PALE – Problem Areas in Legal Ethics

1. Definition of legal Ethics

 is a branch of moral science, which treats of the duties which an attorney owes to the
court, to the client, to his colleagues in the profession and to the public as embodied in
the Constitution, Rules of Court, the Code of Professional Responsibility, Canons of
Professional Ethics, jurisprudence, moral laws and special laws.
2. What constitutes practice of law?
 Practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court; it embraces
the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special
proceedings, the management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients
before judges and courts, and in addition, conveying.

Cayetano vs Monsod

G.R. No. 100113 September 3, 1991

Facts:

Christian Monsod was nominated by President Corazon C. Aquino to the position of Chairman of the
COMELEC in a letter received by the Secretariat of the Commission on Appointments. Commission on
Appointments confirmed Monsod’s nomination. Cayetano opposed and challenged the nomination and
the subsequent confirmation of the Commission because allegedly Monsod does not possess the
required qualification of having been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.

Issue:

Whether Monsod possesses the required qualification to be the chairman of COMELEC.

Ruling:

Yes, Monsod possesses the required qualification for the position.

The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court; it embraces the
preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, the
management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients before judges and courts, and in
addition, conveying.

In this case, Atty. Monsod is a member of the Philippine Bar, having passed the bar examinations of
1960 with the grade of 86.55%. He has been a dues paying member of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines. After passing the Bar, he worked in his father’s law office. Monsod also worked as an
operations officer for World Bank Group (1963-1970). Upon his return to the Philippines, he worked as
Chief Executive officer of Meralco Group, and subsequently rendered service to various company either
as legal and economic consultant or as chief executive officer. He also served as former Secretary
General (1986), and National Chairman of NAMFREL (1987), as a member of the Constitutional
Commission (1986-1987) and Davide Commission (1990), and as Chairman of Committee on
Accountability of Public Officers.

Atty. Monsod’s past work experiences as a lawyer-economist, a lawyer-manager, a lawyer-entrepreneur

of industry, a lawyer-negotiator of contracts, and a lawyer- legislator of both the rich and the poor —
verily more than satisfy the constitutional requirement — that he has been engaged in the practice of
law for at least ten years.

3. Practice of law privilege or a right?

 The practice of law is a privilege burdened with conditions.
 It is so delicately affected with public interest that it is both a power and a duty of the
State (through this Court) to control and regulate it in order to protect and promote the
public welfare.

Conditions:

1. Adherence to rigid standards of mental fitness,

2. maintenance of the highest degree of morality,
3. faithful observance of the rules of the legal profession,
4. compliance with the mandatory continuing legal education requirement and
5. payment of membership fees to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)

Qualifications:

1. Citizen of the Philippines

2. Atleast 21 years of age
3. Of good moral character
4. Resident of the Philippines
5. Not charged with a crime involving moral turpitude.
6. Proof of educational and moral qualifications
7. Passing the bar
8. Taking the lawyer’s oath
9. Signing the roll of attorneys

Dacanay Bar Matter 1678

Facts:

Benjamin Dacanay was a member of the bar who later on migrated to Canada for the treatment of his
ailments. He then acquired and became a Canadian citizen. He then reacquired his Philippine citizenship
though RA 9225 and wishes to resume his practice of law.

Issue:

Whether he can continue to practice law.

Ruling:

Yes, Dacanay can continue to practice law subject to certain conditions.

Filipinos who lost their citizenship through naturalization from another country and thereafter
reacquires their Philippine citizenship pursuant to RA 9225 is deemed not to have lost their citizenship. A
lawyer however who lost such citizenship and thereafter reacquires it cannot automatically practice law.
He must 1st secure from the Court the authority to do so, conditioned on:
 (a) the updating and payment in full of the annual membership dues in the IBP;

(b) the payment of professional tax;

(c) the completion of at least 36 credit hours of mandatory continuing legal education; this is
specially significant to refresh the applicant/petitioner’s knowledge of Philippine laws and
update him of legal developments and

(d) 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.

A.C. 1928 December 19, 1980

Atty. MARCIAL A. EDILLON

Facts:

Atty. Marcial Edillion was disbarred for stubborn refusal to pay his membership dues to the IBP since his
constitution despite due notice. In defense, he argued that such is invasion of his constitutional right for
being compelled to pay his dues to maintain his membership to the IBP. His reinstatement was then
filed by Chief Justice Castro.

Ruling:

Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with conditions. Failure to abide by any of such
condition entails loss of such privilege if the gravity thereof warrants such drastic move.

Membership of Atty Edillon to the bar is restored.

4. What is considered to be a good and regular standing?

 Maintain high standard of legal proficiency and (always act with good moral character) morality
considering that they are under the watchful eye of the public.
 Good moral character is more than just the absence of bad character. Such character expresses
itself in the will to do the unpleasant thing if it is right and the resolve not to do the pleasant
thing if it is wrong.
 Continue to possess good moral character.

RE: ANONYMOUS COMPLAINT AGAINST ATTY. CRESENCIO P. CO UNTIAN, JR.,

A.C. No. 5900

Facts:

Atty. Untian a member of the bar and a law professor of Xavier University was charged of sexual
harassment against certain students is such school.

In their complaint, one alleged that Atty. Untian has sent flowers, sent text messages and invited her to
go somewhere with another student. The other alleged that Atty. Untian showed her a picture of a
naked lady who looks like her on the corridor of the school in the presence of other students. Lastly the
other, claimed that during her recitation, atty. Untian humiliated her when she asked him to come again
when she was unable to grasp the question. Atty. Untian responded by saying that why ask him to come
again when he did not come the 1 st time and that it takes 5 minutes for him to come.

In defense, atty. Untian stated that such is does not constitute sexual harassment as such conduct does
not include affection, such was only natural since 1 of the student is his niece whom he talks to about
mature stuff and that his action during the recitation was only to create humor in the class.

Issue:

Whether atty. Untian should be suspended for sexual harassment.

Ruling:

Yes. Atty. Untian is suspend for sexual harassment.

Clearly, respondent abused the power and authority he possessed over the complainants. His sexually
laced conduct had created a hostile and offensive environment which deeply prejudiced his students. In
what was supposed to be a safe place for them to learn and develop, they were instead subjected to
unwarranted sexual advances.

Those privileged to practice the legal profession are expected to maintain not only a high standard of
legal proficiency, but also of morality considering that they are always under the watchful public eye
scrutinizing them both in their public and private lives.

As this Court often reminds members of the bar, the requirement of good moral character is of much
greater import, as far as the general public is concerned. Good moral character is more than just the
absence of bad character. Such character expresses itself in the will to do the unpleasant thing if it is
right and the resolve not to do the pleasant thing if it is wrong.

As officers of the court, lawyers must not only in fact be of good moral character but must also be seen
to be of good moral character and leading lives in accordance with the highest moral standards of the
community.

Moreover, the respondent being a professor and a member of the bar, is expected to maintain not only
a high standard of legal proficiency, but also of morality considering that they are always under the
watchful public eye scrutinizing them both in their public and private lives.

A.C. No. 12202

JERRY F. VILLA, COMPLAINANT, VS ATTY. PAULA DIMPA[**] BEATRIZ DEFENSOR –VELEZ

Facts:

Jerry and Atty. Defensor - Velez were both engaged in the business of providing security services.
Defensor – Velez convinced Jerry to lend her Php200, 000 which she will use to pay her security guards.
When the money was given the executed a memorandum of agreement, Defensor issued a post-dated
check and thereafter cut contact with Jerry. When the amount was due, Jerry deposited the check but it
was dishonored for insufficiency of funds. Jerry demanded payment from Defensor but was ignored so
he then instituted a proceeding before the IBP.
During the proceeding, Defensor did not appear and failed to respond to complaint despite notices. So,
she was deemed to have waived her right to participate in the proceedings. The IBP then recommended
her suspension for 1 year for not paying her debt when it was due and demandable and issued a
worthless check despite knowledge of its consequences which is considered gross misconduct, in
violation of the CPR which provides that a lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or
deceitful conduct.

Moreover, she also violated Rule 1.02 of the CPR, when she ignored the proceedings before the IBP
which provides that a lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
lessening confidence in the legal system.

Issue:

Whether she should be suspended.

Ruling:

Yes, she should be suspended.

The fiduciary duty of a lawyer and advocate is what places the law profession in a unique position of
trust and confidence, and distinguishes it from any other calling. Once this trust and confidence is
betrayed, the faith of the people not only in the individual lawyer but also in the legal profession as a
whole is eroded. To this end, all members of the bar are strictly required to at all times maintain the
highest degree of public confidence in the fidelity, honesty and integrity of their profession. The nature
of the office of a lawyer requires that he shall be of good moral character. This qualification is not only a
condition precedent to admission to the legal profession, but its continued possession is essential to
maintain one's good standing in the profession. Law is a noble profession, and the privilege to practice
it is bestowed only upon individuals who are competent intellectually, academically, and, equally
important, morally. Because they are vanguards of the law and the legal system, lawyers must at all
times conduct themselves, especially in their dealings with their clients and the public at large, with
honesty and integrity in a manner beyond reproach.

5. It is not a business but a profession.

 being a lawyer is a privilege with attached duties and obligations. Lawyers bear the responsibility
to meet the profession's exacting standards. A lawyer is expected to live by the lawyer's oath,
the rules of the profession and the Code of Professional Responsibility. The duties of a lawyer
may be classified into four general categories namely duties he owes to the court, to the public,
to the bar and to his client. A lawyer who transgresses any of his duties is administratively liable
and subject to the Court's disciplinary authority.

A.C. No. 9176, December 05, 2019

AGUSTIN ABOY, SR., COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. LEO, B. DIOCOS,

Facts:

Atty Diocos was the counsel of Aboy, the president of the cap holders of the winning code in the promo
held by pepsi cola company in Negros Oriental in a complaint for specific performance, sum of money,
breach of contract and damages. They Atty. Diocos collected php150 from the cap holder. Their case
was however dismissed for lack of cause of action. The complainant asked a copy of the decision from
Judge Villegas but was not refused. They then went to atty Diocos to ask for the same but was also
refused. Instead, he demanded 90k from the complainants so that he will appeal the case. They then ask
Atty. Diocos to withdraw as their counsel but he failed to issue his withdrawal. The complainants again
went to judge Villegas to ask a copy of the order. In the order, they found that the ground for dismissal
was failure to pay the docket fees. When such copy was lost, they again requested a copy wherein they
found that the ground was changed to absence of cause of action.

The complainants then filed an administrative case against Atty. Diocos alleging that he connived with
Judge Villegas in dismissing their case. During the proceeding, atty. Diocos admitted that he was indeed
their counsel but denied having collected the amount of 150 each. The IBP investigating commissioner
recommended the suspension of Atty. Diocos for 3 months.

Issue:

Whether Atty. Diocos should be suspended for violating the CPR.

Ruling:

Yes, Atty. Diocos should be suspended for his inaction.

In administrative proceedings against lawyers, the burden of proof rests on the complainant, and he/she
must establish the case against the respondent by clear, convincing and satisfactory proof, disclosing a
case that is free from doubt as to compel the exercise by the Court of its disciplinary power. The rule is
that "mere allegation is not evidence and is not equivalent to proof. Charges based on mere suspicion
and speculation likewise cannot be given credence. In this case, the complainant failed to prove that
atty. Diocos collected 150 from the cap holders and that there are 2 versions of the decision.

Atty. Diocos was however at fault for letting the time to appeal lapse. Lawyers are duty bound to inform
their clients of the next step to take and the possible consequences of their action or inaction. He should
have notified his clients of the adverse decision within the period to appeal to give his clients time to
decide whether to seek an appellate review.

It must be stressed that an attorney-client relationship is imbued with utmost trust and confidence, such
that clients are led to expect that their lawyer would be ever-mindful of their cause and, accordingly,
exercise the required degree of diligence in handling their affairs.

CANON 18 - A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT WITH COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE.

Rule 18.03 -A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable. Rule 18.04 - A lawyer shall keep the client informed of
the status of his case and shall respond within a reasonable time to the client's request for
information.

It is not enough that lawyers inform their clients of the dismissal of the case. It is also the lawyer's duty
to give information as to why the case was dismissed. To be clear, a lawyer need not wait for their
clients to ask for information but must advise them without delay about matters essential for them to
avail of legal remedies
Qualifications:

1. Rule 138 Sec. 2 ROC - Requirements for all applicants for admission to the bar. — Every
applicant for admission as a member of the bar must be
a. a citizen of the Philippines,
b. at least twenty-one years of age,
c. of good moral character, and
d. resident of the Philippines; and
e. must produce before the Supreme Court satisfactory evidence of good moral character,
and that no charges against him, involving moral turpitude, have been filed or are
pending in any court in the Philippines.

RE: APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO THE PHILIPPINE BAR, vs. VICENTE D. CHING,

BAR MATTER No. 914 October 1, 1999

Facts:

Vicente Ching was born of a Filipino mother and of a Chinese father. He was born in Tuabao La Union
and has resided in the Philippines.

When he finished his bachelor of laws in SLU, he filed his application to take the bar examinations. He
was then allowed to take the bar under the condition that he must submit before the court proof of his
Philippine citizenship. He then complied by submitting a copy of his voter certification, certification as a
certified public accountant and certification as a member of the sangguniang bayan.

He passed the bar examination but was not allowed to take his oath because of the status of his
citizenship and was then required to submit further proof of his citizenship.

OSG in its comment stated that pursuant to the 1935 Constitution, Ching is a Chinese citizen being born
of a Chinese father and continued to be so, unless upon reaching the age of majority and within a
reasonable time, he elected Philippine citizenship.

Issue:

Whether Ching is a Filipino citizen.

Ruling:

No, Ching is not a Filipino citizen.

Ching is governed by the 1935 Constitution for being born during its effectivity. It provides that a child
born of a Filipino mother and an alien father, follows the citizenship of his father, unless upon reaching
the age of majority, he elects Philippine citizenship. Jurisprudence further settled that electing Philippine
citizenship must be made within a reasonable period of time which is 3 years. Such however is subject to
exception which is if the person has always considered himself a Filipino.

In this case, Ching however failed to elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority. 14
years had already elapsed for the election of such citizenship. The exception does not apply to Ching as
the law specifically provides election for the acquisition of Philippine citizenship and that he offered no
reason for the delayed election thereof.
Philippine citizenship can never be treated like a commodity that can be claimed when needed and
suppressed when convenient. As such, he should avail of the right with fervor, enthusiasm and
promptitude.

2. Filipino with a foreign law degree. Sec 5, Rule 138 ROC - Additional requirements for other
applicants. — All applicants for admission other than those referred to in the two preceding
section shall, before being admitted to the examination, satisfactorily show that they have
regularly studied law for four years, and successfully completed all prescribed courses, in a law
school or university, officially approved and recognized by the Secretary of Education. The
affidavit of the candidate, accompanied by a certificate from the university or school of law,
shall be filed as evidence of such facts, and further evidence may be required by the court.

No applicant shall be admitted to the bar examinations unless he has satisfactorily completed
the following courses in a law school or university duly recognized by the government: 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.

Letter of Atty. Mendoza