pecuniarily
interested as heir, legatee, creditor, or otherwise;
2. When the judge is related to either party within the
6th degree of consanguinity or affinity or to counsel
within 4th civil degree;
3. When the judge has been executor, guardian,
administrator, trustee, or counsel;
4. When the judge has presided in an inferior court
where is ruling or is decision. (Rules of Court, Rule 137
Sec. 1)
Note: The same rule also provides that the judge may hear
and decide the case despite the presence of a
disqualification provided the interested parties both give
their written consent, signed by them and entered upon
the record. It has been decided by the Supreme Court that
oral consent is not valid, even though both parties have
agreed (Lazo v. Judge Tiong, A.M. No. MTJ-98-1173,
46
Green Notes 2019
December 15, 1998).
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)
VOLUNTARY
A judge may, in the exercise of sound discretion, disqualify
himself from sitting in a case, for just or valid reasons other
than those mentioned above. (Rules of Court, Rule 137, Sec.
1)
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.
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)
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)
ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION OF THE
SUPREME COURT OVER JUDGES AND
JUSTICES (ALL LEVELS)
The Supreme Court shall have the administrative
supervision over all courts and the personnel (1987
Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 6)
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)
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,
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Judicial Ethics
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.
PROCEDURE FOR DISCIPLINE OF JUDGES (RULE 140)
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.
Note: The complaint shall be served upon the respondent
and he shall be required to comment within ten (10) days
from the date of service. (Rules of Court, Rule 140, Sec. 2)
INVESTIGATION
Upon the filing of the comment of the respondent or upon
the expiration of the period for such filing, the Supreme
Court shall refer the matter to the Office of the Court
Administrator (OCA) for evaluation, report, and
recommendation or assign the case for investigation,
report, and recommendation to a retired member of the
Supreme Court, if the respondent is a Justice of the Court
of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan, or to 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 or to a
Judge of the Regional Trial Court, if the respondent is a
Judge of an inferior court. (Rules of Court, Rule 140, Sec. 3)
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. (Rules of Court, Rule 140, Sec. 4)
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
47
Green Notes 2019
record of the respondent in the OCA. (Rules of Court, Rule
140, Sec. 5)
The Supreme Court shall take action on the report as the
facts and the law may warrant. (Rules of Court, Rule 140, Sec.
6)
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)
AUTOMATIC CONVERSION OF ADMINISTRATIVE
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
Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations
Judicial Ethics
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.
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)
48
Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

PRACTICAL EXERCISES

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 49

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

DEMAND AND AUTHORIZATION LETTERS

FORM: DEMAND LETTER

[DATE]

[Name of debtor]
[Address of debtor]

Sir/Madam:

We write in behalf of our client, ____________, the matter of your non-payment of your obligation.

Records disclose that you have an outstanding obligation with our client in the amount of Php___________ inclusive of
interest and surcharges. Despite repeated demands, you failed and continuously fail to pay the aforesaid amount.

Accordingly, FINAL DEMAND is hereby made upon you to settle the amount of Php___________ within _______
days from receipt of this letter. Otherwise, we will be constrained to file the necessary legal action against you to protect the
interest of our client.

We trust that you will give this matter your prompt and preferential attention to avoid the expense and inconvenience of
litigation.

Sincerely yours,

ATTY. __________

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 50

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

FORM: AUTHORIZATION LETTER

AUTHORIZATION LETTER

[DATE]

[Recipient Name]
[Recipient Address]

To whom it may concern,

I, _______________, hereby authorized the bearer of this letter, _________________, to [process the documents
and sign on my behalf as needed] as described in the scope below. Identity proof details are also provided for verification and
authentication purposes.

Authorized Person: [John Smith]

Identity Type: [Passport]
Identity Number: [123456]
Authorized Person’s Signature:
Scope of Authorization: [process documents]
Start Date: [start date]
End Date: [end date]

Thank you very much.

Respectfully yours,

________________

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 51

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

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 cost or value thereof.

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

___________________ ______________________
(Lessor) (Lessee)
WITNESSES:

__________________ ______________________

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 52

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

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

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 53

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

FORM: CONTRACT OF SALE OF REALTY12 (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

(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 sale 3.

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

______________________
(vendor)

With my consent

______________________
(vendor’s wife)

SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

__________________ ______________________

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

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
3 Art. 1487, Civil Code

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 54

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

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

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 55

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, _______________, of legal age, and resident of _______________, do hereby name, constitute and
appoint _______________, of legal age, and resident of _______________, to be my true and lawful Attorney-in-
Fact and in my name, place and stead, do perform the following specific act(s):

(Specify the particular act/s to be performed)

Giving and granting unto said attorney-in-fact power and authority to do every act necessary and required in
connection with these presents, and hereby ratifying and confirming all that she may do by virtue of these presents.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed this Special Power of Attorney this ____ day of __________, ____, at
(venue).

(Sgd.) _______________
Principal

SIGNED IN THE PRESENCE OF:

(Sgd.) _______________
(Sgd.) _______________

Acknowledgment

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 56

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

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 commenced 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

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 57

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

NOTICE OF HEARING AND EXPLANATION

IN MOTIONS

FORM: NOTICE OF HEARING4

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: EXPLANATION 5

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.

4 required for petitions and motions before trial courts, not to the CA and the SC.
5 Requirement if service is not done by personal service. See: Rule 13, sections 11and 13.

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 58

Green Notes 2019 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

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 59

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

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

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 60

Green Notes 2019 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

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 61

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

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

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 62

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

NOTARIAL CERTIFICATES – JURAT AND

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

FORM: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT6 – 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 Identity7 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 date and place above written.

Doc No. ___; NOTARY PUBLIC for______8

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

6See: 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)
7 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 instrument, 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)
8 Sec 2, Rule VIII 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice for the contents of the concluding part of the notarial certificate

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 63

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

FORM: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INSTRUMENT CONSISTING OF TWO OR MORE PAGES9 (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 Identity10 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 date and place above
written.

Doc No. ___; NOTARY PUBLIC for______11

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

9 Applicable to deeds affecting lands (Sec. 127, Act No. 496, as amended)
10 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 instrument, 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)
11 Sec 2, Rule VIII 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice for the contents of the concluding part of the notarial certificate

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 64

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

FORM: JURAT12 (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

12See: 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)

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 65

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME, TO

DISMISS, AND TO DECLARE IN DEFAULT

FORM: MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT Branch _____,
________ City

_____________________
Plaintiff,
- versus - CIVIL CASE NO. _________
_______________________,
Defendant.

x-------------------------------------------------------x

MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:

1. He has been directed to file a Reply to defendant’s Answer by 10 May 2007.
2. The undersigned counsel, however, anticipates his inability to file the Reply on or before the said due date because
of the tremendous pressure of other equally urgent professional work requiring the preparation of pleadings and almost daily
trial appearances before the various courts within and outside Metro Manila. For this reason, the undersigned is constrained
to ask for an additional fifteen (15) days from 10 May 2007, or until 25 May 2007, within which to submit plaintiff’s Reply.
3. This motion is not intended for delay but is motivated only by the foregoing reason.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that he be granted an additional fifteen (15) days from 10 May 2007, or until
25 May 2007, within which to submit plaintiff’s Reply.

Quezon City; 13 April 2007.

(Sgd.) SUE YOO

Counsel for Plaintiff
[Address]
PLUS:

1. Request for and Notice of Hearing

2. Proof of Service

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 66

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

FORM: MOTION DISMISS

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT Branch _____,
________ City

_____________________
Plaintiff,
- versus - CIVIL CASE NO. _________
_______________________, For: ___________
Defendant.

x-------------------------------------------------------x

MOTION TO DISMISS

DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully moves to dismiss the Complaint on the ground that the Complaint fails to state
a cause of action as THE OBLIGATION SOUGHT TO BE ENFORCED BY PLAINTIFF IS NOT YET DUE AND DEMANDABLE, as
shown by the following:
1. Allegedly, plaintiff has failed to reach the quotas agreed upon under the Marketing Agreement dated 1 January 2006;
defendant now seeks to collect the sum of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P200,000.00), representing the balance of the
proceeds due plaintiff under the said Marketing Agreement.
2. The contract is for one (1) year and defendant is given that same period to reach the quota specified therein; the
period of one (1) year has not expired. Consequently, plaintiff’s claim is premature as there is yet no breach of the Marketing
Agreement until the period expires and the quota is not attained. For this reason, plaintiff’s Complaint states no cause of action
and must be dismissed.

WHEREFORE, defendant respectfully prays that the Complaint be DISMISSED for failure to state a cause of action.
Other just and equitable reliefs are also prayed for.

Quezon City; 13 April 2007.

(Sgd.) SUE YOO

Counsel for Plaintiff
[Address]

REQUEST FOR & NOTICE OF HEARING

THE BRANCH CLERK OF COURT

Metropolitan Trial Court
Branch 39, Quezon City

Please submit the foregoing Motion to the Court for its consideration and approval immediately upon receipt hereof
and kindly include the same in the court’s calendar for hearing on Friday, 27 April 2007 at 8:30 in the morning.

ATTICUS FINCH
1 MockingBird Street
Timog Avenue, Quezon City

Please take notice that counsel has requested to be heard on Friday, 27 April 2007 at 8:30 in the morning.

(Sgd.) SUE YOO

Counsel for Plaintiff
[Address]

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 67

Green Notes 2019 Practical Exercises

FORM: MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT Branch _____,
________ City

_____________________
Plaintiff,
- versus - CIVIL CASE NO. _________
_______________________,
Defendant.

x-------------------------------------------------------x

MOTION TO DECLARE DEFENDANT IN DEFAULT

PLAINTIFF, by counsel, respectfully states that:

1. Plaintiff filed this Complaint against defendant on 1 March 2007; summons were served on defendant on 20 March
2007, as indicated by the Sheriff’s Return of even date, a copy of which is attached as ANNEX A.
2. Defendant’s reglementary period to file Answer ended on 5 April 2007; no motion for extension of such period was
filed nor was any granted motu proprio by this Honorable Court. Despite the lapse of time, defendant has failed to answer the
Complaint against her; plaintiff is entitled to a declaration of default and the right to present evidence ex parte against
defendant.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff respectfully prays that defendant be declared in default and that plaintiff be allowed to present
evidence ex parte before the Clerk of Court acting as Commissioner.
Quezon City; 7 April 2007.

(Sgd.) SUE YOO

Counsel for Plaintiff
[Address]

PLUS:
1. Request for and Notice of Hearing
2. Proof of Service

Lasallian Commission on Bar Operations 68