LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS
Lecture NotesCompiled by: Atty. Chezie K. Demegillo
A. LEGAL ETHICS
Legal Ethics is the branch of moral science which treats of the duties which an attorney owes to the court, to his client, to his collegues in the profession and to the public. (Malcolm, Legal and Judicial Ethics, page 8 [1949])
1. Practice of Law a. Concept
(a.1) Privilege
The practice of law is a privilege granted only to those who possess the STRICT INTELLECTUAL AND MORAL QUALIFICATIONS required of lawyers who are instruments in the effective and efficient administration of justice. (In Re: Argosino, 1997).
Practice of Law – any activity, in or out of court which requires the application
of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. To engage in the practice of law is to give notice or render any kind of service, which or devise or service requires the use in any degree of legal knowledge or skill (Cayetano v. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210).
A lawyer is one who:
a. Passed the Philippine Bar Examination b. Has taken his/her oath
c. Has registered in the roll of attorneys
d. Has received the certificate of license to practice law from the Clerk of Court of the Supreme Court.
After admission to the Bar, he or she must be:
a. IBP member of good standing(paying regular dues) b. Pay annual privilege tax
c. Observe the rules on proper ethics.
Qualifications/Requirements for admission to the Bar:
1. citizen of the Philippines 2. at least 21 years old 3. of good moral character 4. Philippine resident
5. Production before the supreme court satisfactory evidence of:
a. good moral character (continuing requirement) b. no charges against him, involving moral
turpitude, have been filed or are pending in any
Requirement of Good Moral Character: a continuing requirement; good moral character is not only a condition precedent for admission to the legal profession, but it must also remain intact in order to maintain one’s good standing in that exclusive and honored fraternity. (Tapucar vs. Tapucar, A.C. 4148, 1998)
Academic Requirements for Candidates:
1. a bachelor’s degree in arts and sciences (pre-law course) 2. a completed course in:
a. civil law
b. commercial law c. remedial law
d. public international law e. private international law f. political law
g. labor and social legislation h. medial jurisprudence i. taxation
j. legal ethics
Supreme Court shall have the following power:
5). Promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights, pleadings, practice and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the Integrated Bar and legal assistance to the underprivileged. (Section 5, Article VIII, 1987 Constitution)
(a.2) Profession, Not Business
In DOMINADOR P. BURBE, vs. ATTY. ALBERTO C. MAGULTA, respondent. AC No. 99-634, June 10, 2002, the Supreme Court said:
“In this day and age, members of the bar often forget that the practice of law is a profession and not a business.11Lawyering is not primarily meant to be a money-making venture, and law advocacy is not a capital that necessarily yields profits.12 The gaining of a livelihood is not a professional but a secondary consideration.13 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. The practice of law is a noble calling in which emolument is a byproduct, and the highest eminence may be attained without making much money.”
b. Appearance of Non-Lawyers (1) Law Student Practice
Legal Aid Program – A senior law student, who is enrolled in a recognized law school’s clinical education program approved by the Supreme Court may appear before any court without compensation, to represent indigent clients, accepted by the Legal Clinic of the law school. The student shall be under the
direct supervision and control of an IBP member duly accredited by the law school.
(2) Non-Lawyers in Administrative Tribunal
If before the Labor Court, Section 8, Rule III of the NLRC Rules:
(4) he is a duly-accredited member of any legal aid office
recognized by the Department of Justice or Integrated Bar of
the Philippines: Provided, that he (i) presents proof of his
accreditation; and (ii) represents a party to the case;
(3) Non-Lawyers in Courts
Cases before the MTC: Party to the litigation, in person OR through an agent or friend or appointed by him for that purpose (Sec. 34, Rule 138, RRC)
Before any other court: Party to the litigation, in person (Ibid.)
Criminal case before the MTC in a locality where a duly licensed member of the Bar is not available: the judge may appoint a non-lawyer who is:
a. resident of the province
b. of good repute for probity and ability to aid the accused in his defense (Rule 116, Sec. 7, RRC). Under the Cadastral Act, a non-lawyer can represent a claimant before the Cadastral Court (Act no. 2259, Sec. 9).
(4) Proceedings Where Lawyers Prohibited from Appearing
ATTY. EVELYN J. MAGNO, vs. ATTY. OLIVIA VELASCO-JACOBA, A.C. No. 6296 November 22, 2005, the Supreme Court ruled:
Section 415 of the LGC of 19917, on the subject Katarungang Pambarangay, provides:
Section 415. Appearance of Parties in Person. - In all katarungang pambarangay proceedings, the parties must appear in person without the assistance of the counsel or representative, except for minors and incompetents who may be assisted by their next of kin who are not lawyers.
The above-quoted provision clearly requires the personal appearance of the parties in katarungan pambarangayconciliation proceedings, unassisted by counsel or representative. The rationale behind the personal appearance requirement is to enable the lupon to secure first hand and direct information about the facts and issues,8 the exception being in cases where minors or incompetents are parties. There can be no quibbling
that laymen of goodwill can easily agree to conciliate and settle their disputes between themselves without what sometimes is the unsettling assistance of lawyers whose presence could
sometimes obfuscate and confuse issues.9 Worse still, the participation of lawyers with their penchant to use their analytical skills and legal knowledge tend to prolong instead of expedite settlement of the case.
c. Sanctions for Practice or Appearance Without Authority (1) Lawyers Without Authority
Ground to cite him/her for contempt. If corrupt or willful appearance, ground for DISBARMENT.
(2) Persons Not Lawyers Kinds of Appearances:
a. General appearance is when the party comes to court either as plaintiff or defendant and seeks general relief from the court for satisfaction of his claims or counter-claims respectively.
It is the one done by a lawyer for any act except to question the jurisdiction of the court.
b. Special Appearance is when a defendant appears in court solely for the purpose of objecting to the jurisdiction of the court over his person.
Is one solely intended to question the jurisdiction of the court.
d. Public Officials and Practice of Law
CANON 6 - THESE CANONS SHALL APPLY TO LAWYERS IN GOVERNMENT SERVICE IN THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR OFFICIAL TASKS.
Rule 6.01 - The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution is not to convict but to see that justice is done. The suppression of facts or the concealment of witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is highly reprehensible and is cause for disciplinary action.
Rule 6.02 - A lawyer in the government service shall not use his public position to promote or advance his private interests, nor allow the latter to interfere with his public duties.
Note: Public Officials include elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent and temporary, whether in the career or non-career service, including military and police personnel,
whether or not they receive compensation regardless of amount. (Sec. 3(b) R.A. 6713)
Public Officials who cannot engage in the private practice of Law in the Philippines:
1. Judges and other officials as employees of the Supreme Court (Rule 148, Sec. 35, RRC).
2. Officials and employees of the OSG (Ibid.)
3. Government prosecutors (People v. Villanueva, 14 SCRA 109).
4. President, Vice-President, members of the cabinet, their deputies and assistants (Art. VIII Sec. 15, 1987 Constitution).
5. Members of the Constitutional Commission (Art IX-A, Sec. 2, 1987 Constitution)
6. Ombudsman and his deputies (Art. IX, Sec. 8 (2nd par), 1987 Constitution)
7. All governors, city and municipal mayors (R.A. No. 7160, Sec. 90).
8. Those prohibited by special law
Public Officials with Restrictions in the Practice of Law:
a. No Senator as member of the House of Representative may personally appear as counsel before any court of justice as before the Electoral Tribunals, as quasi-judicial and other administration bodies (Art. VI, Sec. 14, 1987 Constitution). b. Under the Local Government Code (RA 7160, Sec. 91)
Sanggunian members may practice their professions provided that if they are members of the Bar, they shall not:
1. appear as counsel before any court in any civil case wherein a local government unit or any office, agency, or instrumentality of the government is the adverse party;
2. appear as counsel in any criminal case wherein an officer or employee of the national or local government is accused of an offense committed in relation to his office;
3. collect any fee for their appearance in administrative proceedings involving the local government unit of which he is an official;
4. use property and personnel of the government except when the Sanggunian member concerned is defending the interest of the government.
c. Under RA 910, Sec. 1, as amended, a retired justice or judge receiving pension from the government, cannot act as counsel in any civil case in which the Government, or any of its subdivision or agencies is the adverse party or in a criminal case wherein an officer or employee of the Government is accused of an offense in relation to his office.
(1) Prohibition or Disqualification of Former Government Attorneys Rule 6.03 - A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service, accept engagement or employment in connection with any matter in which he had intervened while in said service.
Section 7 (b) of R.A. 6713 prohibits officials from doing any of the following acts:
1. Own, control, manage or accept employment as officer, employee, consultant, counsel, broker, agent, or trustee or nominee in any private enterprise, regulated, supervised or licensed by their office unless expressly allowed by law.
This prohibitions shall continue to apply for a period of one (1) year after resignation, retirement, or separation from public service, except in case of sub-paragraph b,2 above, BUT THE PROFESSIONAL CONCERNED
CANNOT PRACTICE HIS PROFESSION IN
CONENCTION WITH ANY OTHER MATTER BEFORE THE OFFICE HE USED TO BE WITH in which case the one (1) year prohibition shall likewise apply.
e. Lawyers Authorized to Represent the Government
Office of the Solicitor General is required to represent the government, its agencies and instrumentalities and its officials and agents in any litigation, proceedings or investigation requiring the services of a lawyer. (Section 35, Administrative Code)
f. Lawyer’s Oath
“I, __________________, 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 willingly nor wittingly promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit, or give aid nor consent to the same; I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself as a lawyer according to the best of my knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to the court as to my clients; and I impose upon myself this voluntary obligations without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God.” (Form 28, RRC)
2. Duties and Responsibilities of a Lawyer
A. Society
CANON 1 - A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL PROCESSES.
Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
Case Digest on Julieta B. Narag vs. Atty. Dominador M. Narag (291 SCRA 451) Gross Immoral Conduct
Facts: Atty. Narag’s spouse filed a petition for disbarment in the IBP alleging that her husband courted one of his students, later maintaining her as a mistress and having children by her. Atty. Narag claims that his wife was a possessive, jealous woman who abused him and filed the complaint out of spite. IBP disbarred him, hence, this petition.
Held: Narag failed to prove his innocence because he failed to refute the testimony given against him and it was proved that his actions were of public knowledge and brought disrepute and suffering to his wife and children. Good moral character is a continuing qualification required of every member of the bar. Thus, when a lawyer fails to meet the exacting standard of moral integrity, the Supreme Court may withdraw his or her privilege to practice law. (Canons 1&7, Rule 7.03, Code of Ethics for Lawyers) It is not only a condition precedent to the practice of law, but a continuing qualification for all members. Hence when a lawyer is found guilty of gross immoral conduct, he may be suspended or disbarred. Grossly immoral means it must be so corrupt as to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a high degree or committed under such scandalous or revolting circumstances as to shock the common sense of decency. As a lawyer, one must not only refrain from adulterous relationships but must not behave in a way that scandalizes the public by creating a belief that he is flouting those moral standards.
Rule 1.02 - A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessening confidence in the legal system.
Case Digest on Felicidad L. Oronce, et al. v. Court of Appeals, et. al. (298 SCRA 133) Gross Misconduct
Facts: During a dispute over land, Flaminiano illegally took possession of the property in litigation using abusive methods. She was aided by her husband, a lawyer. The illegal entry took place while the case was pending in the CA & while a writ of preliminary injunction was in force.
Held: Atty. Flaminiano’s acts of entering the property without the consent of its occupants & in contravention of the existing writ or preliminary injunction & making utterances showing disrespect for the law & this Court, are unbecoming of a member of the Bar. Although he says that they “peacefully” took over the property, such “peaceful” take-over cannot justify defiance of the writ of preliminary injunction that he knew was still in force. Through his acts, he has flouted his duties as a member of the legal profession. Under the Code
of Professional Responsibility, he is prohibited from counseling or abetting “activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessening confidence in the legal system.”
Rule 1.03 - A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage any suit or proceeding or delay any man’s cause.
BARRATRY is the offense of frequently exciting and stirring up quarrels and suits, either at law or otherwise. It is lawyer’s act of fomenting suits among individuals and offering his legal services to one of them. (Albano and Albano, page 45)
AMBULANCE CHASER is a lawyer who haunts hospitals and visits homes of afflicted, officiously intruding their presence and persistently offering his services on the basis of a contingent fee. (Warvelle, Legal Ethics, pp. 56-67)
Examples of delaying man’s cause:
a. Resorting to technicalities to frustrate the ends of justice. b. Filing of multiple or repetitious petitions which obviously
delay the execution of a final and executor judgment. c. Filing several actions covering the same subject matter
or seeking substantial or identical relief. d. Frivolous appeals for purposes of delay.
e. Filing motion for postponements and other kinds of motions for dilatory purposes.
f. Indiscriminate filing of suits against a party clearly
intended for harassment. (Albano and Albano, pp. 45-46) Rule 1.04 - A lawyer shall encourage his clients to avoid, end or settle a controversy if it will admit of a fair settlement.
(Reason: to save client from litigation expenses and minimize clogging of court docket.)
Case: Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. vs. Attys. Antonio M. Llorente and Ligaya P. Salayon, A.C. No. 4690, August 29, 2000.
Facts: Attys. Antonio Llorente and Ligaya Salayon were election officers of the COMELEC and held the position of Chairman and Vice-Chairman respectively for the Pasig City Board of Candidates. The respondents helped conduct and oversee the 1995 elections. Then Senatorial candidate Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. alleged that the respondents tampered with the votes received by them by either adding more votes for particular candidates in their Statement of Votes (SoV) or reducing the number of votes of particular candidates in their SoV. Pimentel filed an administrative complaint for their disbarment. Respondents argued that the discrepancies were due to honest mistake, oversight and fatigue. Respondents also argued that the IBP Board of Governors had already exonerated them from any offense and that the motion for reconsideration filed by Pimentel was not filed in time.
Held: GUILTY. Respondents do not dispute the fact that massive irregularities attended the canvassing of the Pasig City election returns. The only explanation they could offer for such irregularities is that the same could
be due to honest mistake, human error, and/or fatigue on the part of the members of the canvassing committees who prepared the SoVs. There is a limit, we believe, to what can be construed as an honest mistake or oversight due to fatigue, in the performance of official duty. The sheer magnitude of the error renders the defense of honest mistake or oversight due to fatigue, as incredible and simply unacceptable. Indeed, what is involved here is not just a case of mathematical error in the tabulation of votes per precinct as reflected in the election returns and the subsequent entry of the erroneous figures in one or two SoVs but a systematic scheme to pad the votes of certain senatorial candidates at the expense of the petitioner in complete disregard of the tabulation in the election returns. A lawyer who holds a government position may not be disciplined as a member of the bar for misconduct in the discharge of his duties as a government official. However, if the misconduct also constitutes a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility or the lawyer’s oath or is of such character as to affect his qualification as a lawyer or shows moral delinquency on his part, such individual may be disciplined as a member of the bar for such misconduct. Here, by certifying as true and correct the SoVs in question, respondents committed a breach of Rule 1.01 of the Code which stipulates that a lawyer shall not engage in “unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.” By express provision of Canon 6, this is made applicable to lawyers in the government service. In addition, they likewise violated their oath of office as lawyers to “do no falsehood.” The Court found the respondents guilty of misconduct and fined them PhP 10,000 each and issued a stern warning that similar conduct in the future will be severely punished.
(2) Efficient and Convenient Legal Services
CANON 2 - A LAWYER SHALL MAKE HIS LEGAL SERVICES AVAILABLE IN AN EFFICIENT AND CONVENIENT
MANNER COMPATIBLE WITH THE INDEPENDENCE,
INTEGRITY AND EFFECTIVE-NESS OF THE PROFESSION.
Rule 2.01 - A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid reasons, the cause of the defenseless or the oppressed.
Rule 2.02 - In such cases, even if the lawyer does not accept a case, he shall not refuse to render legal advice to the person concerned if only to the extent necessary to safeguard the latter’s rights.
Rule 2.03 - A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed primarily to solicit legal business.
Rule 2.04 - A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those customarily prescribed unless the circumstances so warrant. (3) True, Honest Fair, Dignified and Objective Information on Legal Services
CANON 3 - A LAWYER IN MAKING KNOWN HIS LEGAL SERVICES SHALL USE ONLY TRUE, HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED AND OBJECTIVE INFORMATION OR STATEMENT OF FACTS.
Rule 3.01 - A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or unfair statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services.
Rule 3.02 - In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or assumed name shall be used. 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.
Rule 3.03 - Where a partner accepts public office, he shall withdraw from the firm and his name shall be dropped from the firm name unless the law allows him to practice law concurrently.
Rule 3.04 - A lawyer shall not pay or give anything of value to representatives of the mass media in anticipation of, or in return for, publicity to attract legal business.
NO ADVERTISEMENT IS ALLOWED: Exceptions:
1. Reputable law list , in a manner consistent with the standards of conduct imposed by the canons, of brief biographical and informative data are allowed (Ulep vs. Legal Clinic Inc. 223 SCRA 378)
2. Use of simple professional card (with name, name of law firm, address, telephone number, and special branch of law practiced (Id)
3. Publication of announcement of opening of law firm or changes
in partnership, associates, firm name, or office address, being for the
convenience of the profession.(Id)
4. Advertisements or simple announcement of the existence of a lawyer or his law firm posted anywhere except court rooms and
government buildings.
5. Advertisements or announcement in any legal publication, including books, journals and legal magazines and in telephone directories.
(4) Participation in the Improvement and Reforms in Legal System
CANON 4 - A LAWYER SHALL PARTICIPATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM BY INITIATING OR SUPPORTING EFFORTS IN LAW REFORM AND IN THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.
(5) Participation in Legal Education Program
CANON 5 - A LAWYER SHALL KEEP ABREAST OF LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS, PARTICIPATE IN CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS, SUPPORT EFFORTS TO ACHIEVE HIGH STANDARDS IN LAW
SCHOOLS AS WELL AS IN THE PRACTICAL TRAINING OF LAW STUDENTS AND ASSIST IN DISSEMINATING INFORMATION REGARDING THE LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE.
B. The Legal Profession
(1) Integrated Bar of the Philippines
CANON 7 - A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INTEGRATED BAR.
Rule 7.01 - A lawyer shall be answerable for knowingly making a false statement or suppressing a material fact in connection with his application for admission to the bar.
Rule 7.02 - A lawyer shall not support the application for admission to the bar of any person known by him to be unqualified in respect to character, education, or other relevant attribute.
Rule 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession.
(a) Membership and Dues
Case: Soliman M. Santos, Jr. v. Atty. Francisco R. Llamas A.C. No. 4749. January 20, 2000 Misrepresentation and Non-payment of IBP Dues
Facts: Complaint for misrepresentation and non-payment of bar membership dues. It appears that Atty. Llamas, who for a number of years now, has not indicated the proper PTR and IBP OR Nos. and data in his pleadings. If at all, he only indicated “IBP Rizal 259060” but he has been using this for at least 3 years already. On the other hand, respondent, who is now of age, averred that he is only engaged in a “limited” practice of law and under RA 7432, as a senior citizen, he is exempted from payment of income taxes and included in this exemption is the payment of membership dues.
Held: GUILTY. Rule 139-A requires that every member of the Integrated Bar shall pay annual dues and default thereof for six months shall warrant suspension of membership and if nonpayment covers a period of 1-year, default shall be a ground for removal of the delinquent’s name from the Roll of Attorneys. It does not matter whether or not respondent is only engaged in “limited” practice of law. Moreover, the exemption invoked by respondent does not include exemption from payment of membership or association dues. In addition, by indicating “IBP Rizal 259060” in his pleadings and thereby misprepresenting to the public and the courts that he had paid his IBP dues to the Rizal Chapter, respondent is guilty of violating the Code of Professional Responsibility
which provides: Rule 1.01 – A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. His act is also a violation of Rule 10.01 which provides that: A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court; nor mislead or allow the court to be misled by any artifice. Lawyer was suspended for 1 year or until he has paid his IBP dues, whichever is later.
(2) Upholding the Dignity and Integrity of the Profession (3) Courtesy, Fairness and Candor Towards Professional Colleagues
CANON 8 - A LAWYER SHALL CONDUCT HIMSELF WITH
COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND CANDOR TOWARD HIS
PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES, AND SHALL AVOID HARASSING TACTICS AGAINST OPPOSING COUNSEL.
Rule 8.01 - A lawyer shall not, in his professional dealings, use language which is abusive, offensive or otherwise improper.
Rule 8.02 - A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach upon the professional employment of another lawyer; however, it is the right of any lawyer, without fear or favor, to give proper advice and assistance to those seeking relief against unfaithful or neglectful counsel.
(4) No Assistance in Unauthorized Practice of Law
CANON 9 - A LAWYER SHALL NOT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ASSIST IN THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW.
Rule 9.01 - A lawyer shall not delegate to any unqualified person the performance of any task which by law may only be performed by a member of the Bar in good standing.
Rule 9.02 - A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legal services with persons not licensed to practice law, except:
a) 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; or
b) Where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished legal business of a deceased lawyer; or
c) 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 profitable sharing arrangement.
Case:
Engr. Gilbert Tumbokon vs. Atty. Mariano R. Pefianco. A.C. No. 6116,
August 1, 2012. Attorney; sharing of fees with non- lawyers. Respondent’s
defense that forgery had attended the execution of the August 11, 1995 letter was belied by his July 16, 1997 letter admitting to have undertaken the payment of complainant’s commission but passing on the responsibility to Sps. Yap.
Clearly, respondent has violated Rule 9.02, Canon 9 of the Code which prohibits a lawyer from dividing or stipulating to divide a fee for legal services with persons not licensed to practice law, except in certain cases which do not obtain in the case at bar.
c. The Courts
(1) Candor, Fairness and Good Faith Towards the Courts
CANON 10 - A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH TO THE COURT.
Rule 10.01 - A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in Court; nor shall he mislead, or allow the Court to be misled by any artifice.
Rule 10.02 - A lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or misrepresent the contents of paper, the language or the argument of opposing counsel, or the text of a decision or authority, or knowingly cite as law a provision already rendered inoperative by repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact that which has not been proved.
Rule 10.03 - A lawyer shall observe the rules of procedure and shall not misuse them to defeat the ends of justice.
Atty. Josabeth V. Alonso, et al. vs. Atty. Ibaro B. Relaminda, Jr., A.C. No. 8481, August 3, 2010.Attorney; violation of rules on forum shopping and abuse of judicial processes. A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client, but not at the expense of truth and the administration of justice. The filing of multiple petitions constitutes abuse of the court’s processes and improper conduct that tends to impede, obstruct and degrade the administration of justice and will be punished as contempt of court. Needless to state, the lawyer who files such multiple or repetitious petitions (which obviously delays the execution of a final and executory judgment) subjects himself to disciplinary action for incompetence (for not knowing any better) or for willful violation of his duties as an attorney to act with all good fidelity to the courts, and to maintain only such actions as appear to him to be just and are consistent with truth and honor. The filing of another action concerning the same subject matter, in violation of the doctrine of res judicata, runs contrary to Canon 12 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which requires a lawyer to exert every effort and consider it his duty to assist in the speedy and efficient administration of justice. By his actuations, respondent also violated Rule 12.02 and Rule 12.04 of the Code, as well as a lawyer’s mandate “to delay no man for money or malice.”
(2) Respect for Courts and Judicial Officers Cases:
In re: Supreme Court Resolution dated 28 April 2003 in G.R. Nos. 145817 and 145822. A.C. No. 6332, April 17, 2012 .Attorney; groundless imputation of bribery. As officers of the court, lawyers are duty-bound to observe and maintain the respect due to the courts and judicial officers. They are to abstain from offensive or menacing language or behavior before the court and must refrain from attributing to a judge motives that are not supported by the record or have no materiality to the case. Atty. Peña cannot be excused for uttering snide and accusatory remarks at the expense of the reputation and integrity of members of this Court, and for using those unsubstantiated claims as basis for the subject Motion for Inhibition. Not only has respondent Peña failed to show sincere remorse for his malicious insinuations of bribery and wrongdoing against Justice Carpio, he in fact continually availed of such unethical tactics in moving for the inhibition of eleven Justices of the Court. Indeed, his pattern of behavior can no longer be seen as isolated incidents that the Court can pardon given certain mitigating circumstances. Respondent Peña has blatantly and consistently cast unfounded aspersions against judicial officers in utter disregard of his duties and responsibilities to the Court. Respondent Peña’s actions betray a similar disrespectful attitude towards the Court that cannot be countenanced especially for those privileged enough to practice law in the country.
CANON 11 - A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND MAINTAIN THE RESPECT DUE TO THE COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST ON SIMILAR CONDUCT BY OTHERS.
Rule 11.01 - A lawyer shall appear in court properly attired. Rule 11.02 - A lawyer shall punctually appear at court hearings.
Rule 11.03 - A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous, offensive or menacing language or behavior before the Courts.
Case:
Complaints of Mrs. Milagros Lee & Samantha Lee against Atty. Gil Luisito R. Capito, A.M. No. 2008-19-SC. August 18, 2010. Attorney; gross discourtesy. When Milagros finally met respondent on September 30, 2008 [in order to collect on his debt to her], respondent, in the presence of several others, told her “Eh kung sabihin ko na sugar mommy
kita,” adding that “Nagpapakantot ka naman sa akin.” The Court finds
that respondent is indeed guilty of gross discourtesy amounting to conduct unbecoming of a court employee. By such violation, respondent failed to live up to his oath of office as member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and violated Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Court has consistently been reminding officials and employees of the Judiciary that their conduct or behavior is circumscribed with a heavy burden of responsibility which, at all times, should be characterized by, among other things, strict propriety and decorum. As such, they should not use abusive, offensive, scandalous, menacing and improper language. Their every act or word should be marked by prudence, restraint, courtesy and dignity. Aside from violating
Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, respondent appears to have also violated Rule 8.01 of the same Code.
Rule 11.04 - A lawyer shall not attribute to a Judge motives not supported by the record or have no materiality to the case.
Rule 11.05 - A lawyer shall submit grievances against a Judge to the proper authorities only.
(3) Assistance in the Speedy and Efficient Administration of Justice
CANON 12 - A LAWYER SHALL EXERT EVERY EFFORT AND CONSIDER IT HIS DUTY TO ASSIST IN THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.
Rule 12.01 - A lawyer shall not appear for trial unless he has adequately prepared himself on the law and the facts of his case, the evidence he will adduce and the order of its preferences. He should also be ready with the original documents for comparison with the copies.
Rule 12.02 - A lawyer shall not file multiple actions arising from the same cause.
Rule 12.03 - A lawyer shall not, after obtaining extensions of time to file pleadings, memoranda or briefs, let the period lapse without submitting the same or offering an explanation for his failure to do so.
Rule 12.04 - A lawyer shall not unduly delay a case, impede the execution of a judgment or misuse Court processes.
Case: Ban Hua U. Flores v. Atty. Enrique S. Chua (306 SCRA 465) Falsehood/Forum-shopping/Dilatory Tactics
Facts: Chua was charged with many offenses. The evidence was found to support the charges that he notarized a forged deed of sale, that he caused to be published an advertisement of a SEC decision in order to bring ridicule and shame upon a corporation, that he filed a civil case knowing that the reliefs he prayed for were probably granted in the SEC case – thus belying his certification against forum shopping. He has also been previously reprimanded for bribing a judge and for consistently using dilatory tactics to prolong a litigation.
Held: DISBARRED. He has thus violated Rules 10.01, 12.02, 12.04 (foisting or commission of falsehood, forum-shopping and causing in court proceedings), Canon 19 (failing to resort to lawful means in representing his client), 27, 3.01 and 13.02 (causing undue publication of a pending action). He had an active role in committing fraud since he falsely stated that the person making the deed of sale appeared before him and stated that the same
was his free act and deed- when evidence shows the signature was forged; also, he prolonged a family dispute by using dilatory tactics and placing an advertisement in order to ridicule his opponents – in violation of Rule 1.04 that lawyers should encourage their clients to end a controversy by a fair settlement. A lawyer must uphold the integrity of the profession. He brings honor to it by honesty and fair dealing and by performing his duties to society, the bar, the courts and his clients.
Rule 12.05 - A lawyer shall refrain from talking to his witness during a break or recess in the trial, while the witness is still under examination.
Rule 12.06 - A lawyer shall not knowingly assist a witness to misrepresent himself or to impersonate another.
Rule 12.07 - A lawyer shall not abuse, browbeat or harass a witness nor needlessly inconvenience him.
Rule 12.08 - A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf of his client, except:
a) on formal matters, such as the mailing, authentication or custody of an instrument, and the like, or
b) on substantial matters, in cases where his testimony is essential to the ends of justice, in which event he must, during his testimony, entrust the trial of the case to another counsel.
(4) Reliance on Merits of Case, Not From Improper Influence Upon the Courts
CANON 13 - A LAWYER SHALL RELY UPON THE MERITS OF HIS CAUSE AND REFRAIN FROM ANY IMPROPRIETY WHICH TENDS TO INFLUENCE, OR GIVES THE APPEARANCE OF INFLUENCING THE COURT
Rule 13.01 - A lawyer shall not extend extraordinary attention or hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for cultivating familiarity with Judges.
Rule 13.02 - A lawyer shall not make public statements in the media regarding a pending case tending to arouse public opinion for or against a party.
Rule 13.03 - A lawyer shall not brook or invite interference by another branch or agency of the government in the normal course of judicial proceedings.
d. The Clients
(a) Services Regardless of Person’s Status
CANON 14 - A LAWYER SHALL NOT REFUSE HIS SERVICES TO THE NEEDY.
Rule 14.01 - 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.
(b) Services as Counsel De Officio
Rule 14.02 - 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.
(c) Valid Grounds for Refusal
Rule 14.03 - 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 14.04 - A lawyer who accepts the cause of a person unable to pay his professional fees shall observe the same standard of conduct governing his relations with paying clients.
(2) Candor, Fairness and Loyalty to Clients (a) Confidentiality Rule
CANON 21 - A LAWYER SHALL PRESERVE THE CONFIDENCE AND SECRETS OF HIS CLIENT EVEN AFTER THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATION IS TERMINATED
Rule 21.01 - A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or secrets of his client except:
a) When authorized by the client after acquianting him of the consequences of the disclosure;
b) When required by law;
c) When necessary to collect his fees or to defend himself, his employees or associates or by judicial action.
Rule 21.02 - A lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his client, use information acquired in the course of employment, nor shall he use he same to his own advantage or that of a third person, unless the client with full knowledge of the circumstances consents thereto.
Rule 21.03 - A lawyer shall not, without the written consent of his client, give information from his files to an outside agency seeking such information for auditing, statistical, bookkeeping, accounting, data processing, or any similar purpose.
Rule 21.04 - A lawyer may disclose the affairs of a client of the firm to partners or associates thereof unless prohibited by the client.
Rule 21.05 - A lawyer shall adopt such measures as may be required to prevent those whose services are utilized by him, from disclosing or using confidences or secrets of the client.
Rule 21.06 - A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet conversation about a client’s affairs even with members of his family.
Rule 21.07 - A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been consulted about a particular case except to avoid possible conflict of interest.
(b) Privileged Communications
Rule 15.02 - A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on privilege communication in respect of matters disclosed to him by a prospective client.
Requisites:
2. There is attorney-client relationship
3. Communication made by client to lawyer in the course of lawyer’s professional engagement.
4. Communication is intended to be confidential (Rule 130, Sec. 21 (b), Rules of Court)
(c) Conflict of Interest
Rule 15.01 - A lawyer, in conferring with a prospective client, shall ascertain as soon as practicable whether the matter would involve a conflict with another client or his own interest, and if so, shall forthwith inform the prospective client.
Rule 15.03 - A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST RULE:
A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts. (Rule 15.03) TESTS OF CONFLICTING INTERESTS:
1. Conflicting Duties: when on behalf of one client, it is the attorney’s duty to contest for that which duty to another client requires him to oppose or when the possibility of such situation will develop. 2. Invitation of Suspicion: whether or not the
acceptance of a new relation will prevent an attorney from the full discharge of his duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to his client or invite suspicion of unfaithfulness in double dealing in the performance thereof.
3. Use of prior Knowledge Obtained: whether a lawyer will be called upon in his new relation to use against the first client any knowledge acquired in the previous employment
Cases:
Aniñon vs. Sabistsana. A.C. No. 5098, April 11, 2012.Attorney; representation of conflicting interests. “The proscription against representation of conflicting interests applies to a situation where the opposing parties are present clients in the same action or in an unrelated action.” The prohibition also applies even if the “lawyer would not be called upon to contend for one client that which the lawyer has to oppose for the other client, or that there would be no occasion to use the confidential information acquired from one to the disadvantage of the other as the two actions are wholly unrelated.” To be held accountable under this rule, it is “enough that the opposing parties in one case, one of whom would lose the suit, are present clients and the nature or conditions of the lawyer’s respective retainers with each of them would affect the performance of the duty of undivided fidelity to both clients.”
Santos Ventura Hocorma Foundation, Inc., represented by Gabriel H. Abad vs. Atty. Richard V. Funk. A.C. No. 9094, August 15, 2012 Attorney; representing conflicting interest. Canon 15, Rule 15.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer cannot represent conflicting interests except by written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts.
An attorney owes his client undivided allegiance. Because of the highly fiduciary nature of their relationship, sound public policy dictates that he be prohibited from representing conflicting interests or discharging inconsistent duties. An attorney may not, without being guilty of professional misconduct, act as counsel for a person whose interest conflicts with that of his present or former client. This
rule is so absolute that good faith and honest intention on the erring lawyer’s part does not make it inoperative. The reason for this is that a lawyer acquires knowledge of his former client’s doings, whether documented or not, that he would ordinarily not have acquired were it not for the trust and confidence that his client placed on him in the light of their relationship. It would simply be impossible for the lawyer to identify and erase such entrusted knowledge with faultless precision or lock the same into an iron box when suing the former client on behalf of a new one.
(d) Candid and Honest Advice to Clients
Rule 15.05 - A lawyer when advising his client, shall give a candid and honest opinion on the merits and probable results of the client’s case, neither overstating nor understating the prospects of the case.
Rule 15.06 - A lawyer shall not state or imply that he is able to influence any public official, tribunal or legislative body.
Rule 15.07 - A lawyer shall impress upon his client compliance with the laws and principles of fairness.
(3) Client’s Moneys and Properties
(a) Fiduciary Relationship
CANON 16 - A LAWYER SHALL HOLD IN TRUST ALL MONEYS AND PROPERTIES OF HIS CLIENT THAT MAY COME INTO HIS POSSESSION.
Rule 16.01 - A lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for or from the client.
Case:
Suzette Del Mundo vs. Atty. Arnel C. Capistrano. A.C. No. 6903, April 16, 2012.Attorney; obligation to hold in trust money of his client. A lawyer is obliged to hold in trust money of his client that may come to his possession. As trustee of such funds, he is bound to keep them separate and apart from his own. Money entrusted to a lawyer for a specific purpose such as for the filing and processing of a case if not utilized, must be returned immediately upon demand. Failure to return gives rise to a presumption that he has misappropriated it in violation of the trust reposed on him. And the conversion of funds entrusted to him constitutes gross violation of professional ethics and betrayal of public confidence in the legal profession.
Emilia O. Dhaliwal vs. Atty. Abelardo B. Dumaguing. A.C. No.
9390, August 1, 2012. Attorney; failure to account for money. The Code of Professional Responsibility provides:
Canon 16-A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and properties of his client that may come into his possession.
Rule 16.01-A lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for or from the client.
Rule 16.02-A lawyer shall keep the funds of each client separate and apart from his own and those of others kept by him.
Rule 16.03-A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when due or upon demand.
Money entrusted to a lawyer for a specific purpose but not used for the purpose, should be immediately returned. 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.
(b) Co-Mingling of Funds
Rule 16.02 - A lawyer shall keep the funds of each client separate and apart from his own and those of others kept by him.
(c) Delivery of Funds
Rule 16.03 - A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when due or upon demand. However, he shall have a lien over the funds and may apply so much thereof as may be necessary to satisfy his lawful fees and disbursements, giving notice promptly thereafter to his client. He shall also have a lien to the same extent on all judgments and executions he has secured for his client as provided for in the Rules of Court.
(d) Borrowing or Lending
Rule 16.04 - A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client unless the client’s interests are fully protected by the nature of the case or by independent advice. Neither shall a lawyer lend money to a client except, when in the interest of justice, he has to advance necessary expenses in a legal matter he is handling for the client.
(4) Fidelity to Client’s Cause
CANON 17 - A LAWYER OWES FIDELITY TO THE CAUSE OF HIS CLIENT AND HE SHALL BE MINDFUL OF THE TRUST AND CONFIDENCE REPOSED IN HIM.
Case Digest on Development Bank of the Philippines and Asset Privatization Trust v. Court of Appeals and Continental Cement Corporation (302 SCRA 362) Duty to Protect Client’s Interest
Facts: CCC filed an injunction suit to prevent the DBP and APT from foreclosing on its mortgages. During trial, DBP & APT were unable to appear for cross-examining CCC’s witnesses because the respective counsels were unprepared, unavailable or ill. The lower court decided this as a waiver, hence judgment was rendered for CCC. DBP & APT filed this petition alleging denial of due process.
Held: Petition denied. There can be no denial of due process where a party had the opportunity to participate in the proceedings but did not do so. Counsel for APT was absent on several occasions because of withdrawal of previous counsel, unreadiness to conduct the cross-examinations and serious illness. The withdrawal of APT’s previous counsel in the thick of the proceedings would be a reasonable ground to seek postponement of the hearing. However, such necessitates a duty on the part of the new counsel to prepare himself for the next scheduled hearing. The excuse that it was due to the former counsel’s failure to turn over the records of the case to APT, shows the negligence of the new counsel to actively recover the records of the case. Counsel should have taken adequate steps to fully protect the interest of his client, rather than pass the blame on the previous counsel. A motion to postpone trial on the ground that counsel is unprepared for trial demonstrates indifference and disregard of his client’s interest. A new counsel who appears in a case in midstream is presumed and obliged to acquaint himself with all the antecedent processes and proceedings that have transpired prior to his takeover. Also, even if counsel had been ill with dengue, he chose not to notify his co-counsels who could have conducted the cross-examination.
(5) Competence and Diligence
CANON 18 - A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT WITH COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE.
(a) Negligence
Rule 18.03 - A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection there with shall render him liable.
Case:
Suzette Del Mundo vs. Atty. Arnel C. Capistrano. A.C. No. 6903, April 16, 2012. Attorney; lack of diligence. 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 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. Suzette Del Mundo vs. Atty. Arnel C. Capistrano. A.C. No.
Case Digest on Corazon T. Reontoy v. Atty. Liberato R. Ibadlit (302 SCRA 604) Negligence of Counsel
Facts: On January 28, 1998 the SC found Ibadlit administratively liable and suspended him from the practice of law for 1 year for failing to appeal within the reglementary period the decision rendered against his client. His reason was, an appeal would only be futile. SC declared that it was highly improper for him to have adopted such opinion. SC said that a lawyer was without authority to waive his client’s right to appeal and that his failure to appeal within the reglementary period constituted negligence and malpractice, proscribed by Rule 18.03, Canon 18 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which provides “(a) lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable.” This is a motion for reconsideration.
Held: Suspension lowered to 2 months – his arguments are partly persuasive, he believed in good faith that his client’s case was weak and that she accepted his explanation that the adverse decision was not worth appealing anymore. Besides, it was only several years later that she complained when no more relief was available to her. Also, complainant had reasonable opportunity to hire another counsel for a second opinion whether to appeal from the judgment or file a petition for relief, that he did not commit to handle his client’s case on appeal and that the testimonies of complainant and her brother were unpersuasive. This is also his first offense.
Case: People of the Philippines v. Sevilleno ( 304 SCRA 519) Negligence of Counsel
Facts: In a criminal case for rape with homicide, the accused pleaded guilty. However, the 3 PAO lawyers assigned as counsel de officio did not perform their duty. The first did not advise his client of the consequences of pleading guilty, the second left the courtroom during trial and thus did not cross-examine the prosecution witnesses. The third postponed the presentation of evidence for the defense, and when he did appear, he said he would rely solely on the plea in the mistaken belief that it would lower the penalty to reclusion perpetua.
Held: Case remanded. Canon 18 required every lawyer to serve his client with utmost dedication, competence and diligence. He must not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in this regard renders him administratively liable. In this case, the defense lawyers did not protect, much less uphold, the fundamental rights of the accused. N.B. Case remanded because of error by the judge in not using searching questions to find if the plea was made knowingly.
(b) Collaborating Counsel
Rule 18.01 - A lawyer shall not undertake a legal service which he knows or should know that he is not qualified to render. However, he may render such service if, with the consent of his client, he can obtain as collaborating counsel a lawyer who is competent on the matter.
(c) Duty to Apprise Client
Rule 18.04 - A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case and shall respond within a reasonable time to client’s request for information.
(6) Representation with Seal Within Legal Bounds
CANON 19 - A LAWYER SHALL REPRESENT HIS CLIENT WITH ZEAL WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE LAW.
Rule 19.01 - 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.
Rule 19.02 - A lawyer who has received information that his client has, in the course of the representation, perpetrated a fraud upon a person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon the client to rectify the same, and failing which he shall terminate the relationship with such client in accordance with the Rules of Court.
Rule 19.03 - A lawyer shall not allow his client to dictate the procedure on handling the case.
(7) Attorney’s Fees
(a) Acceptance Fees
CANON 20 - A LAWYER SHALL CHARGE ONLY FAIR AND REASONABLE FEES.
Rule 20.01 - A lawyer shall be guided by the following factors in determining his fees:
a) The time spent and the extent of the services rendered or required;
b) The novelty and difficulty of the questions involved;
c) The importance of the subject matter; d) The skill demanded;
e) The probability of losing other employment as a result of acceptance of the proffered case;
f) The customary charges for similar services and the schedule of fees of the IBP chapter to which he belongs; g) The amount involved in the controversy and the benefits resulting to the client form the service;
h) The contingency or certainty of compensation; i) The character of the employment, whether
occasional or established; and
j) The professional standing of the lawyer.
(b) Contingency Fee Arrangements
Contingent Contract is an agreement whereby the fee usually a fixed percentage of what may be recovered is made to depend on the success of the action.(Albano and Albano, Reviewer, page 20)
(c) Attorney’s Liens
4. Must at all times be reasonable
5. Courts must guard against charging of unconscionable and excessive fees by lawyers.
Retaining Lien is the right to retain the funds, documents and papers of his client which have lawfully come to his possession until his lawful fees and disbursements have been paid and to apply such funds to the satisfaction thereof.
Rule 22.02 - A lawyer who withdraws or is discharged shall, subject to a retainer lien, immediately turn over all papers and property to which the client is entitled, and shall cooperate with his successor in the orderly transfer of the matter, including all information necessary for the proper handling of the matter.
Charging Lien is a right to have the fees and lawful disbursements due a lawyer for his services in a suit secured to him out of the judgment for the payment of money and executions issued in pursuance thereof in the particular suit.
Retaining Lien Charging Lien Nature Passive lien cannot
be actively enforced (general lien)
Active lien. Can be enforced. (Special lien) Basis Lawful possession
of papers, documents, and property of his client Securing a favorable money judgment
Coverage papers, documents, and property in his lawful possession Covers all judgments, for payment of money and execution issued. Effect As soon as he gets
possession of them
Atty’s fees entered into the records of the case
Notice Client need not be notified
Client and adverse party must be notified Applicability May be exercised
before judgment or execution
After a favorable judgment
(d) Fees and Controversies with Clients
Rule 20.04 - A lawyer shall avoid controversies with clients concerning his compensation and shall resort to judicial action only to prevent imposition, injustice of fraud.
Note: any stipulations on attorney’s fees is not illegal and is enforceable as the law between the parties provided it does not contravene any law, good morals, and public policy.
CHAMPERTOUS CONTRACT (Void) – is an
agreement between a lawyer and his client wherein it is stipulated in prosecution of the case, the lawyer will bear all the expenses for the recovery of things or property being claimed by the client and the latter agrees to pay the former a portion of the thing or property recovered a compensation.
(e) Concepts of Attorney’s Fees
(i) Ordinary Concept
The reasonable compensation paid to a lawyer by his client for the legal services he has rendered to the latter.
(ii) Extra-Ordinary Concept
An indemnity for the damages ordered by the court to be paid b the losing party in litigation. Basis: Article 2208 of the Civil Code and payable to the client not to the lawyer unless there is an agreement to the contrary.
QUANTUM MERUIT- means “as much as he deserves” and is used as the basis for determining the lawyer’s professional fees in the absence of a contract.
Case: Renato S. Ong & Francia N. Ong v. Court of Appeals, Inland Trailways, Inc. & Philtranco Service Enterprise, Inc. (301 SCRA 387) Attorney’s Fees
Facts: Renato Ong was injured during a vehicular collision. He was awarded damages by the trial court. On appeal, the CA, the awards for actual damages, moral damages & attorney’s fees were reduced because (1) the cost & feasibility of corrective surgery had not been adduced in evidence, (2) the document
relied upon to prove actual damages was not formally offered in evidence and (3) no evidence but the bare assertion of counsel was put forward to prove damages for unearned income.
Held: Attorney’s fees is an indemnity for damages ordered by a court to be paid by the losing party to the prevailing party, based on any of the cases authorized by law. It is payable not to the lawyer but to the client, unless the 2 have agreed that the award shall pertain to the lawyer as additional compensation or as part thereof. The Court has established a set of standards in fixing the amount of attorney’s fees. Counsel’s performance, however, does not justify the award of 25 percent attorney’s fees. The nature of the case was not exceptionally difficult, and his handling of the case was sorely inadequate, as shown by his failure to follow elementary norms of civil procedure & evidence. It is well-settled that such award is addressed to sound judicial discretion and subject to judicial control.
(8) Preservation of Client’s Confidences
CANON 21 - A LAWYER SHALL PRESERVE THE CONFIDENCE AND SECRETS OF HIS CLIENT EVEN
AFTER THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATION IS
TERMINATED
Rule 21.01 - A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or secrets of his client except:
a) When authorized by the client after acquianting him of the consequences of the disclosure;
b) When required by law;
c) When necessary to collect his fees or to defend himself, his employees or associates or by judicial action.
Rule 21.02 - A lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his client, use information acquired in the course of employment, nor shall he use he same to his own advantage or that of a third person, unless the client with full knowledge of the circumstances consents thereto.
Rule 21.03 - A lawyer shall not, without the written consent of his client, give information from his files to an outside agency seeking such information for auditing, statistical, bookkeeping, accounting, data processing, or any similar purpose.
Rule 21.04 - A lawyer may disclose the affairs of a client of the firm to partners or associates thereof unless prohibited by the client.
Rule 21.05 - A lawyer shall adopt such measures as may be required to prevent those whose services are utilized by him, from disclosing or using confidences or secrets of the client.
Rule 21.06 - A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet conversation about a client’s affairs even with members of his family.
Rule 21.07 - A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been consulted about a particular case except to avoid possible conflict of interest.
(9) Withdrawal of Services
CANON 22 - A LAWYER SHALL WITHDRAW HIS SERVICES ONLY FOR GOOD CAUSE AND UPON NOTICE APPROPRIATE IN THE CIRTUMSTANCES.
Rule 22.01 -A lawyer may withdraw his services in any of the following cases:
a) When the client pursues an illegal or immoral course of conduct in connection with the matter he is handling;
b) When the client insists that the lawyer pursue conduct violative of these canons and rules;
c) When his inability to work with co-counsel will not promote the best interest of the client;
d) When the mental or physical condition of the lawyer renders it difficult for him to carry out the employment effectively; e) When the client deliberately fails to pay the fees for the services or fails to comply with the retainer agreement;
f) When the lawyer is elected or appointed to public office; and
g) Other similar cases.
3. Suspension, Disbarment and Discipline of Lawyers
a. Nature and Characteristics of Disciplinary Actions Against Lawyers Administrative Liabilities of Lawyers:
a. Disbarment
It is a quasi-summary proceeding instituted and prosecuted before an appropriate court for the purpose of depriving an attorney of his license to practice his profession by reason of some misconduct .
b. Suspension
It is the act of court prohibiting an attorney from practicing law for a certain definite period.
Characteristics of Disbarment:
(1) Neither civil nor criminal proceedings (sui generis) (2) It is imprescriptible.
(3) No double jeopardy
