Agpalo- Ethics- Reviewer

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________

1

LEGAL ETHICS REVIEWER 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. State the significance of legal ethics. The practice of law which covers a wide range of activities characteristic of the legal profession including the pursuit and defense of client's rights and interests before the court, will be transgressive, anarchic, riotous, lawbreaking, defiant and disobedient to courts, if there are no sets of governing rules to limit the parameters and tame the exercise of the profession. Legal ethics will guard against the abuses and ills of the profession such as dishonesty, deceit, immorality, negligence, slothness, lack of diligence and the many forms of malpractice of the members of the bar. On the positive side, it will raise the standard of the legal profession, encourage and enhance the respect for the law, assure an effective and efficient administration of justice, assist in the keeping and maintenance of law and order in coordination with the other departments of government. It also provides the basis for weeding out the unfit and the misfits in the legal profession for the protection of the public. (Pineda, Legal and Judicial Ethics, 1994 Ed., pp.1 and 2). Original Bases of Legal Ethics: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Canons of Professional Ethics Supreme Court Decisions: Constitution Treatises and publications Statistics

Present Basis of the Philippine Legal System : Code of Professional Responsibility.


2

DEFINITION OF TERMS Bar vs. Bench Refers to the whole body of attorneys and denotes the whole body of judges, counselors, collectively the members of the legal profession 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 device or service requires the use in any degree of legal knowledge or skill (Cayetano v. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210). Attorney-at-law/Counsel-at-law/Attorney/Counsel Abogado/Boceros: - that class of persons who are licensed officers of the courts, empowered to appear, prosecute and defend; and upon whom peculiar duties, responsibilities, and liabilities are developed the law as a consequence (Cui v. Cui, 120 Phil. 729). Attorney In fact an agent whose authority is strictly limited by the instrument appointing him, however, he may do things not mentioned in his appointment but are necessary to the performance of the duties specifically required of him by the power of attorney appointing him, such authority being necessarily implied. He is not necessarily a lawyer. Counsel de Oficio a counsel, appointed or assigned by the court, from among members of the Bar in good standing who, by reason of their experience and ability, may adequately defend the accused. Note: In localities where members of the Bar are not available, the court may appoint any person, resident of the province and good repute for probity and ability, to defend the accused. Sec. 7, Rule 116, Rules of Court. Attorney ad hoc' a person named and appointed by the court to defend an absentee defendant in the suit in which the appointment is made (Bienvenu v. Factor's of Traders Insurance Cp., 33 La.Ann.209) Attorney of Record - one who has filed a notice of appearance and who hence is formally mentioned in" court records as the official attorney of the party. Person whom the client has named as


3

his agent upon whom service of papers may be made. (Reynolds v. Reynolds, Cal.2d580). Of Counsel -

to distinguish them from attorneys of record, associate attorneys are referred to as "of counsel" (5 Am. Jur. 261).

Lead Counsel - The counsel on their side of a litigated action who is charged with the principal management and direction of a party's case. House Counsel -

Lawyer who acts as attorney for business though carried as an employee of that business and not as an independent lawyer.

Bar Association Advocate -

an association of members of the legal profession.

The general and popular name for a lawyer who pleads on behalf of someone else.

Barrister' (England) - a person entitled to practice law as an advocate or counsel in superior court. Proctor (England) - Formerly, an attorney in the admiralty and ecclesiastical courts whose duties and business correspond to those of an attorney at law or solicitor in Chancery. Titulo de Abogado - It means not mere possession of the academic degree of Bachelor of Laws but membership in the Bar after due admission thereto, qualifying one for the practice of law.

ADMISSION TO THE PRACTICE OF LAW The Supreme Court has the power to control and regulate the practice of law. Thus, the Constitution, under Article VIII, Sec. 5 (5) provides: See. 5. The Supreme Court shall have the following powers: (5) 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 under privileged. The Supreme Court acts through a Bar Examination Committee in the Exercise of his judicial function to admit candidates to the legal profession.


4

The Bar Examination Committee:  Composed of (1) member of the Supreme Court who acts as Chairman and eight (8) members of the bar.  The 8 members act as examiners for the 8 bar subjects with one subject assigned to each. 



The "Bar Confidant acts as a sort of liaison officer between the court and the Bar Chairman on the other hand, 'and the individual members of the committee on the other. He is at the same time a deputy clerk of .court. Admission of examinees is always subject to the final approval of the court.

Practice of Law 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 means 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 perform those acts which are characteristics of the profession. Generally to practice law is to give notice or render any kind of service which device or service requires the use in any degree of legal knowledge or skill." (Cayetano vs. Monsod, 20.1 SORA 210 citing 111 AI..R 23). Requirements for admission to the Bar: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Citizen of the Philippines At least 21 years old Of good moral character Resident of the Philippines Production before the Supreme Court satisfactory evidence of: a. Good moral character b. No charges against him, involving moral turpitude, have been filed or are pending in any court in the Philippines.

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, 1998) Academic Requirements for Candidates: 1. A bachelor's degree in arts and sciences (pre-law course)


5

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 Non-lawyers who may be authorized to appear in court: 1. 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) 2. Before any other court Party to the litigation, in person (Ibid.) 3. Criminal case before the MTC In a locality where a duly licensed member of the Bar is not available: the judge may appoint a nonLawyer 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). 4. Legal Aid Program - A senior law student, who /s 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. 5. Under the labor code, non-lawyers may appear before the NLRC or any labor Arbiter, if a. They represent themselves, or If b. They represent their organization or members thereof (Art 222, PO 442, as amended). " 6. Under the Cadastral Act, a non-lawyer can represent a claimant before the Cadastral Court (Act no. 2259, Sec. 9). 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 SORA 109). 4. President, Vice-President, members of the cabinet, their deputies and assistants (Art. VI/I 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(2 nd par), 1987


6

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 1. 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). 2. 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: a. Appear as counsel before any court in any civil case wherein a local government unit 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; d. Use property and personnel of the government except when the Saggunian member concerned is defending the interest of the government. 3. 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.

Attorney'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)


7

Nature of Lawyer’s Oath  

The lawyer’s oath is not mere facile words, drift and hollow, but a sacred trust that must be upheld and kept inviolable. (Sebastian vs. Calis, 1999) It is NOT a mere ceremony or formality for practicing law. Every lawyer should at all times weigh his actions according to the sworn promises he made when taking the lawyer’s oath. (In Re: Argosino, 1997, In Re: Arthur M. Cuevas, 1998).

State the concept of attorney's fee. Attorney's fee is the reasonable compensation paid to a lawyer for the legal services he has rendered to a client. It may also be an indemnity for damages ordered by the court to be paid by the losing party to the prevailing party in litigation.

Define contingent fee. Contingent fee is one depending on the success of the services to be performed (7 C.J.S. 1062). Define contingent fee contract. Contingent fee contract is a bilateral, entire agreement, speculative in nature, providing for conditional compensation of an attorney. (7 C.J.S. 1062). Give the distinction between champertous contracts.

contingent

fee

contracts

and

1.

In a champertous contract, the attorney undertakes to bear all expenses incident to the litigation. This is not true in contingent fee contracts.

2.

Champertous fees are payable only in kind, out of the properties recovered; whereas, contingent fees may be paid in cash. Champertous contracts are void as against public policy and the ethics of the profession; whereas, contingent fee contracts are valid. (Canons of Professional Ethics, 42).


8

ATTORNEY'S FEES Q

-May a lawyer in a probate case which was dismissed appeal the dismissal to enforce his attorney's fees based on contingency? Why? -No. If the probate of a will is dismissed, the lawyer cannot appeal to enforce his fees. Since the contingency did not occur due to the dismissal of the petition, the lawyer is not entitled to his attorney's fees.

Q

-Is a contract between a lawyer and his client stipulating a contingent fee covered by the prohibition under Article 1491(5) of the New Civil Code? -No because the payment of said fee was not made during the pendency of the litigation but only after the judgment has been rendered in the case handled by the lawyer. (Fabillo vs. lAC, 195 SCRA 28, March 11, 1991).

Q

-Are initial fees and fees paid in the progress of litigation part of the contingent fees? -No, they are independent of the contingent fees. The fact that a lawyer may have been paid substantially (in initial fees) while the case was dragging is no justification for denying him the full amount under the contingent fee contract with a client. (Law Firm of Raymundo Armovit vs. CA, 202 SCRA 16, Sept. 27, 1991).

Q

-A lawyer whose services were engaged on a contingency basis was terminated by his client due to his refusal to represent him in an extrajudicial settlement of the claim. State the effect of such termination. -An attorney hired on a contingent basis and whose services were terminated by his clients because of his refusal to represent them in an out of court settlement of their claims has no right to interfere in the implementation of the settlement agreement in his efforts to collect attorney's fees not due him. (Chua vs. NLRC, 190 SCRA 558, Oct. 17, 1990).

Q

-Is the agreement between a lawyer and his client which provides that the latter agrees on a 50% contingent fee provided the former defrays all expenses for the suit, including court fees, valid? -No, such agreement is null and void for being a champertous agreement. (Bautista vs. Gonzales, supra).

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________ Q

9

-When may a lawyer validly advance the expenses of litigation? -A lawyer may in good faith advance the expenses of litigation provided the same should be subject to reimbursement. (Bautista vs. Gonzales, supra). Q-

-What is the nature of a charging lien? A charging lien, to be enforceable as security for the payment of attorney's fees, requires as a condition sine qu non a judgment secured in the main action by the attorney in favor of his client. It is not of the nature which attaches to the property in litigation, but is at most a personal claim enforceable by a writ of execution. It presupposes that the attorney has secured a favorable money judgment for his client. A charging lien is limited only to money judgments and not to judgments for the annulment of a contract or for delivery of real property. (Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. CA, 181 SCRA 367, Jan. 23,1990).

Q

What court has jurisdiction over an enforceable charging lien? -An enforceable charging lien, duly recorded, is within the jurisdiction of the court trying the main case. This jurisdiction subsists until the lien is settled. (Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. CA, supra).

Q

-

How may a lawyer enforce his right to attorney's fees? By filing the necessary petition as an incident in the main action in which his services were rendered when something is due his client in the action from which the fee is to be paid. (Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. CA)

Q

-How may a lawyer assert his claim for attorney's fees? -Counsel's claim for attorney's fees may be asserted either in the very action in which the services in question have been rendered for or in a separate action. If the first alternative is chosen, the Court may pass upon said claim even if its amount were less than the minimum prescribed by law for the jurisdiction of said court, upon the theory that the right to recover attorney's fees is but an incident of the case in which the services of counsel have been rendered. (Quirante vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 73886, 31 Jan. 89).


10

- How may a petition for the recovery of attorney's fees be established? A petition for the recovery of attorney’s fees, either as a separate civil suit or as an incident in the main action has to be prosecuted and the allegations therein established as in any other money claim. The persons who are entitled to or who must pay attorney's fees have the right to be heard upon the question of their propriety or amount. Hence, the obvious necessity of a hearing is beyond cavil. (Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. CA, supra).

Q-

How do you consider a contract for the payment of attorney's fees? A stipulation regarding the payment of attorney's fees is neither illegal nor immoral and is enforceable as the law between the parties as long as such stipulation does not contravene law, good morals, good customs, public order or public policy. (Reparations Commission vs. Visayan Packing Corporation, 191 SCRA 531, Feb. 6, 1991). So that if a lawyer who rendered services to a labor union with the knowledge and acquiescence of its Board is entitled to the reasonable value of his professional services on a quantum meruit basis, especially if such services redounded to the benefit of the union although his appointment as union counsel was not authorized by a Board Resolution. (Hipolito, Jr. vs. Ferrer-Calleja, 190 SCRA 182, Oct. 1, 1990).

Q

-If a lawyer claims and enforces his claim for attorney's fees, is he required to pay docket fees? Why? -Yes. A motion for attorney's fees is in the nature of an action commenced by a lawyer against his client for attorney's fees, hence, docket fees should have been priory paid before the court could lawfully act on said motion, and decide it. It may be true that the claim for attorney's fees was but an incident in the main case, still, It is not an escape valve from the payment of docket fees because as in all actions, whether separate or as an offshoot of a pending proceedings, the payment of docket fees is mandatory. (Lacson vs. Reyes, 182 SCRA 729, Feb. 26, 1990).

Q-

May the court modify an agreement for the payment of attorney's fees? -Yes. Courts may modify attorney's fees previously agreed upon by the parties under a valid contractual stipulation where the amount thereof appears to be unconscionable or unreasonable.


11

(Radiowealth Finance Co., Inc. vs. Int'I. Corporate Bank, 182 SCRA 862, Feb. 28, 1990). Q- May an executor or administrator recover attorney's fees for his services to the estate? Why? - No. An administrator or executor may be allowed fees for necessary expenses he has incurred but he may not recover attorney's fees from the estate. Where the administrator is himself the counsel for the heirs, it is the latter who must pay attorney's fees. (Lacson vs. Reyes, supra) Q.

If the individual heirs in an estate proceedings hired their own lawyers, is the estate liable for attorney's fees? Why? No. In estate proceedings, attorney's fees are not the obligation of the estate but of the individual heirs who individually hired their respective lawyers. The lawyer should collect from the heirs distributes who individually hired him his attorney's fees according to the nature of the services rendered. (Sesbreno vs. CA, 213 SCRA 681, Sept. 4, 1992).

Q

-What is the nature of an award of attorney's fees under Art. 2208 of the Civil Code? Explain. An award of attorney's fees as an item of damages is the exception rather than the rule, and counsel's fees are not to be awarded every time a party wins a suit. The power of the court to award attorney's fees under Article 2208 of the Civil Code demands factual, legal and equitable justification, without which the award is a conclusion without a premise, its basis being improperly left to speculation and conjecture. The court must explicitly state thereof the legal reason for the award of attorney's fees. (Central Azucarera de Bais vs. CA, 188 SCRA 328, Aug. 3, 1990.)

Q

Q.

- When is the principle of quantum meruit applied? -It is applied if a lawyer is employed without a price agreed upon for his services. In which case, he would be entitled to receive when merits for his services, as much as he has earned. (Lorenzo vs. CA, supra ) (A) In the absence of a written contract between attorney and client, what factors are to be considered in determining the amount of attorney's fees? (1966 Bar) (B) What elements are generally to be considered in fixing reasonable compensation for legal services rendered on the basis of quantum meruit? (1968 Bar)


12

(c) What are the criteria in determining the reasonable amount that may be awarded as attorney's fees? Give at least seven factors. (1970 Bar) (D) If the Court decides that the counsel of a party to a case may recover attorney's fees on the basis of "quantum meruit", what does the order of the court mean? (1971 Bar) (E) What factors must be considered by the court in determining attorney's fees in the absence of a written contract? (1972 Bar) (F) What are the factors that should be considered in determining the amount to be awarded as attorney's fees? (1977 Bar) A.

The factors, in determining the amount to be awarded as attorney's fees on a quantum meruit are: 1. The importance of the subject matter of the controversy; 2. The extent of the services rendered; and 3. The professional standing of the lawyer (Sec. 24, Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court).

Supreme Court decisions mentioned the following factors: (1) The amount and character of the services rendered; (2) The labor, time, and trouble involved; (3) The nature and importance of the litigation or business in which the services were rendered; (4) The responsibility imposed; (5) The amount of money or the value of the property affected by the controversy or involved in the employment; (6) The skill and experience called for in the performance of the services; (7) The professional character and social standing of the attorney; and (8) The results secured, it being a recognized rule that an attorney may properly charge a much larger fee when it is contingent than when it is not. The Canons of Professional Ethics consider the following factors, namely: (1) The time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved and the skill required properly to conduct the cause; (2) Whether the acceptance of employment in the particular case will preclude the lawyer's appearance for others in cases likely to arise out of the transaction, and in which there is a reasonable expectation that otherwise he could be employed in particular case of antagonisms with other clients; (3) The customary charges of the BAR for similar services; (4) The amount involved in the controversy and the benefits resulting to the client from the services; (5) The contingency or the certainty of the compensation; and (6) The character of the employment, whether casual or for an established and constant client. (Canons of Professional Ethics, 12; Mambulao Lumber. Co. vs. PNB, G.R. No. L-22973, January 30, 1968).

Q

- May a lawyer be entitled to compensation for services


13

he rendered? -Yes. A lawyer has a right to recover from his client a reasonable compensation for his services, except if he agreed to render services for free or gratuitously or if he has been appointed as counsel de oficio. Q

- What are the requirements before a lawyer maybe entitled to compensation? - The requirements are: (1). There must be a lawyer-client relationship or in short, employment; (2) There must be rendition of service.

Q

-Who may not charge attorney's fees? - The following may not charge attorney's fees: 1) government lawyers; 2) executor or administrator of an estate; 3) counsel de oficio except that he may be entitled to a token compensation.

Q

- State some acts of a lawyer that may negate the recovery of attorney's fees. - They are: (1)misconduct, negligence or carelessness; (2)abandonment or withdrawal without client's consent; (3)representing adverse interest.

Q - State some acts that may not negate a lawyer's right to attorney's fees. - They are: (1)if the client withdrew the case or compromised it; and (2)if he was discharged without valid cause. Q

- How may a lawyer enforce his claim for attorney's fees? - He may do either of two (2) things: (1)file a petition as an incident of the main action which may be passed upon by the court if there is something due to the client in the action; (2)file an independent action.

Q

- A is the lawyer of B. During the pendency of the case, A


14

wants to file a claim for attorney's fees in the same case amounting to P50, 000.00. B resisted claiming that the RTC has no jurisdiction to pass upon it since that is not within the jurisdiction of the court. Is the contention correct? Why? -No. The court may pass upon such claim even if the amount is less than the minimum amount prescribed by law for the jurisdiction of the court. (Quirante vs. CA, G.R. No. 73886, Jan. 31, 1989). This rule has to be so because the claim is only incidental to the main action. Q lien?

- What does it mean when a lawyer exercises his retaining - It does not: (a) mean that he attached the funds which came to his possession in some other capacity; (b) extend to the funds of client's principal; or (c) extend to subject matter of the action.

Q

-When may the court require the surrender of funds or documents that came into his possession? - If the client posts a bond and when the documents are indispensable to the case.

Q

- When shall a retaining lien end? -It ends when the possession lawfully ends.

Q

- What are the requirements of a charging lien and when shall it take effect? - The requirements of a charging lien are: (1) it should be filed while the court still has the records of the case and before full satisfaction of the judgment; and (2) copies of the statement must be served on the client who has the right to dispute it, or on the adverse party in order to bind him. It shall take effect from the time the lawyer caused a notice of his lien to be entered in the records of the case.

Q

- State the effects of a charging lien. - They are: (1)it gives the lawyer the right to collect out of the judgment and executions in pursuance thereof;


15

(2) client or assignee who receives the proceeds of the judgment holds it in trust for the lawyer; (3)judgment debtor who fully satisfies the judgment debt in disregard of the lien is still liable for the full value thereof, enforceable by execution; (4)the lien enjoys preference of credit over a creditor who subsequently recorded his credit; and (5)it gives the lawyer a standing in the action to protest its discontinuance by the client unless suitable measures for the protection of his fees are provided. In fact, it has the effect of terminating the client-lawyer relationship. Q

- Give the basic requirement for the validity of an award of attorney's fees in a decision. -An award of attorney's fees in the form of damages to be paid by the losing party must be stated in the dispositive portion of the decision giving a reason for the said award. It is necessary for the court to make findings of facts and law that would bring the case within the exception to justify the grant of such award. (Lantin vs. CA, uncited). An award of attorney's fees in accordance with Art. 2208 of the Civil Code demands factual, legal and equitable justification without which the award is a conclusion without a premise its basis being improperly left to speculation and conjecture. The reasons for the award must be explicitly stated in the text of the trial court's decision, otherwise, it will be disallowed on appeal. (Central Azucarrera de Bais vs. CA, 188 SCRA 328; Radiowealth Communication vs. Rodriguez, 182 SCRA 899).

Q

Q

-Is a government-owned or -controlled corporation represented by the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel entitled to attorney's fees? Why? -Yes. There is, as a matter of principle, no reason why a government owned or -controlled corporation, or any other government agency or entity for that matter, which was compelled to bring suit against a private person or entity in order to protect its rights and interests, should not be granted an award of attorney's fees, where such award would be proper if the suit had been brought by a private entity. While such a corporation, agency, or entity may be represented by government lawyers, clearly, costs are incurred either by the plaintiff-corporation or entity directly or by the general taxpaying public indirectly, by reason of the default or other breach of contract or violation of law committed by the defendant. - The services of a lawyer were terminated before his client compromised the case. Is he entitled to contingent


16

attorney's fees? Why? - No, because he did not participate in the negotiations for the settlement of the case. Since he did not take part in the settlement, there is 11,0 basis for attorney's fees. However, if he participated in the negotiation for settlement of his client's case, he is entitled to his fees agreed upon. In fact, the client can even be liable for damages for his bad faith if there is any. Q

-May a lawyer get the entire property in the litigation after the termination of the case? Why? No, because that would be unconscionable. A lawyer is not merely the defender of his client's cause and a trustee of the client in respect of the client's cause of action; he is also, and first and foremost, an officer of the court and participates in the fundamental function of administering justice in society. It follows that a lawyer's compensation for professional services rendered are subject to the supervision of the court, not just to guarantee that the fees he charges and receives remain reasonable and commensurate with the services rendered, but also to maintain the dignity and integrity of the legal profession to which he belongs. Upon taking his attorney's oath as an officer of the court, a lawyer submits himself to the authority of the courts to regulate his right to charge professional fees. There should never be an instance where a lawyer gets as attorney's fees the entire property involved in the litigation (even on a contingent fee basis). It is unconscionable for the victor in litigation to lose everything he won to the fees of his own lawyer. (Sumaoang vs. Judge, RTC Branch XXXI, Guiniba, Nueva Ecija, et ai., 215 SCRA 137).

Q

-A engaged the services of a lawyer in the recovery of a parcel of land consisting of 121 square meters. They agreed that the attorney's fee~ is based on a contingency where if the property is recovered, the lawyer's son would be entitled to a usufruct at 97.5 square meters of the land for 10 years. Is the contingent fee contract valid? Why? -No, because the contract is tantamount to giving the property of the client to the lawyer. The contract is deemed excessive. There should not be an instance wherein the victor in litigation loses everything to his lawyer. (Licudan vs. CA, 193 SCRA 293).


17

THE LAWYER AND 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 to engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. Conviction for crimes involving moral turpitude - a number of lawyers have been suspended or disbarred for conviction of crimes involving moral turpitude such as: a. Estafa b. Bribery c. Murder d. Seduction e. Abduction f. Smuggling g. Falsification of public documents



Morality as understood in law - This Is a human standard based on natural moral law which is embodied in man's conscience and which guides him to do good and avoid evil. Moral Turpitude: any thing that is done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good morals. Immoral Conduct: that conduct which is willful, flagrant, or shameless and which shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the good and respectable members of the community (Artiga VS. Maniwag, 106 SCRA 591). Grossly Immoral Conduct: One that is so corrupt and false as to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled or disgraceful as to be reprehensible to a high degree; it is a WILLFUL, FLAGRANT or SHAMELESS ACT which shows a MORAL INDIFFERENCE to the opinion of respectable members of the community. (Narag VS. Narag, 1998) An attorney may be removed not only for malpractice and dishonesty in his profession but also for gross misconduct not related to his professional duties which show him to be an unfit and unworthy lawyer.(Co VS. Bernardino, 285 SCRA 102).









RULE 1.02- A lawyer shall not to counsel or abet 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. RULE 1.04 - A lawyer shall encourage his clients to avoid, end or settle a controversy if it will admit of a fair settlement. 

If a lawyer finds that his client's cause is defenseless, it is his

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________      

  

18

burden/duty to advise the latter to acquiesce and submit, rather than traverse the incontrovertible. It is unprofessional for a lawyer to volunteer advice to bring a lawsuit, except in rare cases where the blood, relationship or trust makes it his duty to do so. Temper client's propensity to litigate Should not be an instigator of controversy but a mediator for concord and conciliator for compromise. The law violated need not be a penal law. “Moral Turpitude" everything which is done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good morals. Give advice tending to impress upon the client and his undertaking exact compliance with the strictest principles of moral law. Until a statute shall have been construed and interpreted by competent adjudication, he is free and is entitled-to advise as to its validity and as to what he conscientiously believes to be it just meaning and extent. A lawyer has the obligation not to encourage suits. This is so as to prevent barratry and ambulance chasing. Barratry - offense of frequently exciting and stirring up quarrels and suits, either at law or Otherwise; Lawyer's act of fomenting suits among individuals and offering his legal services to one of them. Ambulance Chasing- Act of chasing victims of accidents for the purpose of talking to the said victims (or relatives) and offering his legal services for the filing of a case against the person(s) who caused the accident(s).

CANON 2 - A LAWYER SHALL MAKE HIS LEGAL SERVICES AVAILABLE IN AN EFFICIENT AND CONVENIENT MANNER COMPATIBLE WITH THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY AND EFFECTIVENESS 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. Primary characteristics which distinguish the legal profession from business: a. Duty of service, of which the emolument is a by product, and in which one may attain the highest eminence without making such money; b. A relation as an 'officer of court' to the administration of justice involving thorough sincerity, integrity and reliability; c. A relation to clients in the highest degree of fiduciary; d. A relation to colleagues at the bar characterized by candor, fairness


19

and unwillingness to resort to current business methods of advertising and encroachment on their practice or dealing with their clients.  

Defenseless - not in the position to defend themselves due to poverty, weakness, ignorance or other similar reasons. Oppressed - victims of acts of cruelty, unlawful exaction, domination or excessive use of authority.

Rule on Advertisements  General Rule: No advertisements allowed. The most worthy and effective advertisement possible is the establishment of a wellmerited reputation for professional capacity and fidelity to trust. Lawyers may not advertise their services or expertise nor should not resort to indirect advertisements for professional employment, such as furnishing or inspiring newspaper comments, or procuring his photograph to be published in connection with causes in which the lawyer has been engaged or concerning the manner of their conduct, the magnitude of the interest involved, the importance of the lawyer's position, and all other self-laudation. 

Exceptions: Permissible advertisements

1. Reputable law lists, in a manner consistent with the standards of.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Conduct imposed by the canons, of brief biographical and informative data, are allowed. (Ulep vs. Legal Clinic, Inc., 223 SCRA 378) Ordinary simple professional Card. It may contain only a statement of his name, the name of the law firm which he is connected with, address, telephone number and the special branch of law practiced. (Ulep vs. Legal Clinic, Inc., 2~3 SCRA 378) A simple announcement of the opening of a law firm or of changes in the partnership, associates, firm name or office address, being for the convenience of the profession, is not objectionable. (Ulep vs. Legal Clinic, Inc., 223 SCRA 378) Advertisements or simple announcement of the existence of a lawyer or his law firm posted anywhere it is proper such as his place of business or residence except courtrooms and government buildings. Advertisements or announcement in any legal publication, including books, journals, and legal magazines and in telephone directories.


20

RULE 2.04 - A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those customarily prescribed unless the circumstances so warrant.  A lawyer cannot delay the approval of a compromise agreement entered into between parties, just because his attorney's fees were not provided for in the agreement.  Rule: A lawyer cannot compromise the case without client's consent (special. authority). Exception: Lawyer has exclusive management of the procedural aspect of the litigation lawyer is confronted with an emergency and prompt/urgent action is necessary to protect clients interest and there's no opportunity for consultation, the lawyer may compromise.  Rule: Refrain from charging rates lower than the customary rates. Valid Justification: relatives, co-lawyers, too poor.

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 payor give anything of value to representatives of the mass media in anticipation of, or in return for, publicity to attract legal business.  

It is unethical to use the name of a foreign firm. Death of a partner does not extinguish attorney-client relationship with the law firm.

Negligence of a member in the law firm is negligence of the firm. 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


21

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.  Examples: Presenting position papers or resolutions for the introduction of pertinent bills in Congress; Petitions with the Supreme Court for the amendment of the Rules of Court. CANON 5 - A LAWYER SHALL KEEP ABREAST OF LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS, PARTICIPATE IN CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS, SUPPORT EFFORTS TO ACHIVE 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. Objectives of integration of the Bar  To elevate the standards of the legal profession  To improve the administration of justice.  To enable the Bar to discharge its responsibility more effectively. The three-fold obligation of a lawyer  First, he owes it to himself to continue improving his knowledge of the laws;  Second, he owes it to his profession to take an active interest in the maintenance of high standards of legal education;  Third, he owes it to the lay public to make the law a part of their social consciousness. CANON 6 - THESE CANONS SHALL APPLY TO LAWYERS IN GOVERNMENT SERVICE IN THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR OFFICIAL TASKS. 



Public Officials - include elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent or temporary, whether in the career or noncareer service, including military and police personnel, whether or not they receive compensation, regardless of amount. (Sec. 3 (b), RA 6713). The law requires the observance of the following norms of conduct by every public official in the discharge and execution of their official duties: a. Commitment to public interest b. Professionalism c. Justness and sincerity d. Political neutrality e. Responsiveness to the public f. Nationalism and patriotism g. Commitment to democracy h. Simple living (Sec. 4, RA 6713)

RULE 6.01 - The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution


22

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. RULE 6.03 - A lawyer shall not, after leaving a government service, accept engagement or employment in connection with any matter in which he had intervened while in said service.  Various ways a government lawyer leaves government service: a. Retirement b. Resignation c. Expiration of the term of office d. Dismissal e. Abandonment Q:

What are the pertinent statutory provisions regarding this Rule? Sec. 3 (d) RA 3019 as amended and Sec. 7 (b), RA 6713 Sec 3. Corrupt practice of Public Officers. In addition to acts or omission of public officers already penalized by existing law, the following shall constitute corrupt practice of any public officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful: (d) accepting or having any member of his family accept employment in a private enterprise which has pending official business with him during the pendency thereof or within one year: after termination. Section 7 (b) of RA 6713 prohibits officials from doing any of the following acts: 1. Own, control, manage or accept employment as officer, employee, consultant, counsel, broker, agent, trustee or nominee in any private enterprise regulated, supervised or licensed by their office unless expressly allowed by

law. These prohibitions shall continue to apply for a period of one (1) year after resignation, retirement, or separation from public office, except in the case of subparagraph (b) (2) above, but the professional concerned cannot practice his profession in connection with any matter before the office he used to be with, in which case the one year prohibition shall likewise apply. Q

-State the basic duties of a lawyer to society. 1. 2.

-The Code of Professional Responsibility mandates that: A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law and legal processes; A lawyer shall make his legal services available in an efficient and convenient manner compatible with the independence, integrity, and effectiveness of the profession;

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________ 3. 4. 5.

6.

Q

23

A lawyer in making known his legal services shall use only true, honest, fair, dignified and objective information or statement of facts; 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; A lawyer shall keep abreast of legal development, 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; These canons shall apply to lawyers in government service in the discharge of their official tasks.

- A lawyer procured personal loans from the complainant through insinuations of his power as an influence peddler at the Bureau of Customs, and issued bad checks. If an administrative case is filed against him, can he interpose the defense that his conducts were not connected to the practice of his profession? Explain. -No. Rule 1.01, Chapter 1 entitled The Lawyer and Society of the Code of Professional Responsibility which requires that a lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral and deceitful conduct does not limit itself to conduct exhibited in connection with the performance of professional duties. His propinquity for employing deceit and misrepresentations as well as his cavalier attitude towards incurring debts without the least intention of repaying them is reprehensible. This disturbing behavior cannot be tolerated especially if the lawyer is an officer of the court.

Q

- What is the lawyer's primary duty to society? - The lawyer's primary duty to society or to the State is to uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law and legal processes. (Canon 1, Code of Professional Responsibility). Thus, it has been said that "to say that lawyers must at all times uphold and respect the law is to state the obvious". Considering that, "of all classes of professions, lawyers are most sacredly bound to uphold the law," (Ex parte Wall, 107 U.S. 265; cited in Malcolm, Legal and Judicial Ethics, p. 214), it is imperative that they live by the law. Accordingly, lawyers who violate their oath and engage in deceitful conduct have no place in the legal profession. (Victoriano P. Resurreccion vs. Atty. Ciriaco C. Sayson, Adm. Case No. 1037, 101 SCAD 654, December 14, 1998).

Q

-Where is the duty of a lawyer to uphold the constitution,


24

obey the law, etc. enshrined? - The duty of a lawyer to uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect for the law and legal processes is enshrined in the Attorney's Oath which every lawyer must take before he may practice law. Such oath runs thus: "I... do hereby 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, or give aid nor consent to the same; I will delay no man for money or malice; and will conduct myself as a lawyer according to the best of my knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to the courts as to my clients; and I impose upon myself this voluntary obligation without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God." Q

-A lawyer was convicted of the crime of estafa. Can he be disbarred? Why? -Yes, because for having been convicted of estafa, such lawyer does not possess good moral character. A lawyer who had been convicted of estafa does not possess moral turpitude. Moral turpitude includes everything which is done contrary to justice, honesty and good morals. Estafa, no doubt, is a crime involving moral turpitude because the act is unquestionably against justice, honesty and good morals. Good moral character is not only a condition precedent to admission to the legal profession, but it must also remain extant in order to maintain one's good standing in that exclusive and honored fraternity. 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. (Victoriano O. Resurrection vs. Atty. Ciriaco Sayson, Adm. Case No. 1037, December 14, 1998, 101 SCAD 654)

Q

- May a lawyer who was convicted of the crime of violation of B.P. Big. 22 be disbarred? Why? -Yes. The issuance of a bouncing check imports deceit and violation of the attorney's oath and the Code of Professional Responsibility which requires him to obey the laws of the land.


25

Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude might not relate to the exercise of the profession of a lawyer, but it certainly relates to and affects the good moral character of a person convicted of such offense. (People vs. Tuanda, 181 SCRA 692). It must be emphasized that the nature of the office of a lawyer requires that he shall be a person of good moral character. This qualification is not only a condition precedent to an admission to the practice of law; its continued possession is also essential for remaining in the practice of law. (Victoriano P. Resurreccion vs. Atty. Ciriano Sayson, supra). Q

-BG, a lawyer borrowed the records of a case. He, however, stole some exhibits by tearing them off. Can he be disbarred? Why? -Yes, BG can be disbarred. Well settled is the rule that a lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. The act of stealing the exhibits can be considered as an unlawful and dishonest act of a lawyer, a violation of his bounden duty under the Code of Professional Responsibility. In the case at bar, BG has descended to the level of a common thief (Fernandez vs. Benjamin Grecia, Adm. Case No. 3694, June 17, 1993,42 SCAD 438).

Q

-One of the essential qualifications for a lawyer to maintain his standing in the legal profession is honesty. Give examples of dishonest and deceitful conduct of a lawyer. - They are: 1. 2. 3.

4. 5. 6. 7.

Misappropriating a client's fund (Quilban vs. Robinol, 171 SCRA 769); Giving false statements under oath in an information sheet submitted in connection with a lawyer's application for the position of Chief of Police (Calo vs. Degano, 20 SCRA 447); Maneuvering reconveyance of property in the name of the lawyer instead of the client in a case involving sale with pacta de retro (Imbuido vs. Fidel Sor Mangonon, 4 SCRA 760); Falsification of grades in the Bar Examinations (In re: Del Rosario, 52 Phil. 399); Delayed failure to account money collected for the client (Licuanan vs. Melo, 170 SCRA 100); Inducing someone to buy a parcel of land knowing that it is not for sale (In re: Quiambao, 102 Phil. 940); and Stealing evidence attached to the court records. (Fernandez vs. Grecia, Adm. Case No. 3694, June 17, 1993, 42 SCAD 438).


26

- A lawyer who stole a document from the record of a case was disbarred. Why? -He is an officer of the court. He is like the court itself. An incorrigible practitioner of dirty tricks would be ill-suited to discharge the role of an instrument to advance the ends of justice. (Fernandez, et at. vs. Grecia, supra).

Q

- A lawyer shall not engage in immoral conduct. What degree of immorality may cause the disbarment or disciplinary action against a lawyer? Explain. -For immorality to be a ground for disciplinary action, it must not only be merely immoral but also grossly immoral. It means that the act must be one which is unquestionably so corrupt or unprincipled. (Arciaga vs. Maniwang, 106 SCRA 591)

Q

- Give some examples of immoral conduct of a lawyer. - They are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

6.

7.

Q

Abandonment of wife and cohabiting with another woman. He can be disbarred (Obusan vs. Ocusan, 128 SCRA 485); Bigamy committed by lawyer (Terre vs. Terre, 211 SCRA 6); Representing oneself to be eligible to marry when in fact he is not (Barrientos vs. Daarol, Adm. Matter No. 1512, Jan. 29, 1993); Having carnal knowledge with a woman through a promise of marriage which he did not fulfill. He can be disbarred (Almirez vs. Lopez, 27 SCRA 169); Arranging the marriage of his son to a woman with whom he had illicit relations and after the marriage, he continued his adulterous relations with her (Mortel vs. Aspiras, 100 Phil. 586); Enveigling a woman into believing that they had been married civilly to satisfy his carnal desires. He was disbarred (Cabrera vs. Agustin, 106 Phil. 256; Pomperada vs. Jochico, 133 SCRA 309); and Aintaining adulterous relationship with a married woman. (Cordova vs. Cordova, 179 SCRA 680).

- A married B who was already a married woman although her marriage was void for having married a first degree cousin. A studied law, graduated, passed the Bar


27

Examinations where B practically was the one who spent for him during his studies. A abandoned her and married C. Can A maintain his standing in the legal profession? Why? -No, because he violated his duty not to engage in immoral conduct. He made a dupe of his wife, living on her bounty and allowing her to spend for his schooling and marrying another girl as soon as he finished his studies. (Terre vs. Terre, 211 SCRA 6). Q

- What is barratry? - Barratry is the offense of frequently exciting and stirring up quarrels and suits, either at law or otherwise. It is a lawyer's act of fomenting suits among individuals and offering his legal services to one of them.

Q

- What is an ambulance chaser? -Ambulance chaser is a lawyer who haunts hospitals and visits the homes of affected, officiously intruding their presence and persistently offering his services on the basis of a contingent fee. (Warvelle, Legal Ethics, pp. 56-57).

Q

- A filed a suit against B. They entered into a compromise agreement but X, the lawyer B objected to it as his attorney's fees have not been paid. Is the act of X proper? Why? - No. It is the sworn duty of a lawyer not to delay any man's cause for money or malice. A lawyer cannot delay the approval of a compromise agreement entered into between the parties, just because his attorney's fees were not provided for in the agreement. (Jesalva vs. Bautista, 105 Phil. 348).

Q

- One of the duties of a lawyer is that, he shall not, for corrupt motive or interest, encourage any suit or proceeding or delay any man's cause. Give examples of instances of delay which can be considered condemnable.

ANS.

- They are: 1.

Resorting to technicalities to frustrate justice Insurance Co., Inc. vs. Uy Realty Co., 34 SCRA 745);

(Economic

2.

Filing of multiple or repetitious petitions which obviously delay the execution of a final and executory judgment (Gabriel vs. CA, 72 SCRA 273);

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________ 3. 4. 2.

28

Filing of several actions covering the same subject matter or seeking substantially identical relief (Macias vs. Uy Kim, 45 SCRA 251) or what is otherwise known as forum shopping; Filing of frivolous appeals for purposes of delay; Filing of motions for postponement and other kinds of motion for dilatory purposes;

6. Indiscriminate filing of suits against a party clearly intended for harassment. ( Dimagiba14 vs. Montalvo, Jr., 202 SCRA 641). Q

- What is the duty of a lawyer in matters of settlement of cases and why? -A lawyer shall encourage his clients to avoid, end or settle a controversy if it will admit of a fair settlement. The reason is that, it will save the client from additional expenses and help prevent the clogging of court docket. (Pajares vs. Abad Santos, 30 SCRA 748).

Q

- After the rendition of final and executory judgment in an unlawful detainer case, a lawyer attempted to nullify the decision of the MTC, Manila. Is the act of the lawyer proper? Why? -No, because the act evinced a deliberate intent to prolong and delay the inevitable execution of a final decision. A lawyer's oath is a solemn agreement in dedicating oneself to the pursuit of justice, not mere fictive of words, drift and hallow, but sacred trust. In so doing, the lawyer violated his duty not to encourage any suit or proceeding or delay a man's cause for corrupt motive or interest. (Masinsin, et al. vs. Hon. Ed Vincent S. Albano, et al., G.R. No. 86421, May 31, 1994, 51 SCAD 476).

Q

- What should a lawyer do if he cannot accept a case? - If for valid reasons, a lawyer cannot accept a case, he should instead give immediate legal advice. He should not refuse to provide legal advice. He can even refer the case to another lawyer who can provide prompt assistance.

Q

- What are some of the characteristics of the legal profession which distinguish it from business? They are: 1. A duty of public service of which the emolument is a byproduct, and in which one may attain the highest eminence


29

without making much money; 2.A relation as an officer of court to the administration of justice involving thorough sincerity, integrity and reliability; 3. A relation to clients in the highest degree of fiduciary; and 4.A relation to colleagues at the bar characterized by candor, fairness and unwillingness to resort to current business methods of advertising and encroachment on their practice, or dealing directly with their clients. (In re: Sycip, 92 SCRA 1). Q

- Explain the principle that the practice of law is a profession and not a moneymaking trade. - The rule is so, because in the fixing of attorney's fees, it must not be forgotten that the profession is a branch of the administration of justice and not a mere moneymaking trade. (Jayme vs. Bualan, 58 Phil. 422). It is not a business but a profession. (In re: Tagorda, 53 Phil. 37). Counsel of repute and of eminence welcome opportunities to be appointed counsel de oficio for this makes manifest the principle that the practice of law is dedicated to the ideal of service and not a mere trade. (Ledesma vs. Climaco, 57 SCRA 473).

Q

- A lawyer published in a newspaper that marriage license may be promptly secured through his assistance and the annoyance of delay or publicity is avoided if desired and marriage arranged to the wishes of the parties. Was the act proper? Why? -No, the advertisement was a flagrant violation of the ethics of his profession it being a brazen solicitation of business from the public. It is highly unethical for an attorney to advertise his talents or skills as a merchant advertises his wares. Law is a profession and not a trade. The lawyer degrades himself and his profession who stoops to and adopts the practice of mercantilism by advertising his services or offering them to the public. (Director of Religious Affairs vs. Bayot, 74 Phil. 579).

Q

- What is the best form of advertisement of a lawyer? -The most worthy and effective advertisement possible even for a lawyer is the establishment of a well merited reputation for professional capacity and fidelity to trust. This cannot be forced but must be the outcome of character and conduct. (Director of Religious Affairs vs. Bayot, 74 Phil. 579).


30

- When may a lawyer make a publication or advertisement in newspapers, etc.? -A lawyer may make certain publications or advertisements in newspapers, or periodicals or magazines about the opening of a law office, stating the names of the lawyers and the address of the office or the firm. Publication in reputable law lists, in a manner consistent with the standards of conduct imposed by the canon, of brief biographical or informative data is allowable. (Ulep vs. The Legal Aid Clinic, Inc., Bar Matter No. 553, June 17, 1993).

Q Explain.

- What should a law firm do if a partner has already died? -If a partner died, the name of the deceased may still be used by the firm, provided, that there is an indication that said partner is already dead and the date or year of his death. The purpose is to avoid the tendency of improperly exploiting its advertising value. (In the matter of the Petition for Authority to Continue Use of the Firm Name Ozaeta, Romulo, De Leon, Mabanta and Reyes, 92 SCRA 1).

Q

- May a lawyer who attempts to engage in opium deal be disciplined? Why? -Yes, because he may not only be removed for malpractice and dishonesty in his profession, but also for gross misconduct not related to his professional duties which show him to be an unfit and unworthy lawyer. The courts are not curators of morals of the bar. At the same time, the profession is not compelled to harbor all persons whatever their character, who are fortunate enough to keep out of prison. A good character is an essential qualification for admission of an attorney to practice, when the attorney's character is bad in such respects as to show that he is unsafe and unfit to be entrusted with the powers of an attorney, the courts retain the power to discipline him x x x. Of all classes and professions, the lawyer is most sacredly bound to uphold the law. (Piatt vs. Abordo, 58 Phil. 350; Co vs. Atty. Bernardino, A.C. No. 3919, Jan. 28, 1998, 90 SCAD 750).

THE LAWYER AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION CANON 7 - A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD THE


31

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 scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession.  Upright character; not mere absence of bad character.  A lawyer must at all times conduct himself properly as not to put into question his  Avoid scandalous conduct; not only required to refrain from adulterous relationships or the keeping of mistress but must also behave himself as to avoid scandalizing the public by creating the belief that he is flouting those moral standards. . 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.  It is the duty of a lawyer to inform the SC or the IBP of such malpractice to the end that the malpractitioner be properly disciplined. 

Not to use in pleadings and in practice the following: disrespectful, abusive and abrasive language, offensive personalities, unfounded accusations or intemperate words tending to obstruct, embarrass or influence the court in administering justice.



Want of intention: not an excuse for the disrespectful language used It merely extenuates liability.



A lawyer, both as an officer of the court and as a citizen, may criticize in properly respectful terms and through legitimate channels the act of courts and judges. But it is the cardinal condition of all such criticism that


32

it shall be bona fide, and shall not spill over the walls of decency and propriety. (In Re: Alrrfacen, 31 SCRA 562) 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 profitsharing arrangement. that: Lawyer shall not negotiate with the opposite party who is represented by a counsel. Neither should the lawyer attempt to interview the opposite party and question him as to the facts of the case even if the adverse party is willing to do so.



Lawyer should deal only with counsel, even if there's a fair agreement.



Lawyer may however, interview any witness or prospective witness for the opposing side..; Limitation: avoid influencing witness in recital and conduct.

 A lawyer must not take as partner or associate one who: 1. Is not a lawyer 2. Is disbarred 3. Has been suspended from the practice of law 4. Foreign lawyer, unless licensed by the se. 

Q

A lawyer cannot delegate his authority without client's consent even to a qualified person. - State the basic responsibilities of a lawyer to the legal profession. The Code of Professional Responsibility mandates that: 1. A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession and support the activities of the integrated bar;


33

2. A lawyer shall conduct himself with courtesy, fairness, and candor toward his professional colleagues and shall avoid harassing tactics against opposing counsel; and 3. A lawyer shall not, directly or indirector, assist in the unauthorized practice of law. Q - What should a lawyer do to maintain his fitness to practice law? - He should maintain good moral character during the continuance of the practice and the exercise of the privilege to practice law. (Quingwa vs. Puno, 19 SCRA 439). He should avoid brushes with the law; he should not assist anyone in the commission of crimes. He is expected to be concerned even with matters like payment of his membership dues to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (In re: Edillon, 84 SCRA 554) and the payment of his privilege tax, otherwise, he may be disciplined. (US vs. Garner, 9 Phil. 18).

Q

- What is an example of an act of a lawyer that would prevent the discredit of the legal profession by his own acts? - A lawyer must not only be of good moral character, but also be seen to be of good moral character and leading lives in accordance with the highest moral standards of the community. He should refrain from adulterous relationships or the keeping of mistresses but must also behave himself as to avoid scandalizing the public by creating the belief that he is flouting those moral standards. (Tolosa vs. Cargo, 171 SCRA 21).

Q

- How should a lawyer act in relation to his peers? -He shall conduct himself with courtesy, fairness and candor towards his colleagues and should avoid harassing tactics against opposing counsel. (Canon 8). He should not use language which is abusive, offensive or otherwise improper. (Canon 8.01). He should not encroach upon the professional employment of another lawyer. (Canon 8.02).

Q

- Explain the effects if a lawyer uses intemperate, abusive, abbrasive or threatening language. - He can be cited for contempt or the courts may use their disciplinary powers. (Zaldivar vs.Gonzales, 166SCRA 316). If a lawyer attacks without foundation the integrity of another lawyer, the court may order the same be stricken off the records. For cases are not won by such language.


34

- When is a strong language against a judge justified? -If the use of a strong language is impelled by the same language of the judge. Hence, if everyone is to blame for the language, it is the judge himself who provoked it. For, if the judge desires not to be insulted, he should start using temperate language himself; for, he who sows the wind will reap a storm. (Fernandez vs. Hon. Bello, 107 Phil. 1140).

Q

- Maya lawyer encroach upon the employment of another lawyer? Explain. No. It is highly unethical for a lawyer to exert efforts directly or indirectly, in any way, to encroach upon professional employment of another. (Rule 8.02). However, if a lawyer has already withdrawn his appearance for a client, the entry of his appearance is no longer an encroachment upon the business of another lawyer. (Laput vs. Ramontique, 6 SCRA 45).

Q

- May a lawyer divide a fee for legal services with one who is not licensed to practice law? Is the rule absolute? - A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legal services with persons not licensed to practice law. The rule is not absolute as there are exceptions like: 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 the person specified in the agreement; or 2. Where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished 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 arrangement. (Rule 9.02 [a], [b], [c]).

Q

- What is the reason for the general rule above stated? -The reason is that, if attorney's fees were allowed to non-lawyers, it would leave the public in hopeless confusion in case of necessity and also to leave the bar in a chaotic condition, aside from the fact that non-lawyers are not amenable to disciplinary measures. (PAFLU vs. Binalbagan Isabela Sugar Co., 42 SCRA 303).


35

- Why a lawyer cannot delegate his authority to unqualified persons to practice law? This is by reason of public policy. The practice of law is limited only to individuals duly qualified in moral character and education and who passed the Bar Examination. Public policy demands that legal work be entrusted only to those possessing tested qualifications and who are sworn to observe the rules and the ethics of the profession, as well as being subject to judicial disciplinary control for the protection of the courts, clients and the public. (PAFLU case, supra).

THE LAWYER AND 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 a paper, the language 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. Judge-lawyer relationship: based on independence and self-respect. Lawyer's duty to the court: a. Respect and loyalty b. Fairness, truth and candor c. No attempt to influence courts

 Cases of falsehood: a. Stating in the Deed of Sale that property is free from all liens and encumbrances when not so b. Encashing check payable to a deceased cousin by signing the latter's name on the check c. Falsifying a power of attorney and using it in collecting the money due


36

to the principal. d. Alleging in one pleading that the clients were mere lessees and in another pleading that the same clients were owners e. Presenting falsified documents in court which he knows to be false f. Filing false charges on groundless suits g. Using in pleadings the IBP number of another lawyer h. Unsolicited appearances i. Use of fictitious residence certificate j. Misquotation/misrepresentation k. Citing a repealed or amended provision J. Asserting a fact not proved m. Verbatim reproductions down to the last word and punctuation mark n. Slight typo mistake: not sufficient to place him in contempt CANON ll. -A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND MAINTAIN THE RESPECT DUE TO THE COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST IN SIMILAR CONDUCT BY OTHERS. RULE 11.01- A lawyer shall appear in court properly attired. 

A lawyer may NOT wear outlandish or colorful clothing to court.

 As an officer of the court and in order to maintain the dignity and respectability of the legal profession, a I lawyer who appears in court must be properly attired. Consequently, the court can hold a lawyer IN CONTEMPT of court if he does not appear in proper attire. Any deviation from the commonly accepted norm of dressing in court (barong or tie, not both) is enough to warrant a citing for contempt. RULE 11.02 - A lawyer shall punctually appear at court hearing. 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.  A lawyer is an officer of the court. He occupies a quasi-judicial office with a tripartite obligation to the courts, to the public and to his clients. 

The public duties of the attorney take precedence over his private duties. His first duty is to the courts. Where duties to the courts conflict with his duties to his clients, the latter must yield to the former.



Lawyers must be respectful not only in actions but also in the use of


37

language whether in oral arguments or in pleadings. 

Must exert efforts that others (including clients, witnesses) shall deal with the courts and judicial officers with respect.



Obedience to court orders and processes.



Criticisms of courts must not spill the walls of decency. There is a wide difference between fair criticism and abuse and slander of courts and judges. Intemperate and unfair criticism is a gross violation of the duty to respect the courts. It amounts to misconduct which subjects the lawyer to disciplinary action.

 A mere disclaimer of any intentional disrespect by appellant is not a ground for exoneration. His intent must be determined by a fair interpretation of the languages employed by him. He cannot escape responsibility by claiming that his words did not mean what any reader must have understood them to mean.  Lawyer can demand that the misbehavior of a judge be put on record. 

Lawyers must be courageous enough to expose arbitrariness and injustice of courts and judges.



A lawyer may submit grievances against judges in the Supreme Court, Ombudsman", or Congress (for impeachment of SC judges only).

CANON 12 - A LAWYER SHALL EXERT EVERY EFFORT AND CONSIDER IT HIS DUTY TO ASSIST IN THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.  The Court further commented that it is understandable for a party in the situation to make full use of every conceivable legal defense the law allows it. In the appraisal, however, of such attempts to evade liability to which a party should respond, it must ever be kept in mind that procedural rules are intended as an aid to justice, not as means for its frustration. Technicalities should give way to the realities of the situation. (Economic Insurance Co., Inc., vs. Uy Realty Co.) 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 preference. He should also be ready with the original documents for comparison with the copies - A lawyer shall not appear for trial unless he has adequately prepared himself with the law and the facts of his case, the


38

evidence he will adduce and the order of Its preference. He should also be ready with the original" documents for comparison with the copies. 

Newly hired counsel: must acquaint himself with all the antecedent proceedings and processes that have transpired in the record prior to his takeover.



If presenting documentary exhibits, he must be ready with the originals for the purpose of comparison with copies thereof.

RULE 12.02 - A lawyer shall not file multiple actions arising from the same cause.  Forum shopping - omission to disclose pendency of appeal or prior dismissal of his case by a court of concurrent jurisdiction with intent of seeking a favorable opinion. 

Forum. ;shopping exists when as a result of an adverse opinion In one forum: a. A party seeks favorable opinion (other than by appeal or certiorari) in another; or b. When he institutes two or more actions or proceedings grounded on the same cause, on the gamble that one or the other would make a favorable disposition (Binguet Electric Corp. vs. Flores, 287 SCRA 449, March 12, 1998).

 The most important factor in determining the existence of forum-shopping is the VEXATION caused the courts and party-litigants by a party who asks different courts to rule on the same related causes, asking the same relief. 

Forum shopping constitutes DIRECT CONTEMPT of court and may subject the offending lawyer to disciplinary action.

RULE 12.03 - A lawyer shall not, after 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. 

Asking for extension of time must be in good faith.

RULE 12.04 - A lawyer shall not unduly delay a case, impede the execution of a judgment or misuse Court processes. RULE 12.05 - A lawyer shall refrain from talking to his witness during a


39

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.  Rights and obligations of a witness - a witness must answer questions, although his answer may tend to establish a claim against him. However, it is the right of a witness: 1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions and from harsh or insulting demeanor; 2. Not to be detained longer than the interest of justice requires; 3. Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue; 4. Not to give any answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an : offense unless otherwise provided by law, or 5. Nor to give answer which will tend to degrade his reputation, unless it be to the very fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be presumed. But a witness must answer to the fact of his previous final conviction for an offense. (Rule 132, Sec. 3, RRC) 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

CANON 13 - A LAWYER SHALL RELY UPON THE MERITS OF HIS CAUSE AND REFRAIN FROM ANY IMPROPRIETY WHICH TENDS TO INFLUENCE, OR GIVE 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. 

The judge has the corresponding duty not to conveyor permit others to convey the


40

impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. 

Discussing cases with the judge privately should be avoided.



Test when public statement is contemptuous: The character of the act done and its direct tendency to prevent and obstruct the discharge of official duty.



To warrant a finding: of "prejudicial publicity", there must be an allegation and proof that the judges have been unduly influenced, not simply that they might be, by the "barrage" of publicity.



Lawyer is equally, guilty as the client if he induces the latter to cause the publicity.

Q

-State the basic responsibilities of a lawyer to the courts. - The Code of Professional Responsibility mandates that: 1) A lawyer owes candor, fairness, and good faith to the court; 2) A lawyer shall observe and maintain the respect due to the courts and to judicial officers and should insist on similar conduct by others; 3) A lawyer shall exert every effort and consider it his duty to assist in the speedy and efficient administration of justice; and 3

Q-

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. Who has the power to regulate the admission to the bar and the practice of law? The Supreme Court, as regulator and guardian of the legal profession, has plenary disciplinary authority over attorneys. The authority to discipline lawyers stems from the Court's Constitutional mandate to regulate admission to the practice of law, which includes as well authority to regulate the practice itself of law. (Zaldivar vs. Sandiganbayan, 166 SCRA 316 [1988]).

Q

- May a lawyer or anybody criticize the courts? Why? It is the cardinal condition that criticisms of courts shall be bona fide and shall not spill over the walls of decency and propriety. A wide chasm exists between fair criticisms, on the one hand, and abuse and slander of courts and the judges on the other. Intemperate and unfair criticism is gross violation of the duty of respect to courts. It is such a misconduct that subjects a lawyer to disciplinary action. The lawyer's duty to render respectful subordination to the courts is essential to the orderly administration of justice. Hence, in the assertion of


41

their clients' rights, lawyers even those gifted with superior intellect are enjoined to give due respect to the courts. (Zaldivar vs. Gonzales, supra). Q - A lawyer wanted the Office of the President to review the decision of the Supreme Court. Is the act of the lawyer subject to discipline? Why? Yes, because respect to the court is an important duty of a lawyer. No other department of the government can review the decisions of the Supreme Court. What the lawyer did was even violative of the principle of separation of powers. (Maglasang vs. People, 190 SCRA 308).

Q - Is the act of a lawyer of filing baseless cases against a judge proper? Why? No. In Aparicio vs. Andal, et al., July 25, 1989, it was said that filing of baseless cases against a judge is improper. He was admonished because a lawyer has a basic duty to conduct himself with good fidelity to the courts, to be courteous, fair, not be combative and bellicose. (Sangalang vs. Gaston, Aug. 30, 1989; In re: Laureta). Q

- To whom does a lawyer owe his first and foremost duty? The lawyer's first and foremost duty is to the court. He is duty bound to comply with the lawful orders of the court. The reason is that the attorney is an officer of the court because his main mission is to assist the court in administering justice.

Q

- In Sangalang vs. Gaston, August 30, 1989, a lawyer was suspended because of his own actuations, when in his motion for reconsideration he said that the decision of the SC "reads more like a brief for Ayala." Was the lawyer's act proper? Why? .-No. The primary duty of a lawyer is to assist in the administration of justice, not to his client. His client's success is only subordinate such that, he is at liberty to advocate his client's cause in utmost earnest, but he is not at liberty to resort to arrogance, intimidation and innuendo. The act of the lawyer not only puts to serious question his own integrity and competence but also jeopardized his own campaign against graft and corruption undeniably prevailing in the judiciary. They are unbecoming as well as an assault on the honor and integrity of the court.

Q-

State the basic duties of a lawyer to the court. The attorney's duty of prime importance is to observe and maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers. The duty to observe and maintain the respect due the court is likewise incumbent up OJ} one aspiring to be a lawyer. He should conduct himself toward judges with the courtesy that all have a right to expect


42

and with the propriety which the dignity of the courts requires. For his investiture into the legal profession places upon his shoulders no burden more basic, more exacting and more intemperate than that of a respectful behavior toward the courts. A lawyer owes the court the duty to observe and maintain a respectful attitude not for the sake of temporary incumbent of the judicial office but for the maintenance of its supreme importance. (Department of Health vs. Sy Chi Siong Co., Inc., et al., G.R. No. 85289, Feb. 20, 1989). A lawyer owes candor, fairness and good faith to the Court. (Canon 10). A lawyer shall observe and maintain the respect due to the Court and to judicial officers (Canon 11) and a lawyer shall exert every effort and consider it his duty to assist in the speedy and efficient administration of justice. (Canon 12). (Pentecostes vs. Judge Hidalgo, Adm. Case No. RTC 89-331, Sept. 28, 1990). A lawyer should be courteous, respectful to the courts of justice. He should be fair, not repultant, combative and bellicose in dealing with the Court. The use of disrespectful, intemperate and manifestly baseless and malicious statements in his pleadings or motions is a direct contempt of Court for which he may be disciplined. (Aparicio vs. Andal, July 25, 1989; Zaldivar vs. Gonzales, supra). Q-

In filing a pleading, etc., the lawyer deliberately changed the wordings of the law. State the effect of such act. A lawyer may be punished for contempt of court by deliberately changing the provisions of law in order to mislead the court. (Deiparine, Jr. vs. CA, 221 SCRA 503, April 23, 1993; COMELEC vs. Hon. Noynay, et al., G.R. No. 132365, July 9, 1998, 95 SCAD 818).

Q-

State the effect of submitting to the court a falsified document. Submission to the court of falsified documents constitutes willful disregard of the lawyer's duty to act at all times in a manner consistent with the truth. A lawyer should never seek to mislead the court by an artifice or false statement of fact or law. (Bautista vs. Gonzales, 182 SCRA 151, Feb. 12, 1990).

Q - State the effect of forum shopping. - Forum shopping is malpractice and constitutes contempt of court. In PNCC vs. NLRC, 172 SCRA 867, the Supreme Court said that a lawyer engages in forum shopping when he institutes a proceeding at the time the same case or an incident thereto is pending in another court or tribunal with an expectation of securing a favorable decision.


43

In fact, in Danville Maritime, Inc. vs. Comm. on Audit and Comm. on Audit vs. RTC, July 28, 1989, the Supreme Court said that all cases should be dismissed without prejudice to the filing of action against the counsel concerned. No one should try to trifle with courts and abuse processes. (Crisostomo vs. SEC, November 6, 1989). A lawyer who resorts to forum shopping, continuously seeks the court where he may possibly obtain favorable judgment, thereby adding to the already clogged dockets of the courts with the unmeritorious cases he files, grossly abuses his right of recourse to the courts. By filing multiple petitions or complaints in the false hope of getting some favorable action, he obstructs the administration of justice. He is thus derelict in his duty as counsel to maintain in such admission, actions or proceeding only as appears to him to be just, and such defenses only as he believes to be honestly debatable under the law. He thus prostitutes his office at the expense of justice. (Atriaga vs. Villanueva, Adm. Case No. 1892, July 29, 1988). A counsel, who, instead of assisting in the speedy disposition of cases, makes mockery of justice, and this is guilty of gross misconduct in office may be suspended indefinitely from the practice of law until such time that he can demonstrate to the court that he has rehabilitated himself and deserves to resume the practice of law. Q- Is a lawyer first and foremost the defender of his client or an officer of the court? Explain. - A lawyer is not merely the defender of his client's cause and a trustee of his client in respect of the client's cause of action and assets; he is also, first and foremost, an officer of the court and participates in the fundamental function of administering justice in society. It follows that a lawyer's compensation for professional services rendered are subject to the supervision of the court, not just to guarantee that the fees he charges and receives remain reasonable and commensurate with the services rendered, but also to maintain the dignity and integrity of the legal profession to which he belongs. Upon taking his attorney's oath as an officer of the court, a lawyer submits himself to the authority of the courts to regulate his right to charge professional fees. (Sumaoang vs. Judge, RTC Br. XXXI, Guimba, Nueva Ecija, 215 SCRA 136, Oct. 26, 1992). Q - State the effect of the willful filing of multiple frivolous and baseless complaints. A lawyer who files multiple petitions may be held liable for willful violation of his duties as an attorney. The filing of multiple petitions constitutes abuse of the Court's processes and improper conduct that tends to impede, obstruct and degrade the due administration of justice. Claim of good faith alone is not enough to be exonerated from


44

contempt. (Kalilid Wood Industries Corp. vs. CA, 197 SCRA 735, May 31,1991; Eternal Gardens Memorial Park Corp. vs. CA, et al., August 5, 1998, 97 SCAD 93). Complainant's (lawyer) wanton disregard of the Supreme Court's stern warning not to file baseless and frivolous complaints and his adamant refusal to abide by Canon 11, Rule 11.03 and Rule 11.04 of the Code of Professional Responsibility have shown his unfitness to hold the license to practice law. (Balaoing vs. Calderon, 221 SCRA 533). Q

- A government lawyer filed a petition for certiorari as a special civil action before the Supreme Court and later filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals, without withdrawing the first case. Is the act of the lawyer proper? Explain.

No, because he owes the following duties to the court: a.)

A lawyer shall observe the rules of procedure and shall not misuse them to defeat the ends of justice. (Canon 10.03, Canon 10, CPR); and

b.)

A lawyer shall not file multiple actions from the same cause. (Rule 12.02, Canon 12, CPR).

Q-

A party is not allowed to pursue simultaneous remedies in two (2) different for a because such practice works havoc on orderly judicial procedure. Explain. The filing of the petition for certiorari borders on the censurable as it trifles with the courts, abused their processes, and added to the already heavily burdened dockets. While counsel may owe entire devotion to the interest of his client, his privilege to practice law carries with it certain correlative duties to the court, one of which is to assist in the speedy and efficient administration of justice and not saddle the court with multiple actions arising from the same case. The lawyer has the duty to be more circumspect in dealing with the courts. The SC said that a lawyer who performs his duty with diligence and candor not only protects the interest of his client, he also serves the ends of justice, does honor to the bar and helps maintain the respect of the community to the legal profession. (PRC, et al. vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 117817, and PRC, et al. vs. Hon. Nitafan, et al., G.R. No. 118437, July 9, 1998, 95 SCAD 732).

Q-

A lawyer filed a motion for extension of time to file a motion for reconsideration at the MTC. What duty did he violate? Why? -The lawyer has the duty to keep abreast with jurisprudence. In filing a motion for extension of time to file Motion for Reconsideration with


45

the MTC, or RTC or Court of Appeals, he has failed to observe the responsibility imposed on him as a member of the Bar to keep abreast with the latest developments in the law. (Uy vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 126337, February 12, 1998, 91 SCAD 715).

THE LAWYER AND THE CLIENT CANON 14 - A LAWYER SHALL NOT REFUSE HIS SERVICES TO THE NEEDY. RULE 14.01A 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 is applicable only in criminal cases. In criminal cases, a lawyer cannot decline to represent an accused or respondent because of his opinion that the said person is guilty of the charge or charges filed against him. In representing the accused or respondent, the lawyer must only use means which are fair and honorable. (Rule 138, sec.20[l], Revised Rules of Court) 



Rule 14.01 is not applicable in civil cases because "(c) To counselor maintain such actions or proceedings only as appear to him to be just. and such defenses only ~s he believes to be honestly debatable under the law." (Rule 138, sec. 20[C},1 Revised Rules of Court) When the lawyer signs a complaint or answer, his signature is deemed a certification by him "that he has read the pleading; that to the best of his knowledge. information, and belief, there is good ground to support it." (Rule 7, sec. 3, Revised Rules of Court) For violating this rule, the lawyer may be subjected to disciplinary action.

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. RULE 14.03 A lawyer may not refuse to accept representation of an indigent client unless: (a) he is not in a 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

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________ 

46

governing his relations with paying clients. Duties to Client: a. Owe utmost learning and ability b. Maintain inviolate the confidence of the client c. Disclose all circumstances/interest regarding the controversy d. Undivided loyalty e. Not reject cause of defenseless and oppressed f. Candor, fairness and loyalty g. Hold in trust money or property h. Respond with zeal to the cause of the client



Appointment of Amicus Curae a. By application to the judge b. The judge on his own initiative may invite the lawyer c. No right to interfere with or control the condition of the record, no control over the suit



Cannot refuse on the ground of insufficient of compensation or lack of it

CANON 15 - A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY IN ALL HIS DEALINGS AND TRANSACTIONS WITH HIS CLIENT. 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 15.02 A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on privilege communication in respect of matters disclosed to him by a prospective client. Rule on Revealing Client's Identity 

General Rule: A lawyer may not invoke privilege communication to refuse revealing a client's identity. (Rega/a vs. Sandiganbayan, 262 SCRA 122, September 20, 1996) Exceptions: 1. When by divulging such identity, it would implicate the client to that same Controversy for which the lawyer's services were required. 2. It would open client to civil liability 3. The disclosure of such identity will provide for the only link in order to convict the Accused, otherwise, the government has no case.



Requisites of Communication:

Privileged


47

a. Atty.-client relationship (or a kind of consultancy relationship with a prospective Client . b. Communication made by client to lawyer in the course of lawyer's professional employment . c. Communication is intended to be confidential (see Rule 130, Sec. 21(b), Rules of Court) 

When communication is not privileged: a. After pleading has been filed [pleading ceases to be privileged communication becomes part of public records] b. Communication intended by the client to be sent to a third person through his counsel (it loses its confidential character as soon as it reaches the hands of third person) c. When the communication sought by client is intended to aid future crime d. When communication between attorney and client is heard by a third party - third party testimony is admissible as evidence, 

Even if the communication is unprivileged, the rule of ethics prohibits him from voluntarily revealing or using to his benefit or to that of a third person, to the disadvantage of the' client, the said communication unless the client consents thereto.



This is applicable to students under the Student Practice Law Program

RULE 15.03A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts. Rule on Conflicting Interest It is generally the rule based on sound public policy that an attorney cannot represent adverse interest. It is highly improper to represent both sides of an issue. The proscription against representation of conflicting interest finds application where the conflicting interest arises with respect to the same general matter and is applicable however slight such adverse interest maybe. It applies although the attorney’s intention and motives were honest and he acted in good faith. However, representation after full disclosure of facts. (Nakpil vs. Valdez, 286 SCRA 758). 

General Rule: An attorney Cannot represent adverse interest. Exception: Where the parties consent to the representation after full disclosure of facts.



The TEST in determining Conflicting Interest: The test is whether or


48

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. (Tiana vs. Ocampo) RULE 15.04A lawyer may, with the written consent of all concerned, act as mediator, conciliator or arbitrator in settling disputes. 

At a certain stage of the controversy before it reaches the court, a lawyer may represent conflicting interests with the consent of the parties. A common representation may work to their advantage since a mutual lawyer, with honest motivations and impartially cognizant of the parties’ disparate positions may well be better situated to work out an acceptable settlement. (Donald Dee vs. CA, 176 SCRA 651)

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. 

It is the duty of a counsel to advise his client, ordinarily a layman to the intricacies and vagaries of the law, on the merit or lack of merit of his case. If he finds that his client’s cause is defenseless, then it is his duty to advise the latter to acquiesce and submit, rather than traverse the incontrovertible. A lawyer must resist the whims and caprices of his client, and temper his client’s propensity to litigate.

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 the principles of fairness. RULE 15.08 - A lawyer who is engaged in another profession or occupation concurrently with the practice of law shall make clear to his client whether he is acting as a lawyer or in another capacity.  Lawyers should refrain from giving any advice unless they have obtained sufficient understanding of their client's cause. A careful investigation and examination of the facts must first be had before any legal opinion be given by the lawyer to the client. 

To avoid breach of legal ethics, a lawyer should keep any business, in which is engaged in concurrently with the practice of law, entirely separate and apart from the latter.


49

CANON 16 - A LAWYER SHALL HOLD IN TRUSTS ALL MONEYS AND PROPERTIES OF HIS CLIENT THAT MAY COME INTO HIS POSSESSION. RULE 16.01 A lawyer shall account for all the 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. 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. Attorney’s Liens - an attorney shall have a lien upon the funds, documents and Papers of his client which have lawfully come into his possession and may retain the same until his lawful fees and disbursements have been paid, and may apply such fines to the satisfaction thereof. He shall also have a lien to the same extent upon all Judgments for the payment of money, and executions issued in pursuance of such Judgments which he has secured in a litigation of his client, from and after the time when he shall have caused a statement of his claim of such lien to be entered upon the records of the court rendering such judgment, or issuing such execution and shall have caused written notice thereof to be delivered to his client and to the adverse party; and he shall have the same right and power over such judgments and executions as his client would have to enforce his lien and secure the payment of his fees and disbursements. (Sec. 37, Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court) 

Prohibition on Purchase of Client's Property: art. 1491: Civil Code Art. 14-1: The following persons cannot acquire by purchase, even at a public or judicial auction, either in person or through the mediation of another: (4) Public officers and employees, the property of the State or of any subdivision thereof, or of any government owned or controlled corporation, or Institution, the administration of which has been entrusted to them; this provision shall apply to judges and government experts who, in any manner whatsoever, take part in the sale; (5) Justices, judges, prosecuting attorneys, clerks of superior and inferior courts, and, other officers and employees connected with the administration of justice, the property and rights litigation or levied upon an execution before the court within whose jurisdiction or territory they


50

exercise their respective functions; this prohibition includes the act of acquiring by assignment and shall apply to lawyers, with respect to the property and rights which may be the object of any Litigation in which may take part by virtue Of their profession. 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.  Attorney's lien is not an excuse for non-rendition of accounting. 

Cannot disburse client's money to client's creditors without authority.



Failure to deliver upon demand gives rise to the presumption that he has misappropriated the funds for his own use to the prejudice of the client and in violation of the trust reposed in him. Notify client if retaining lien shall be implemented.

 

When a lawyer enforces a charging lien against his Client, the clientlawyer relationship is terminated.



The principle behind Rule 16.04 is to prevent the lawyer from taking advantage of his influence over the client or to avoid acquiring a financial interest in the outcome of the case.

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. 

NO fear of judicial disfavor or public popularity should restrain him from full discharge of his duty.



It is the duty of the lawyer at the time of retainer to disclose to the client all the Circumstances of his relations to the parties and any interest in, or connection with, The controversy which might influence the client in the selection of counsel.



The lawyer owes loyalty to his client even after the relation of attorney and client has terminated. (Lorenzana Food Corp. vs. Daria, 197 SCRA428) It is not good practice to permit him afterwards to defend in another case other persons against his former client under the pretext that the case is distinct from and independent of the former case.


51

CANON 18 - A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT WITH COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE. 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. RULE 18.02 - A lawyer shall not handle any legal matter without adequate preparation. 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. 

Competence: sufficiency of lawyer's qualification to deal with the matter in question and includes knowledge and skill and the ability to use them effectively in the interest of the client in a reasonable time to the client's Request for information.



A lawyer must keep himself constantly abreast with the trend of authoritative pronouncements and developments in all branches of law.



There must be extraordinary diligence in prosecution or defense of his client's cause. If a lawyer errs like any other human being, he is not answerable for every error or Mistake, and will be protected as long as he acts honestly and in good faith to the Best Of his skill and knowledge.





Lawyer is not an insurer of the result of a case where he is engaged as counsel.



Attorneys have authority to bind their clients In any case by any agreement in relation they made in writing, and in taking appeals, and in all matters or ordinary judicial procedure. But they cannot, without special authority, compromise their client's litigation or receive anything in discharge of a client's claim, but the full amount in cash. (FAR Corp. vs. JAC, 157 SCRA 698)


52

CANON 19 - A LAWYER SHALL REPRESENT HIS CLIENT WITH ZEAL WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THE LAW. 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 in handling the case. 

General Rule: Negligence binds client

Exception: Reckless imprudence (deprives client of due process) Results in outright deprivation of one's property through technicality 

Must not present in evidence any document known to be false; nor present a false witness.  Negative pregnant is improper since it is an ambiguous pleading (improper if in bad faith and the purpose is to confuse the other party) In defense: present every defense the law permits. 

Lawyer should do his best efforts to restrain and to prevent his clients from perpetrating acts which he himself ought not to do. Or else, withdraw. But lawyer shall not volunteer the information about the client's commission of fraud anyone counter to duty to maintain client’s confidence and secrets.

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




53

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 from the services; (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. Kinds of Payment which may be stipulated upon: A fixed or absolute fee which is payable regardless of the result of the case b. A contingent fee that is conditioned to the securing of ,a favorable judgment and recovery of money or property and the amount of which may be on a percentage basis, c. A fixed fee payable per appearance d. A fixed fee computed by the number of hours spent e. A fixed fee based on a piece of work

 Attorney's Fees a. Ordinary attorney's fee - the reasonable compensation paid to a lawyer by his client for the legal services he has rendered to the latter. The basis for this compensation is the fact of his employment by and his agreement with the client. b. Extraordinary attorney's fee.. an indemnity for damages ordered by the court to be paid by the losing party In litigation. The basis for this is any of the cases provided for by law where such award can be made, such as those authorized in Article 2208 of the Civil Code, and is payable NOT to the lawyer but to the client, unless they have agreed that the award shall pertain to the lawyer as additional compensation or as part thereof. 

How attorney's fees may be claimed by the lawyer: 1. It may be asserted either in the very action in which the services of a lawyer had been rendered or in a separate action.

2. A petition for attorney's fees may be filed before the judgment in favor of the client is satisfied or the proceeds thereof delivered to the client. 3. 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 lawyers claim for attorney's fees may arise has become final. Otherwise, the


54

determination of the courts will be premature. 

Contracts for employment may either be oral or express. It is oral when the counsel is employed without a written agreement - but the conditions and amount of attorney’s fees are agreed upon. A written agreement is not necessary to prove a client's obligation to, pay attorney's fees. (Peyer VS. Peyer, 77 Phil 366)



Kinds of Retainer Agreements on Attorney’s fees: a. General Retainer or Retaining Fee – it is the fee paid to a lawyer to secure his future services as general counsel for any ordinary legal problem that may arise in the ordinary business of the client and referred to him for legal action; b. Special Retainer – it means “as much as he deserves”, and his used as the basis for determining the lawyer’s professional fees in the absence of a contract, but recoverable by him from his client.



Quantum Meruit is resorted to where: a. There is no express contract for payment of attorney's fees agreed upon between the lawyer and the client; b. When although there is a formal contract for attorney's fees, the stipulated fees are found unconscionable or unreasonable by the court. c. When the contract for attorney's fees is void due to purely formal matters or defects of execution d. When the counsel, for justifiable cause, was not able to finish the case to its conclusion . e. When lawyer and client disregard the contract for attorney's fees.



Skill: length of practice is not a safe criterion of professional ability.

RULE 20.02 A lawyer shall, in cases of referral, with the consent of the client, be entitled to a division of fees in proportion to the work performed and responsibility assumed. RULE 20.03 - A lawyer shall not, without the full knowledge and consent of the client, accept any fee, reward, costs, commission, interest, rebate or forwarding allowance or other compensation whatsoever related to his professional employment from anyone other than the client. 

Exception. A lawyer may receive compensation from a person other than his client when the latter has full knowledge and approval thereof. (Rule 138, sec. 20[e], Revised Rules of Court}


55

RULE 20.04 - A lawyer shall avoid controversies with clients concerning his compensation and shall resort to judicial action only to prevent imposition, injustice and fraud.  Unauthorized counsel: Not entitled to attorney's fees. 

Stipulation regarding payments of attorney's fees is not illegal/immoral and is enforceable as the law between the parties provided such stipulation does not contravene law, good morals, etc.



When counsel cannot recover full amount despite written contract for attorney’s fees: a. When he withdraws before the case is finished b. Justified dismissal ()f 'attorney (payment: in quantum meruit only)

 The reason for the award of attorney's fees must be stated in the text of the decision; otherwise, if It is stated only in the dispositive portion of the decision, the same must be disallowed on appeal. 

Even though the interest or property involved is of considerable value, if the legal services rendered do not call for much efforts there is no justification for the award of high fees.



Compensation to an attorney for merely recommending another lawyer is improper (agents)



Attorney's fees for legal services shared or divided to non-lawyer is prohibited. Division of fees is only for division of service or responsibility.



A lawyer should try to settle amicably any differences on the subject. A lawyer has 2 options. Judicial action to recover attorney's fees; a. In Same case: Enforce attorney's fees by filing an appropriate motion or petition as an incident to the main action where he rendered legal services. b. In case separate civil action.

CANON 21 - A LAWYER SHALL PRESERVE THE CONFIDENCE AND SECRETS OF HIS CLIENT EVEN AFTER THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATION IS TERMINATED. 

Confidence - refers to information protected by the attorney-client privilege (Revised


56

Rules of Court) 

Secret - refers to other information gained in the professional relationship that the client has regulated to be held Inviolate or the disclosure of which would be embarrassing or would likely be detrimental to the client.

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 professional employment; nor can an attorney's secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined, without the consent of the client and his employees, concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity (Rule 130, Sec. 21 (b), Revised Rules RULE 21.01 - A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or secrets of his client except: a) When authorized by the client after acquainting 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.  When properly authorized after having been fully informed of the consequences to reveal his confidences/secrets, then there is a valid waiver. . 

Art. 209. Betrayal of Trust by an Attorney or Solicitor. Revelation of secrets. In addition to the proper administrative action, the penalty of prison correctional in its minimum period, or a fine ranging from P200 to P1000, or both, shall be imposed upon any attorney at law or solicitor who, by any malicious break of professional duty as inexcusable negligence or ignorance, shall prejudice his client, or reveal any of the secrets of the latter learned by him in his professional capacity. The same penalty shall be imposed upon an attorney at law or solicitor who, having undertaken the defense of a client, or having received confidential information from said client in a case, shall undertake the defense of the opposing party in the same case, without the consent of his first client (Rule 209, Revised Penal Code)



General Rule: Obligation to keep secrets covers only lawful purposes Exceptions: a. Announcements of intention of a client to commit a crime b. Client jumped bail and lawyer knows his whereabouts; or client is living somewhere under an assumed name c. Communication involves the commission of future fraud or crime but crimes/frauds "already committed" falls within the privilege

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 the same


57

to his own advantage or that of third person, unless the client with full knowledge of the circumstance 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. 

Avoid committing calculated indiscretion - accidental revelation of secrets obtained in his professional employment.



Prohibition applies, even if the prospective client did not thereafter actually engage the lawyer.

CANON 22 - A LAWYER SHALL WITHDRAW HIS SERVICES ONLY FOR GOOD CAUSE AND UPON NOTICE APPROPRIATE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES. 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. h) Kinds of Appearance: (a) General appearance is when the party comes to court either as plaintiff or defendant and seeks general reliefs from the court for satisfaction of his


58

claims or counterclaims respectively. (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. The aim is simply the dismissal of the case. If the defendant seeks other reliefs, the appearance, even if qualified by the word special, is equivalent to a general appearance. 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.  If a person, in respect to his business affairs or troubles of any kind, consults with his atty. in his professional capacity with the view of obtaining professional advice or assistance, and the atty. voluntarily permits or acquiesces in such consultation, then the professional employment must be regarded as established. (Hi/ado vs. David, 84 Phil. 589) 

The withdrawal as counsel of a client or the dismissal by the client of his counsel must be in a formal partition filed in the case. Atty.-client relationship does not terminate formally until there is withdrawal made of record. Unless properly relieved, counsel is responsible for the conduct of the case. (Tumbangahan vs. CA, 165 SCRA 485)

1.NATURE 2. BASIS 3. COVERAGE

4. WHEN LIEN TAKES EFFECT 5. NOTICE 6. APPLICABILIT Y 

RETAINING LIEN Passive Lien: It cannot be actively enforced. It is a general lien Lawful possession of papers, documents, property belonging to client. Covers only papers, documents and property in the lawful possession of the attorney by reason of his professional employment. As soon as the attorney gets possession of the papers documents or property Client need not be notified to make it effective May be exercised before judgment or execution or regardless thereof.

CHARGING LIEN ACTIVE LIEN: It can be enforced by execution. It is a special lien. Securing of a favorable money judgment for the client. Covers all judgment for the payment of money and executions issued in pursuance of such judgments. As soon as the claim for attorney’s fees had been entered into the records of the case. Client and adverse party must be notified to make it effective Generally, it is exercisable only when the attorney had already secured a favorable judgment for his client

Withdrawal as counsel for a' client, an attorney may only retire from a


59

case either by written consent of his client or by permission of the court after due notice and hearing, in which event the attorney should see to it that the name of the new attorney is recorded in the case. 

An attorney who could not get the written consent of his, client must make an application to the court, for the relation does not terminate formally until there is a withdrawal of record. Counsel has no right to presume that the court would grant his withdrawal and therefore must still appear on the date of hearing.



Requirements for the Substitution of Counsel in a Case: a. Written application b. Written consent of client c. Written consent of attorney to be substituted d. If the consent of the attorney to be substituted cannot be obtained, there must be at least a proof of notice that the motion for substitution has been served upon him, in the manner prescribed by the rules.



A lawyer cannot recover compensation from one who did not employ or authorize his employment, however valuable the results of his services may have been to such person. In similar cases, no compensation when: a. Client conducts himself in a manner which tends to degrade his attorney; b. Client refuses to extend cooperation; c. Client stops having contact with him.



The right of a client to terminate a lawyer is absolute. Such termination may be with or without cause.



The attorney-client relationship is terminated by: (1) Withdrawal of the lawyer under Rule 22.01; (2) Death of the lawyer, unless it is a Law Firm, in which case, the other partners may continue with the case; (3) Death of the client as the relationship is personal, and one of agency (4) Discharge or dismissal of the lawyer by the client, for the right to dismiss a counsel is the prerogative of the client, subject to certain limitations; (5) Appointment or election of a lawyer to the government position which prohibits private practice of law; (6) Full termination of the case or case; (7) Disbarment or suspension of the lawyer from the practice of law; (8) Intervening incapacity or incompetence of the client during the pendency of the Case, for then the client loses his capacity to contract, or to control the subject matter of the action. The guardian may authorize the lawyer to continue his


60

employment; (9) Declaration of the presumptive death of the lawyer (art. 390, New Civil Code; art. 41, Family Code) (10) Conviction for a crime and imprisonment of the lawyer

LIABILITIES OF LAWYERS 

Civil Liability a. Client is prejudiced by lawyer’s negligence or misconduct b. Breach of fiduciary obligation b. Breach of fiduciary obligation c. Civil liability to third persons d. Libelous words in pleadings; violation of communication privilege e. Liability for costs of suit (treble costs) - when lawyer is made liable

for insisting on client's patently unmeritorious case or interposing appeal merely to delay litigation  Criminal Liability a. Prejudicing client through malicious breach of professional duty b. Revealing client's secrets c. Representing adverse interests d. Introducing false evidence e. Misappropriating client's funds (estafa) 

Contempt of Court a. Kinds of Contempt: 1. Direct - consists of misbehavior in the presence of or so near a court or judge as to interrupt or obstruct the proceedings before the court or the administration of justice; punished summarily. 2. Indirect - one committed away from the court involving disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order, judgment or command of the court, or tending to belittle, degrade, obstruct, interrupt or embarrass the court. 3. Civil- failure to do something ordered by the court which is for the benefit of a party. 4. Criminal - any conduct directed against the authority or dignity of the court.  The exercise of the power to punish contempt has a twofold aspect, namely (1)the proper punishment of the guilty party for his disrespect to the court or its order; and


61

(2)to compel his performance of some act or duty required of him by the court which he refuses to perform. A civil contempt is the failure to do something ordered to be done by a court or a judge for the benefit of the opposing party therein; and a criminal contempt is conduct directed against the authority and dignity of a court or of a judge, as in unlawfully assailing or discrediting the authority or dignity of a court or of a judge, or in doing a duly forbidden act. Where the punishment imposed, whether against a party to a suit or a stranger, is wholly or primarily to protect or vindicate the dignity and power, either by fine payable to the government or by imprisonment, or both, it is deemed a judgment in criminal case. Where the punishment is by fine directed to be paid to a party in the nature of damages for the wrong inflicted, or by imprisonment as coercive measure to enforce the performance of some act for the benefit of the party or in aid of the final judgment or decree rendered in his behalf, the contempt judgment will, if made before final decree, be treated as in the nature of an interlocutory order, or, if made after final decree, as a remedial in nature, and may be reviewed only on appeal from the final decree, or in such other mode as is appropriate to the review of judgments in civil cases. The question of whether the contempt committed is civil or criminal, does not affect the jurisdiction or the power of a court to punish the same.(Halili vs. CIR, 136 SCRA 112) b. Acts Constituting Contempt: 1. Misbehavior 2. Disobedience 3. Publication concerning pending litigation 4. Publication tending to degrade -the court disrespectful language in Pleadings 5. Misleading the court or obstructing justice 6. Unauthorized practice of law 7. Belligerent attitude 8. Unlawful retention of client's funds 

The power to punish for contempt and the power to disbar are separate and distinct, and that the exercise of one does not exclude the exercise of the other. (People vs. Godoy, 243 SCRA 64)

ADMINISTRATIVE LIABILITIES OF LAWYERS Main Objectives of Disbarment and Suspension:


62

1. To compel the attorney to deal fairly and honestly with his clients; 2. To remove from the profession a person whose misconduct has proved him unfit to be entrusted with the duties and responsibilities belonging to the office of all attorney; 3. To punish the lawyer; 4. To set an example or a warning for the other members of the bar; 5. To safeguard the administration of justice from Incompetent and dishonest Lawyers; 6. To protect the public . I  Characteristics of Disbarment Proceedings: 1. Neither a civil nor criminal proceedings; 2. Double jeopardy cannot be availed of In a disbarment proceeding; 3. It can be initiated motu propio by the SC or IBP. It can be initiated without a complaint; 4. It is imprescriptible; 5. Conducted confidentially; 6. It can proceed regardless of the interest of the lack thereof on the part of the complainant; 7. It constitutes due process. 

Grounds for Disbarment or Suspension: 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 attorney for a party to case without authority to do so (Sec. 27, Rule 138, RRC)



Pr0cedure for Disbarment a. Institution either by: 1. The Supreme Court, motu proprio, or 2. The ISP, motu proprio, or 3. Upon verified complaint by any person b. Six copies of the verified complaint shall be filed with the Secretary of the IBP or Secretary of any of its chapter and shall be forwarded to the IBP Board of Governors. c. Investigation- by the National Grievance Investigators. d. Submission of investigative report to the ISP Board of Governors. e. Board of Governors decides within 30 days. f. Investigation by the Solicitor-General g. SC renders final decision for disbarment/suspension/dismissal.

Quantum of Proof Required: CLEAR, CONVINCING & SATISFACTORY evidence. "'1 Burden of Proof. Rests on the COMPLAINANT, the one who Instituted the suit


63



Officer authorized to investigate Disbarment cases: 1. Supreme Court '.I 2. IBP through its Commission on Bar Discipline or authorized investigator 3. office of the Solicitor General



Mitigating Circumstances in Disbarment: 1. Good faith in the acquisition of a property of the client subject of litigation (In re: Ruste, 70 Phil. 243) 2. Inexperience of the lawyer (Munoz v. People, 53 SCRA 190) 3. Age (Lantos v. Gan, 198 SCRA 16) 4. Apology (Munoz v. People, 53 SCRA 190) 5. Lack of Intention to slight or offend the Court (Rheem of the Philippines, Inc. v. Ferrer, 20 SCRA 441).

REINSTATEMENT Reinstatement - the restoration in disbarment proceedings to a disbarred lawyer the privilege to practice law. 

The power of the Supreme Court to reinstate is based on its constitutional prerogative to promulgate rules (;>0 the admission of applicants to the practice of law. (art. VIII, sec. 5[5], 1987Consfitution).



Criterion. The applicant must, like a candidate for admission to the Bar, satisfy the Court that he is a person 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 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. Whether or not the applicant shall be reinstated rests on the discretion of the court. (Prudential Bank VS. Benjamin Grecia, 192 SCRA 381).



Reinstatement to the roll of attorneys wipes out the restrictions and disabilities resulting from a previous disbarment. (Cui vs: Cui, 11 SCRA 755)



The Supreme Court, in addition to the required rehabilitation of the applicant for reinstatement may require special conditions to be fulfilled by the applicant. PARDON



Q: Is a disbarred lawyer due to conviction for a crime automatically reinstated to the practice of law upon being pardoned by the President? A: To be reinstated, there is still a need for the filing of an appropriate

64

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________ petition with the Supreme Court. (In re: Rovero, 101 SCRA 803) 

If during the pendency of a disbarment proceeding, the respondent was granted executive pardon, the dismissal of the case on that sole basis wiU depend on whether the executive pardon is absolute or conditional. If the pardon is absolute or unconditional, the disbarment case will be dismissed. However, if the executive pardon is conditional, the disbarment case will not be dismissed on the basis thereof. . SPECIAL DISABILITIES OF LAWYERS

The following persons are prohibited from acquiring property under litigation by reason of the relation of trust or their peculiar control either directly or indirectly and even at a public or judicial auction: . 1. Guardians; 2. Agents 3. Administrators 4. Public officers and employees 5. Judicial officers and employees 6. Prosecuting attorney’s and lawyers (Art 1491 f NCC) 7. Those specially disqualified by law (Rubias vs. Batilles, 31 SCRA 120)  Elements of Article 1491 (Civil Code; Laig vs. CA, 82 SCRA 294) a. There must be an attorney-client relationship b. The property or interest of the client must be in litigation c. The attorney takes part as counsel in the case d. The attorney by himself or through another purchases such interest during the pendency of the litigation. 

General Rule: A lawyer may not purchase, even at a public or judicial auction, in person or through the mediation of another, any property or interest involved in any' litigation in which he may take part by virtue of his profession. This prohibition is entirely independent of fraud and such need not be alleged or proven. Effects: a. Malpractice on the part of the lawyer and may be disciplined for misconduct b. Transaction is null and void



Exceptions: a. Property is acquired by lawyer through arrangement b. Any of the 4.e.Ie.ments of Art. 1491 is missing

a

contingent

fee


65

- State the basic responsibilities of a lawyer to his client. The Code of Professional Responsibility prescribes the following as responsibilities of a lawyer to his client, to wit: 1. A lawyer shall not refuse his services to the needy; 2. A lawyer shall observe candor, fairness, and loyalty in all his dealings and transactions with his clients; 3. A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and properties of his client that may come into his possessions; 4. A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and he shall be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him; 5. A lawyer shall serve his client with competence and diligence; 6. A lawyer shall represent his client with zeal within the bounds of the law; 7. A lawyer shall charge only fair and reasonable fees; 8. A lawyer shall preserve the confidence and secrets of his client even after the attorney-client relationship is terminated; and 9. A lawyer shall withdraw his services only for good cause and upon notice appropriate in the circumstances.

Q

- What is the significance of the duty of a lawyer that he shall not refuse his services to the needy? - It is an implementation of the constitutional guarantee that free access to the courts shall not be denied the citizens by reason of poverty. It also implements the time-honored principle that a lawyer shall delay no man for money or malice. It must be recalled that the business of a lawyer is basically public service and not for business purposes.

Q

- A, a lawyer was appointed counsel de oficio by the court. Since he is a mere counsel de oficio, will it affect his relationship with his client considering that he has no compensation? Why? - No. The fact that an attorney merely volunteers his services or that he is only a counsel de oficio does not diminish or alter the degree of professional responsibility owed to his client. (People vs. Rio, 201 SCRA 702). The reason is that a lawyer should represent his client with zeal within the bounds of the law.

Q

- Should a lawyer in the discharge of his duties to his clients


66

present every remedy regardless of his personal views? Why? - Yes. A lawyer owes entire devotion to the interests of his clients, warmth and zeal in the maintenance and defense of his rights and the exertion of his utmost learning and ability; to the end that nothing can be taken or withheld from his client except in accordance with law. He should present every remedy or defense regardless of his own personal views. In the full discharge of his duties to his client, the lawyer should not be afraid of the probability that he may displease the judge or the general public. (Legarda vs. CA, 195 SCRA 418). Q

- What should a lawyer do to ensure that communications to him will reach him promptly? - A lawyer should so arrange matters that official and judicial communications sent by mail will reach him promptly and should he fail to do so, not only he, but his client as well must suffer the consequences of his negligence. Where a lawyer moved from his address on record, and did not notify the court thereof, resulting in failure to receive notice of the decision the Supreme Court held that there was negligence. But the client must suffer the consequences. (Villa Transport Service, Inc. vs. CA, 193 SCRA 25).

Q

- What is the duty of a lawyer with respect to his pleadings, etc. before filing the same? Why? - It is the bounden duty of a lawyer to check, review, and re-check the allegations in his pleadings, more particularly the quoted portions, and ensure that the statements therein are accurate and the reproductions faithful, down to the last word and punctuation mark. The legal profession demands that a lawyer thoroughly go over pleadings, motions, and other documents dictated or prepared by him, typed or transcribed by his secretaries or clerks, before filing them with court. If a client is bound by the acts of his counsel, with more reason should counsel be bound by the acts of his secretary who merely follows his order. The distortion of facts, misquoting or intercalating phrases in the text of a court decision, committed by counsel, with the willing assistance of his secretary, is a grave offense and should not be treated lightly because it is a serious violation of one's Oath as a member of the Bar, and under the Code of Professional Responsibility. (Adez Realty, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 212 SCRA 623).

Q - What should a lawyer do when he receives an adverse decision? Explain. - He should inform his client about the adverse decision. If he fails to do so, he is considered as having failed to exercise due diligence of counsel. A lawyer handling a case must give his entire devotion to the interest of his client. Neither shall he neglect a legal matter entrusted to him for his negligence therewith shall render him liable. He can be


67

suspended. (Francisco vs. Bosa, 205 SCRA 722). Q - The Law Firm of A, B, and C represented X in a case. A is personally handling the case. While preparing the brief, A died. What should the Law Firm do? Why? .

- The Law Firm should have re-assigned the case to another lawyer for the purpose of preparing the brief or it could have withdrawn as counsel in the manner provided by the rules so that the client can contract the services of a new lawyer. The negligence of the law firm in this matter binds the client. Besides, the client himself was negligent when he failed to make inquiries with respect to the status of his case, he being a close friend of the lawyer who handled it. The fact should have made him more vigilant with respect to the case at bar, as he failed to do so, its plea that it was not accorded the right to procedural due process cannot elicit either approval or sympathy. (B.R. Sebastian Enterprises vs. Court of Appeals, 206 SCRA 28) Q - A lawyer was tardy in his appearance before a judge in a case, hence, it was considered submitted for resolution. After learning of the incident, he asked the Court to reconsider it and the judge told him to file a motion for reconsideration. He did not notify his client of the turn of events. Explain the effect of his acts. - His failure to file the motion for reconsideration despite the instruction of the judge amounts to negligence. His explanation that the judge already advised him of the improbability of reconsideration is devoid of merit. He still should have taken the proper steps in order to prevent the judgment from becoming final and executory. Worse, he did not even notify his client of the status of the case, even after he received notice of the decision. He should not have gone to Iloilo without leaving someone in his office to act on urgent matters and to notify him of developments in the case he was handling. This is sheer lack of professional sincerity. Counsel was suspended from practice for one year. (Perla Compania de Seguros vs. Santisteban, 207 SCRA 153).

Q

- Is clerical inefficiency of a lawyer's staff like failure to file a brief a valid defense in a charge of negligence of a lawyer? Why? No. A responsible lawyer is expected to supervise the work in his office with respect to all pleadings to be filed in court, and he should not delegate this responsibility completely to his office secretary. Otherwise, irresponsible members of the bar can avoid disciplinary action by simply attributing the fault to the office secretary. (Gutierrez vs. Zulueta, 187 SCRA 64).

Q

- The Law Firm of A, Band C has a branch office in Cebu City where D is assigned or represents himself to be the lawyer in


68

the branch office. Is service upon him binding upon the main office? Why? -Yes. Where a lawyer represents himself to be part of one law firm, service on that lawyer in his branch office will be a valid service, and the law firm cannot be allowed to pretend that its main and branch offices are separate law firms with separate and distinct personalities. (Quano Arrastres vs. Alsonas, 20 SCRA 619). Q - At the hearing of a case, the counsels agreed to consider the case submitted for decision on the basis of the evidence, excluding certain amounts of interests and nominal damages. When the judgment adverse to one party was rendered, he moved to annul the same contending that such act constituted a compromise which his counsel was not authorized to do. Rule on his contention and explain. This was not a compromise or stipulation of facts or confession of judgment. If at all, there was only a mutual waiver on the part of both parties (right to present evidence for defendant, and interests and stipulated attorney's fees for plaintiff). The counsels in this case had the implied authority to do all the acts necessary or incidental to the prosecution and management of the suit in behalf of their clients who were all present but never objected to the disputed order of the court. They have the exclusive management of the procedural aspect of the litigation including the enforcement of the rights and remedies of the client. Thus, when the case was submitted for decision on the evidence so far presented, the counsel for private respondents acted within the scope of his authority as agent and lawyer in negotiating for favorable terms for his client. Parties are bound by the acts and mistakes of their counsel in procedural matters. Mistakes of counsel as to the relevancy and irrelevancy of certain evidence or mistakes in the proper defense, in the introduction of certain evidence, or in argumentation are, among others all mistakes of procedure, and they bind the client, as in the instant case. (Mobil Oil vs. CFI Rizal, 208 SCRA 523). Q - The mistake of a lawyer generally binds the client. Is the rule absolute? Explain. - No. Though as a general rule, the client is bound by the mistakes or negligence of his lawyer, the Supreme Court has made an exception. Where the lawyer's lack of devotion to the client is so gross and palpable that the court must come to the aid of the distraught client. This was the situation in Legarda vs. CA, 195 SCRA 418, where the lawyer merely filed a Motion for Extension of Time to file an answer, and thereafter did nothing else. Q

- Give an example of a case of gross negligence of a lawyer which does not bind his client and an exception to the same.


69

Where a lawyer did not file an answer for his client despite an extension of time therefor having been granted, resulting in an adverse judgment and then failed to appear and then allowed the period to file a petition for relief to lapse, and thereafter did not file a petition for annulment of the judgment in the appellate court despite being asked by his client to do so, he is guilty of gross and inexcusable negligence that effectively denied the client of her day in court, depriving her of her property without due process of law. In this case, the client is not bound by the actions of counsel. (Legarda vs. Court of Appeals, 195 SCRA 418). But where the client knew all along that their counsel was not attending to their case, did not take steps to change counselor attend to their cases until it was too late, and continued to retain the service of the negligent counsel despite full knowledge of his lapses, they cannot raise that negligence to warrant reversal of the adverse decision. (Boyer-Roxas vs. Court of Appeals, 211 SCRA 470). Q - May the Court discipline a lawyer even if his act is not covered by a client-lawyer relationship between the complainant and himself? Explain. Yes. In fact, in Lizaso vs. Amante, A.C. No. 2019, June 3, 1991, 198 SCRA 1, where Atty. Amante enticed complainant to invest in the casino business with the proposition that her investment would yield her an interest of 10% profit daily, and Atty. Amante not only failed to deliver the promised return on the investment but also the principal thereof (P5, 000.00) despite complainant's repeated demands, the Supreme Court said: “As early as 1923, however, the Court laid down in In Re Vicente Pelaez [44 Phil. 567 (1923) J the principle that it can exercise its power to discipline lawyers for causes which do not involve the relationship of attorney and client In disciplining the respondent, Mr. Justice Malcolm said: As a general rule, a court will not assume jurisdiction to discipline one of its officers for misconduct alleged to have been committed in his private capacity. But this is a general rule with many exceptions x x x The nature of the office, the trust relation which exists between attorney and client, as well as between court and attorney, and the statutory rules prescribing the qualifications of attorneys, uniformly require that an attorney shall be a person of good moral character. If that qualification is a condition precedent to a license or privilege to enter upon the practice of the law, it would seem to be equally essential during the continuance of the practice and the exercise of the privilege. So it is held that an attorney will be removed not only for malpractice and dishonesty in his profession, but also for gross misconduct not connected with his

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________ professional duties, which shows him to be unfit for the office and unworthy of the privileges which his license and the law confer upon him.. Q

- In 1965, Jose Nakpil became interested in purchasing a summer residence in Moran Street, Bagnio City. For lack of funds, he requested the respondent to purchase the Moran property for him. They agreed that respondent would keep the property in trust for Nakpil until the latter could buy it back. Pursuant to their agreement, respondent obtained two (2) loans from a bank (in the amounts of P65, 000.00 and P75, 000.00) which he used to purchase and renovate the property. Title was then issued in respondent's name. It was Nakpil who occupied the Moran summer house. When Jose Nakpil died on July 8, 1973, respondent acted as the legal counsel and accountant of his widow, complainant IMELDA NAKPIL. On March 9, 1976, respondent's law firm, Carlos J. Valdes and Associates, handled the proceeding for the settlement of Jose's estate. Complainant was appointed as administratriX of the estate. The ownership of the Moran property became an issue in the intestate proceedings. It appears that respondent excluded the Moran property from the inventory of Jose's estate. On February 13, 1978, respondent transferred his title to the Moran property to his company, the Caval Realty Corporation. On March 29, 1979, complainant sought to recover the Moran property by filing with the then Court of First Instance (CFI) of Baguio City an action for reconveyance with damages against respondent and his corporation. In defense, respondent claimed absolute ownership over the property and denied that a trust was created over it. In his defense, he contended that he did not hold the Moran property in trust for the Nakpils as he is the absolute owner. He explained that the Nakpils never bought back the property from him, hence, it remained to be his property and hence, correctly excluded from the inventory of Nakpil estate. 1. Is the respondent guilty of lack of fidelity to his client? Explain.. Yes, because he violated the trust agreement when he claimed absolute ownership over the property and refused to sell it to the complainant after Jose's death. To place the property beyond the reach of complainant and the intestate court, respondent later transferred it to his corporation. Such act of excluding the Moran property from the intestate estate of Jose evinced a lack of fidelity to the cause of his client. This violated Canon 17 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which provides that a lawyer owes fidelity to his client's cause and enjoins him to be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him. (Imelda Nakpil vs. Atty. Carlos J. Valdes, A.C. No. 2040, 92 SCAD 66, March 4, 1998).

70


71

2. Was the respondent guilty of representing conflicting interest when his accounting firm prepared the list of assets and liabilities of the estate and, at the same time, computed the claims of two creditors of the estate and yet, the estate was represented by his law firm? Explain. Yes, because the interest of the estate and that of the creditors are adverse to each other. By representing the creditors when his accounting firm prepared and computed the claims of the two creditors while his law firm represented the estate, there was clearly a conflict between them which stands as debtor and that of the two claimants who are creditors in the estate. He thus, undoubtedly placed his law firm in a position where his loyalty to his client could be doubted. In the estate proceedings, the duty of respondent's law firm was to contest the claims of these two creditors but which claims were prepared by respondent's accounting firm. Even if the claims were valid and did not prejudice the estate, the set-up is still undesirable. The test to determine whether there is a conflict of interest in the representation is probability, not certainty of conflict. It was respondent's duty to inhibit either of his firms from said proceedings to avoid the probability of conflict of interest. (Nakpil vs. Valdes, supra). 3.

Can respondent advance the defense that assuming there was conflict of interest, he could not be charged before this Court as his alleged "misconduct" pertains to his accounting practice? Explain. No. In the case at bar, complainant is not charging respondent with breach of ethics for being the common accountant of the estate and the two creditors. He is charged for allowing his accounting firm to represent two creditors of the estate and, at the same time, allowing his law firm to represent the estate in the proceedings where these claims were presented. 4. In advancing his defense, he said that assuming there was conflict of interest, he could not be charged before the Supreme Court as his alleged misconduct pertains to his accounting practice. Is the contention correct? Why? - No, for the complainant was not charging the respondent with breach of ethics for being the common accountant of the estate and the two creditors. He was charged for allowing his accounting firm to represent two creditors of the estate and, at the same time, allowing his law firm to represent the estate in the proceedings where these claims were presented. The act is a breach of professional ethics and undesirable as it placed respondent's and his law firm's loyalty under a cloud of doubt. Even granting that respondent's misconduct refers to his accountancy practice, it would not prevent the Court from disciplining him as a member of the Bar. The rule is settled that a lawyer may be suspended or disbarred for ANY misconduct, even if it pertains to his private


72

activities, as long as it shows him to be wanting in moral character, honesty, probity or good demeanor. (Nadayag vs. Grageda, 55 SCAD 713, 237 SCRA 202). Possession of good moral character is not only a prerequisite to admission to the bar but also a continuing requirement to the practice of law. Public confidence in law and lawyers may be eroded by the irresponsible and improper conduct of a member of the Bar. Thus, a lawyer should determine his conduct by acting in a manner that would promote public confidence in the integrity of the legal profession. Members of the Bar are expected to always live up to the standards embodied in the Code of Professional Responsibility as the relationship between an attorney and his client is highly fiduciary in nature and demands utmost fidelity and good faith. (lgual vs. Javier, 69 SCAD 117,254 SCRA 416). In the case at bar, respondent exhibited less than full fidelity to his duty to observe candor, fairness and loyalty in his dealings and transactions with his clients. (Canon 15, Code of Professional Responsibility; Nakpil vs. Valdez, A.C. No. 2040, March 4, 1998, 92 SCAD 66). Q

- Does the prohibition against sale of properties between a lawyer and a client apply to assignment of rights? Why?

- Yes, the prohibition in Article 1491, NCC applies to assignment of rights over a property subject of litigation in consideration of legal services during the pendency of litigation. The reason is that, assignment has the same import and effect of sale. In both situations, public policy prohibits the acts. (Ordonio vs. Eduarte, 207 SCRA 229). Q - What is the essential feature of a client-lawyer relationship? Give some instances of such an indication. -The essential feature of the relationship between a lawyer and a client is the employment of the former by the latter as suggested by: (1) the giving of advice or assistance when sought; and (2) the receipt of documents and use of the same. Q

- Define general and special appearance.

General appearance is one that is done by a lawyer for any act except to question the jurisdiction of the court. Q - Who can challenge the appearance of a lawyer and within what time? Why? -The authority of a lawyer to appear may be challenged by the client because such relationship partakes of the nature of agency. It may likewise be challenged by the adverse party. But the challenge must be seasonably done otherwise, estoppel would come in.


73

-What is the effect of unauthorized appearance of a lawyer? - That is a ground to cite him for contempt.

Q - May a client terminate his lawyer and cite the effects of the same? . - Yes, a client has the right to terminate his lawyer at any time with or without just cause. If it is without just cause, he must fully pay the compensation agreed upon. If it is with just cause, the payment of compensation is based on quantum meruit. Q - What is the effect of death or incapacity of a client? ANS. - Death or incapacity of a client terminates the relationship of the lawyer and client. Thus, the lawyer cannot represent the estate unless he is retained by the administrator. Q

- May a counsel withdraw from a case of his client? - Yes, provided the client consents to it. The consent is necessary because the relationship of a lawyer and a client is based on contract and the consent of a client to the withdrawal of a lawyer has the effect of terminating such relationship. If the client does not consent, the contract still subsists. Q - State the grounds for the withdrawal of a counsel. They are the following: (1)if the client insists on unjust or immoral cause in the conduct of a case; (2)if the client refuses to cooperate or loses contact with him; (3)if the client disregards agreement as to compensation; (4)if the lawyer accepts an incompatible office.

Q

- State the procedure in the substitution of a lawyer. - The procedure in the substitution of a lawyer requires that: a) there must be written application for substitution; b) there must be written consent of the client; c) there must be written consent of counsel to be substituted; d) there must be proof of notice on the first attorney.

Q

- If a lawyer withdraws from a case, is there a need for the court's approval?

.

- It depends. An attorney's withdrawal with clients' consent needs no court approval. Court approval is indispensable


74

only if the withdrawal is without the client's consent. (Arambulo vs. CA, 44 SCAD 972, 226 SCRA 589, Sept. 17, 1993). The reason for the client's consent is that, the relationship between the two of them is based on a contract. Q

- A engaged the services of X as his counsel. A year later, he engaged the services of Y and authorized him to appear for A. State the effects of the acts of A with respect to his relationship with X. Explain. - The execution of power of attorney for authority to appear in favor of second counsel works as a dismissal of incumbent counsel of record who need not formally withdraw. Once a new counsel assumes that status, it is incumbent on him to inquire why he has not received any notice from the court. Q - State the 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, Code of Professional Responsibility).

Q

- What is the rationale for the conflict of interest rule? . - The prohibition against representation of conflicting interests is based not only because the relation of attorney and client is one of trust and confidence of the highest degree, but also because of the principles of public policy and good taste. (Tiania vs. Ocampo, 200 SCRA 462, Aug. 12, 1991). A lawyer becomes familiar with this facts connected with his client's case. He learns from his client the weak points of the action as well as the strong one. Such knowledge must be considered and guarded with care. No opportunity must be given to him to take advantage of his client's secrets. A lawyer must have the fullest confidence of his client, for if the confidence is abused, the profession will suffer by the loss thereof. (Maturan vs. Gonzales, A.C. No. 2597, 92 SCAD 473, March 12, 1998).

Q - What is the test of conflict of interest in disciplinary cases against a lawyer? - The test is 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 of double-dealing in the performance thereof. (Tiana vs. Ocampo, supra). Q - When is a lawyer deemed to be representing conflicting interests? - A lawyer represents conflicting interests when, in behalf of one client,


75

it is his duty to contend for that which duty to another client requires him to oppose. The obligation to represent the client with undivided fidelity and not to divulge his secrets or confidence forbids also the subsequent acceptance of retainers or employment from others in matters adversely affecting any interest of the client with respect to which confidence has been reposed. In cases where a conflict of interest may exist, full disclosure of the facts and express consent of all the parties concerned are necessary. There is no necessity for proving the actual transmission of confidential information to an attorney in the course of his employment by his first client in order that he may be precluded from accepting employment by the second Or subsequent client where there are conflicting interests between the first and the subsequent clients. Absence of monetary consideration does not exempt the lawyer from complying with the prohibition against pursuing cases where a conflict of interest exists. (Buted vs. Hernando, 203 SCRA 1, Oct. 17, 1991). Q

- Cite a recognized exception to the rule against representation of conflicting interests by a lawyer. - Where the clients knowingly consent to the dual representation after the full disclosure of the facts by the counsel. (Bautista vs. Gonzales),

Q State and explain the test in determining a conflict of interest. - The test of conflict of interest in disciplinary cases against a lawyer is 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 or doubledealing in the performance thereof. (In re: De la Rosa, 27 Phil. 265). Q

- May a lawyer represent parties with conflicting positions? Is the rule absolute? Explain. - As a rule, a lawyer cannot represent parties with conflicting positions because of the conflict of interest. There is however, an exception at a certain stage of the controversy before it reaches the court. A lawyer may represent the conflicting interest of the two parties with their consent, since a mutual lawyer, with honest motivations may be better situated to work out an acceptable settlement of their differences, being free of partisan inclination and acting with the cooperation and confidence of said parties.

Q

- The accounting firm of Atty. V prepared the list of assets and liabilities of the estate of A and at the same time computed the claims of two creditors of the estate. Is there a representation of conflicting interest in allowing his accounting firm to represent the two creditors in the proceedings for the settlement of the estate of A which his law

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________ .

Q

76

firm represented? Why? - Yes. The professional services of a lawyer and representation as a CPA might result to representation of conflicting interest. In Nakpil vs. Valdez, A.C. No. 2040, March 1998, 92 SCAD 66, it was said that there is clearly a conflict between the interest of the estate which stands as the debtor and that of the two claimants who are creditors of the estate. - State some rules in case of conflict of interest. - In Generosa Buted, et al. vs. Atty. Harold M. Hernando, Adm. Case No. 1359, Oct. 17, 1991, the Supreme Court laid down rules on conflict of interest of lawyers in handling cases, thus: (a) In cases where a conflict of interest may exist, full disclosure of the facts and express consent of all the parties concerned are necessary. (ln re: Dela Rosa, 27 Phil. 258). The present Code of Professional Responsibility is stricter on this matter considering that consent of the parties is now required to be in written form. (Canon 15, Rule 15.03). (b)In San Jose vs. Cruz, 57 Phil. 794, it was said that an attorney owes loyalty to his client not only in the case in which he has represented him but also after the relation of attorney and client has terminated and it is not a good practice to permit him afterwards to defend in another case other persons against his former client under the pretext that the case is distinct from, and independent of the former case. For it is a rule that: "An attorney is not permitted, in serving a new client as against a former one, to do anything which will injuriously affect the former client in any manner in which the attorney formerly represented him, though the relation of attorney and client has terminated, and the new employment is in a different case; nor can the attorney use against his former client any knowledge or information gained through their former connection. " (c) In Maria Tinia vs. Atty. Amado Ocampo, A.C. No. 2285 and other companion cases, Aug. 12, 1991, it was said that the prohibition against conflict of interest in representation of clients is prohibited because the relation of lawyer and client is one of trust and confidence of the highest degree, and because of the principles of public policy and good taste. An attorney has the duty to preserve fullest confidence of his client and represent him with undivided loyalty. Once this confidence is abused, the entire profession suffers. (In re: De la Rosa).

Q

- The law firm of X, Y and Z and Associates was retained by ABC Corporation which sued SMC represented by the firm. Can an associate of the firm represent SMC? Why? - No, because the employment of the firm is considered the


77

employment of all its members and associates. To hold otherwise would be to promote conflict of interest. Q - What is the duty of a lawyer who receives money for his client? .

- He must account for the same, otherwise, his conduct shows his unfitness for the confidence and trust reposed in him, or showing such lack of personal honesty or good moral character as to render him unworthy of public confidence, a ground for disbarment. (Navarro vs. Meneses, 91 SCAD 285, 285 SCRA 586; 19ual vs. Javier, 69 SCAD 117, March 7,1996; Castillo vs. Taguines, 69 SCAD 291, March 11, 1996; Jaime Curimatmat, et al. vs. Atty. Felipe Gojat, A.C. No. 4411, June 10, 1999).

Q

-May a lawyer decline employment? Explain. Yes. It is settled that a lawyer is not obliged to act as counsel for every person who wish to become his client. He has the right to decline employment, subject, however, to the provisions of Canon 14 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Once he agrees to take up the case of a client, he owes fidelity to such cause and must always be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed on him. (Navarro vs. Meneses, 91 SCAD 285, 285 SCRA 586)

Q

- What is the nature of the office of a lawyer? - An attorney is more than a mere agent or servant because he possesses special powers of trust and confidence reposed on him by his client. (Regala vs. SB, 74 SCAD 504, 262 SCRA 122)

Q

- What is the nature of duty of the Office of the Solicitor General to represent the interest of the government? Explain. - As a public official, it is his sworn duty to provide legal services to the government, particularly to represent it in litigations. And such duty may be enjoined upon him by a writ of mandamus. Under the Administrative Code (Sec. 35), it is mandatory upon the OSG to represent the government, its agencies and instrumentalities and its officials and agents in any litigation, proceedings, investigation requiring the services of a lawyer. In fact, if the OSG withdraws, it can be considered as beyond the scope of its authority in the management of a case.

Q

- After the death of a partner in a law firm, the latter failed to file the brief for a client due to the fact that the lawyer assigned to do it left the law firm. Explain the effect of such act.


78

- The death of one of the partners of a law firm does not extinguish the lawyer-client relationship between said firm and petitioner. If the firm does not file the brief for the client, that is an inexcusable negligence. The mere fact that the lawyer who was designated to handle the case left the law office is of no moment. (R.B. Sebastian Ent., Inc. vs. CA, G.R. No. 41862, Feb. 7, 1992). Negligence of counsel binds the client. Q

- Explain the effect if a lawyer notarizes a document purporting to have been signed by one who is already dead. - A lawyer who notarized a document purporting to have been signed by a person already dead and yet cognizant of such fact committed grave professional misconduct. He failed to live up to the standards expected as a member of the bar. His conduct amounted to dishonesty, in violation of his oath. (Tejada vs. Hernando, Adm. Case No. 2427, May 8, 1992).

Q

- May a lawyer transact business with his client? Why? As a rule, a lawyer is not barred from dealing with his client but the business transaction must be characterized with utmost honesty and good faith. The measure of good faith which an attorney is required to exercise in his dealings with his client is a much higher standard than is required in business dealings where the parties trade at arms length. Business transactions between the lawyer 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. This rule is founded on public policy for, by virtue of his office, an attorney is in an easy position to take advantage of the credulity and ignorance of his client. Thus, no presumption of innocence or improbability of wrongdoing is considered in an attorney's favor. (Nakpil vs. Valdez, 92 SCAD 66, 286 SCRA 758).

Q - How do you describe the relationship between a lawyer and his client? Explain. .

- The relation between an attorney and his client is highly fiduciary and very delicate, exacting and confidential, requiring a high degree of fidelity and good faith. In view of that special relationship, lawyers are bound to promptly account for money or property received by them on behalf of their clients and failure to do so constitutes professional misconduct. The fact that a lawyer has a lien for fees on money in his hands collected for his client does not relieve him from the duty of promptly accounting for the funds received. (Licuanan vs. Melo, A.C. 2361, 9 Feb. 89).

Q

- Describe the lawyer's duty to the cause of his client.


79

- A lawyer must protect the rights and interests of his client and not to take advantage of him. He should be more circumspect in dealing with the properties of his client instead of concentrating only on his attorney's fees. (Fornilda vs. Branch 164, RC, 169 SCRA 376). A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and must be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him. (Canon 17). He 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. (Canon 15). An attorney's duty to safeguard the client's interests commences from his retainer until his effective release from the case or the final disposition of the whole subject matter of the litigation. (Visitacion vs. Manit, March 27, 1969). During that period, he is expected to take such reasonable steps and such ordinary care as his client's interests may require. (Gamalinda vs. Attys. Fernando Alcantara and Joselito Lim, A.C. No. 3695, Feb. 24, 1992). The Supreme Court also admonished lawyers on their duty to advice their clients not to make untenable claims. As officers of the court, they are under obligation to advice their clients against making untenable and inconsistent claims. For, they are not merely hired employees who must unquestionably do the bidding of the clients. (Periquet vs. NLRC, 186 SCRA 724). In one case, the Supreme Court however reminded litigants that lawyers are not demi-gods or magicians who can always win their cases for their clients no matter the utter lack of merit of the same or how passionate the litigants may feel about their cause, while lawyers are expected to serve their clients with competence and diligence, they are not always expected to be victorious. (Curimatmat, et ai. vs. Gojari, A.C. No. 4411, June 10, 1999). Q

- What presumption arises if a lawyer appears for a client and explain the effect of the same? - As a rule, once a lawyer appears for a party, it is presumed that he has the authority to do so. No written power of attorney is required to authorize him to appear in court for his client. (Marcelo vs. Ubay, 187 SCRA 719). The filing of the answer and appearance is sufficient to give authority to the lawyer. However, the authority to appear can be questioned by the adverse party. (Com. of Customs vs. KMK Gano, 182 SCRA 591). The reason is obvious. The client will be bound by his acquiescence resulting from his knowledge that he was being represented by the lawyer. But where that relationship is created, the lawyer has the obligation to


80

attend to and protect the integrity of his client. Hence, a lawyer was warned for his inexcusable negligence to appear for pre-trial. (Agravante vs. Patriarca, 183 SCRA 113 [1990]). Hence, in Gutierrez vs. Zulueta, 187 SCRA 64, a lawyer was suspended for one year for his failure to exercise due diligence in protecting and attending to the interest of his client. He failed to file the brief to the prejudice of his client. He attributed the negligence to his secretary which was not accepted. Q

Q

- State the effect of a lawyer's acceptance of attorney's fees. - The lawyer's acceptance of attorney's fees effectively bars a lawyer from altogether disclaiming the existence of an attorney-client relationship. The client, however, must explain his case to his lawyer so that he can handle it properly and intelligently. He must likewise extend full cooperation. (Villafuerte vs. Cortez, A.C. No. 3455, April 14, 1999). - May a lawyer accept a bad case? - It depends. A lawyer may accept a bad case if it is criminal inspite of his opinion regarding the innocence or guilt of the accused. If it is a civil case, he should decline it.

Q - What is the extent of the lawyer's obligation of fidelity to his client? Explain. - A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client but not at the expense of truth and the administration of justice. Practice of law must not serve as an instrument for the harassment of the complainant and the misuse of judicial processes. (Garcia vs. Francisco, 220 SCRA 512, March 30, 1993). As officers of the court, counsels are under obligation to advise their client against making untenable and inconsistent claims. Lawyers are not merely hired employees who must unquestionably do the bidding of their client, however, unreasonable this may be when tested by their own expert appreciation of the pertinent facts and the applicable law and jurisprudence. Counsel must counsel. (Periquet vs. NLRC, 196 SCRA 724, June 22,1990). Q - How do you characterize the right of a client to terminate the services of his counsel? - The right of client to terminate his relations with his counsel is universally recognized. Such termination may be with or without cause. The right of a client to terminate the authority of his counsel includes the right to make a change or substitution at any stage of the proceedings. To be valid, any such change or substitution must be made: (a) upon written application; (b) with written consent of the


81

client; (c) upon written consent of the attorney to be substituted; (d) in case the consent of attorney to be substituted can not be contained, there must be at least a proof of notice that the motion for substitution has been served upon him in the manner prescribed by the Rules. (Section 26, Rule 138, Rules of Court; Rinconada Telephone Company, Inc. vs. Buenvi'aje, 184 SCRA 701, April 27, 1990). Q

- State the effect if a client personally appears and files a motion by himself even if he is represented by a counsel. - A client, by appearing personally and presenting a motion by himself, is considered to have impliedly dismissed his lawyer. Both at common law and under Section 26, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, a client may dismiss his lawyer at any time or at any stage of the proceedings, and there is nothing to prevent a litigant from appearing before the court to conduct his own litigation. The client has also an undoubted right to compromise a suit without the intervention of his lawyer. Even the lawyer's right to fees from their clients may not be invoked by the lawyers themselves as a ground for disapproving or holding in abeyance the approval of a compromise agreement. The lawyers concerned can enforce their rights in the proper court in an appropriate proceeding in accordance with the Rules of Court, but said rights may not be used to prevent the approval of the compromise agreement. (Municipality of Pililia, Rizal vs. CA, 52 SCAD 548, 233 SCRA 484, June 28, 1994).

Q

- What happens if a lawyer commits misconduct by using for his personal end money collected by him for and behalf of a client? - A lawyer, under his oath, pledges himself not to delay any man for money or malice. He is bound to conduct himself with all good fidelity to his clients. He is obligated to report promptly the money of his clients that has come into his possession. He should not comingle it with his private property or use it for his personal purposes without his client's consent. He should maintain a reputation for honesty and fidelity to private trust. Money collected by a lawyer in pursuance of a judgment in favor of his clients is held in trust and must be immediately turned over to them. A lawyer may be disbarred for any deceit, malpractice or other gross misconduct in his office as attorney or for any violation of the lawyer's oath. (Licuanan vs. Melo, A.C. 2361, Feb. 9, 1989).

Q

- May a lawyer purchase a property of his client subject of litigation during the pendency of litigation? Does the prohibition include a mortgage? Why? No, because of public policy for it is possible that the lawyer may e) at


82

undue influence against his client. Mortgage of property of a client to a lawyer while the property is under litigation is void under Art. 1491 (5), New Civil Code. To state that mortgages are not included within the prohibition would open the door to an indirect circumvention of the statutory injunction, acquisition of property being merely postponed till eventual foreclosure. (Fornilda vs. Br. 164, RTC, G.R. 72306, Jan. 29, 1989). What cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. (See also Rubias vs. Batiller). Q - When is a thing said to be in litigation for purposes of applying the prohibition against lawyers from acquiring by purchase their clients' property under Art. 1491 of the Civil Code? -

A thing is said to be in litigation not only if there is some contest or litigation over it in court, but also from the moment that it becomes subject to the judicial action of the judge, including certiorari proceedings. (Valencia vs. Cabanting, 196 SCRA 302, April 26, 1991).

Q - What if the purchase was made after the litigation has already been terminated, is the disqualification still applicable? Why? - No more. A contract of services does not violate Art. 1491, NCC prohibiting lawyers from acquiring by purchase even at a public or judicial auction, properties and rights which are the objects of litigation in which they may take part by virtue of their profession, if the purchase takes place after the litigation. (Fabillo vs. IAC, March 11, 1991). The rule has to be so because the public policy that is sought to be preserved no longer exists, as there can be no more undue influence that the lawyer may exert against his client. Q

May a lawyer enter into a contract of lease with the administrator of an estate where the former is his client? Why? - No. The Civil Code provides the persons disqualified to buy referred to in Arts. .1490 and 1491, are also disqualified to become lessees of the things mentioned therein. (Art. 1646). A lawyer of the administrator of an estate failed to secure the approval of the court in various contracts of lease between the estate and the lawyer's family partnership. It was said that the lease contracts are covered by the prohibition against any acquisition or lease by a lawyer of properties involved in litigations in which he takes part. To rule otherwise would lend stamp of judicial approval on an arrangement which, in effect, circumvents that which is directly prohibited by law. (Mananquil vs. Atty. Villegas, Adm. Matter 2430, Aug. 30, 1990).


83

- May a lawyer appropriate money received for his client? Why? - No. In Quilban vs. Robinol, 171 SCRA 768, the Supreme Court said that a lawyer cannot unilaterally appropriate his client's money not only because he is bound by a written agreement but because it is highly improper for him to have done so. His contention that he has! the right to retain possession of the money until his attorney fees are paid is not meritorious. He is bereft of a legal right to retain his client's funds intended for any purpose. For doing so, he was disbarred, for he rendered himself unfit to continue in the practice. He did not only violate his oath "not to delay any man for money" and but also "to conduct himself with all good fidelity to his client. Q - A lawyer assured his client that he could secure a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to stop the execution of a judgment because the judge is his "katsukaran" and accepted Pl,000.00 as attorney's fees. But the judge asked him to withdraw because of their friendship. He again asked for P3,000.00 to be given to another judge, but he said he could not find the judge. He later on told his client that a case should be filed and demanded P10,000.00 to be deposited with the Treasurer's Office for the redemption of the property plus Pl,000.00 as expenses. At the hearing, he withdrew his appearance. It was found out that there was no deposit. State the effect of the acts of the lawyer. - When a lawyer takes client's cause, he thereby covenants that he will exert ,all efforts for its prosecution until the final conclusion. The failure to exercise diligence of advancement of a client's cause makes such lawyer unworthy of the trust that the client had reposed in him. His acts showed lack of fidelity as a lawyer. (Cantiller vs. Potenciano, Dec. 18, 1989).

Q - What is the effect if a lawyer makes an unsolicited appearance for a person without a Client lawyer relationship? The unsolicited appearance of a lawyer in the absence of client-lawyer relationship with a client is an act unbecoming of a member of the Bar, and should be a cause for investigation. (Porac Trucking, Inc. vs. CA, 183 SCRA 45, March 6, 1990). Q - State the effect of a lawyer's participation in the preparation of prohibited contracts. - Participation in the execution of the prohibited contracts such as those referred to in Articles 1491 and 1646 of the New Civil Code has been held to constitute breach of professional ethics on the part of the lawyer for which disciplinary action may be brought against him. The claim of good faith is no defense to a lawyer who has failed to adhere faithfully to the legal


84

disqualifications imposed upon him designed to protect the interests of his client. (Mananquil vs. Villegas, 198 SCRA 335, Aug. 30, 1990). Q - Is a client bound by his counsel's acts? Is the rule absolute? Why? As a general rule, a client is bound by his counsel's conduct, negligence, and mistakes in handling the case during the trial. However, the rule admits of exceptions. A new trial may be granted where the incompetence of counsel is so great that the defendant is prejudiced and prevented from fairly presenting his defense. Where a case is not tried on the merits because of the negligence of counsel rather than the plaintiff, the case may be dismissed, but in the interest of justice, without prejudice to the filing of a new action. (Suarez vs. CA, G.R. No. 91133, March 22, 1993).

DISBARMENT Q

- Are the grounds for disbarment enumerated under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules Of Court exclusive? No. A lawyer may be disbarred for grounds provided by the rules and such causes analogous to the same.

Q

- What is the basic purpose of disbarment? Explain. - The purpose of disbarment is to protect the courts and the public from the misconduct of the officers of the court and to ensure the proper administration of justice by requiring that those who exercise this important function shall be competent, honorable and trustworthy men in whom the courts and clients may repose confidence. The objectives of disbarment are to compel the lawyer to deal fairly and honestly with his client and to remove from the profession a person whose misconduct has proved him unfit for the duties and responsibilities belonging to the office of an attorney. (Doroy vs. Legaspi, 65 SCRA 304). A lawyer who received P900.00 from his client for filing fee and other expenses in connection with the filing of the case but did hot do so, and instead deceived his client into believing that the case had been filed, is guilty of malpractice for gross misconduct in his office as attorney and of violation of his oath of office, and ought to be disbarred for failing to live up to the high standards of the law profession and being unworthy of membership of the bar. (Diaz vs. Gonong,141 SCRA 46).

Q

- May the court discipline one of its officers even if he commits


85

the act in his private capacity? Explain. .

- As a general rule, a court will not assume jurisdiction to discipline one of its officers for misconduct alleged to have been committed in his private capacity. But, this is a general rule with many exceptions. The courts sometimes stress the point that the attorney \las shown, through misconduct outside of his professional dealings, a want of such professional honesty as to render him unworthy of public confidence, and an unfit and unsafe person to manage the legal business of others. The reason why such a distinction can be drawn is because it is the court which admits an attorney to the bar, and the court requires for such admission the possession of a good moral character. So it is held that an attorney will be removed not only for malpractice and dishonesty in his profession, but also for gross misconduct not connected with his professional duties, which shows him unfit for the office and unworthy of the privilege which his license and the law confer upon him. (Lizaso vs. Amante, 198 SCRA 1, June 3, 1991). Q - May a lawyer who is employed in the government be disciplined as a member of the Bar for misconduct in the discharge of his duties as an employee? Why? - As a rule, a lawyer, who holds a. government office 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 conduct is of. such a character as to affect his qualifications as a lawyer or to show moral delinquency, then, he may be disciplined. (Austria vs. Abaya, AM. Nos. R705-RTJ, R698-P, and A.C. No. 2909, August 23, 1989).

Q

- In Collantes vs. Atty. Vicente Renemeron, Adm. Case No. 3056, Aug. 16, 1991, the basic question was whether a lawyer, as Register of Dee
Yes, because his misconduct as a public official constituted a violation of his oath as a lawyer.

The lawyer's oath (Rule 138, Section 17, Rules of Court; People vs. De Luna, 102 Phil. 968), imposes upon every lawyer the duty to delay no man for money or malice. The lawyer's oath is a source of his obligations and its violation is a ground for his suspension, disbarment or other disciplinary action. (Legal Ethics, Ruben E. Agpalo, 1983 Edition, pp. 66-67). As the late Chief Justice Fred Ruiz Castro said: "A person takes an oath when he is admitted to the


86

Bar which is designed to impress upon him his responsibilities. He thereby becomes an 'officer of the court' on whose shoulders rests the grave responsibility of assisting the courts in the proper, fair, speedy and efficient administration of justice. As an officer of the court, he is subject to a rigid discipline that demands that in his every exertion the only criterion be that truth and justice triumph. This disciplinary line is what has given the law profession its nobility, its prestige, its exalted place. From a lawyer, to paraphrase Justice Felix Frankfurter, are expected those qualities of truth speaking, a high sense of honor, full of candor, intellectual honesty, and the strictest observance of fiduciary responsibility all of which, throughout' the centuries, have been compendiously described as moral character. "Membership in the Bar is in the category of a mandate to public service of the highest order. A lawyer is an oath-bond servant of society whose conduct is clearly circumscribed by inflexible norms of law and ethics, and whose primary duty is the advancement of the quest of truth and justice, for which he has sworn to be a fearless crusader." (Apostacy in the Legal Profession, 64 SCRA 784, 789-790). The Code of Professional Responsibility applies to lawyers in government service in the discharge of their official task. (Canon 6). "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." (Rule 7.03, Code of Professional Responsibility). Only those who are competent, honorable, and reliable may practice the profession of law (Noriega vs. Sison, 125 SCRA 293), for every lawyer must pursue only the highest standard in the practice of his calling. (Court Administrator vs. Hermoso, 50 SCRA 269) In disbarring the lawyer, the Supreme Court said the acts of dishonesty and oppression committed by a public official have demonstrated his unfitness to practice the high and noble calling of the law. (Bautista vs. Judge Guevarra, 142 SCRA 632). Q - A law student married his girlfriend, but agreed to keep it secret so that he could continue with his studies. He finished law, took and passed the bar, but the wife blocked his oath taking with a complaint with the Supreme Court. It was however dismissed due to the wife's affidavit of desistance. She later filed a case again against


87

him alleging that he deceived her into signing the affidavit of desistance as he never intended to live with her. He utilized the affidavit only to dismiss the case. In his comment, he went to the extent of claiming that his marriage was void. In his application to take the Bar Exams, he stated that he was "single". Do his acts warrant his membership in the legal profession? Why? - No. The Supreme Court said that respondent's lack of good moral character is only too evident. He has resorted to conflicting submissions before the Supreme Court to suit himself. He has also engaged in devious tactics with complainant in order to serve his purpose. In so doing, he has violated Canon 10 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which provides that "a lawyer owes candor, fairness and good faith to the court" as well as Rule 10.01 thereof which states that "a lawyer should do no falsehood nor consent to the doing of any in court, nor shall he mislead, or allow the court to be misled by any artifice". Courts are entitled to expect only complete candor and honesty from the lawyers appearing and pleading before them. (Chavez v. Viola, Adm. Case No. 2162, 19 April 1991, 196 SCRA 10). Respondent, through his actuations, has been lacking in the candor required of him not only as a member of the Bar but also as an officer of the public from being advised and represented in legal matters by incompetent and unreliable persons over whom, the judicial department can exercise little control. Q

- A was not allowed to take his oath as a lawyer and sign the attorney's roll. Ten years later, he was allowed to do so, upon testimonials signed by some people as to his moral character and civic consciousness. But before he was able to do so, the original complainants in the malpractice case moved for a reconsideration contending that while being a Land Investigator at the Bureau of Lands, he was able to procure a falsified free patent over a public land which he used to secure a loan by means of a real estate mortgage which he did not pay. Is the resolution of the Supreme Court revoking the resolution allowing him to sign the attorney's roll and take his oath proper? Why? Yes, because he does not possess the required good moral character to be a member of the Bar. The law requires that a lawyer must be of good moral character and this is required not only in his membership in the Bar, but also in the performance of his duties as a public officer.

Q

- Is the imposition of indefinite suspension from the practice of law a cruel, degrading and inhuman punishment? Why? - No. The imposition of indefinite suspension from the practice of law is not a "cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment". The indefiniteness of the suspension, far from being "cruel" or "degrading" or "inhuman", has the effect of placing, as it were, the key to the restoration of the


88

suspended lawyer's rights and privileges in his own hands. That sanction has the effect of giving the respondent the chance to purge himself in his own good time of his contempt and misconduct by acknowledging such misconduct, exhibiting appropriate repentance and demonstrating his willingness and capacity to live up to the exacting standards of conduct rightly demanded from every member of the bar and officer of the courts. (Zaldivar vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 79690-707; Zaldivar vs. Gonzales, G.R. No. 80578, Feb. 1, 1989). Q

- A lawyer delayed a probate case for almost half a century. Is his act punishable under the Code of Professional Responsibility? Why? - Yes. In fact, the case of Ismaela Dimagiba vs. Atty. Jose Montalvo, Jr., A.C. No. 1420, Oct. 15, 1991, is a classic example of a lawyer who was disbarred for malpractice, for stretching to almost half of century a litigation arising from the probate of a will of the late Benedicto de los Reyes. It appeared that the probate case was filed on January 1955. In delaying the case for almost half a century, he violated his oath not to delay any man for money-or malice, besmirched the name of an honorable profession, and has proven himself unworthy of the trust reposed in him by law as an officer of the Court.

Q

- May a lawyer be disciplined if he makes a dupe of the complainant, living on her bounty and allowing her to spend for his schooling? Explain. - Yes. In Bolivar vs. Simbol, 16 SCRA 623, the Supreme Court found the respondent guilty of "grossly immoral conduct" because he made a dupe of complainant, living on her bounty and allowing her to spend for his schooling and other personal necessities while dangling before her the mirage of a marriage, marrying another girl as soon as he had finished his studies, keeping his marriage a secret while continuing to demand money from complainant. The Court held such acts "indicative of a character not worthy of a member of the Bar."

Q

- A lawyer courted a lady. He represented himself to be eligible to marry when in fact, he is not. For this reason, the woman submitted herself to the sexual desires of the lawyer. Can he be punished for his acts? Why? - Yes, because he does not possess good moral character which is a condition that precedes admission to the Bar, and is not dispensed with upon admission to the Bar. (Barrientos vs. Daarol, A.C. No. 1512, Jan. 29, 1993).

Q - A lawyer was found guilty of immoral conduct having married twice. Can he be suspended? Why?


89

.

-Yes, because he lacks good moral character which must be possessed by a member of the Bar. In Santos vs. Tan, 196 SCRA 16, however, the lawyer was merely suspended despite the finding of fact that he committed bigamy. The reason was his advanced age of 72.

Q

- Before T became a lawyer, he inveigled D to marry him knowing that she is already married. D even sent him to school, took care of him but T later on abandoned D and got married to another woman. Is he worthy to be a member of the legal profession? Why? - No. The conduct of respondent Jordan Terre in inveigling complainant Dorothy Terre to contract a second marriage with him; in abandoning complainant Dorothy Terre after she had cared for him and supported him through law school, leaving her without means for the safe delivery of his own child; in contracting a second marriage with Helina Malicdem while his first marriage with complainant Dorothy Terre was subsisting, constituted "grossly immoral conduct" under Section 27 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, affording more than sufficient basis for the disbarment of respondent Jordan Terre. He was unworthy of admission to the Bar in the first place. (Terre vs. Terre, Adm. Case No. 2349, July 3, 1992).

Q

- A, a lawyer kept a mistress, entered into another marriage while the prior still subsisted and abandoned his wife and children. Can he be disbarred? Why? - Yes, because such acts show disrespect of family relations, morality and decency and the law and the lawyer's oath. Such gross misbehavior clearly shows a serious flaw in his character, his moral indifference to scandal in the community and his outright defiance to established norms. These acts put the legal profession in disrepute and place the integrity of the administration of justice in peril. (Tapucar vs. Tapucar, A.C. No. 4148, July 30, 1998, 96 SCAD 743).

Q

- May a lawyer be disbarred if he sells properties contrary to the orders of the court? Why? - Yes, because it constitutes disobedience and defiance of the lawful orders of the court. (Gaeslin vs. Navarro, 85 SCRA 230).

Q

- A filed his application to take the Bar Examination and stated that he is single when in truth, he is married. State the effect of such act of A. Explain. ANS. - His act constitutes a gross misrepresentation of a material fact made in utter bad faith. That false statement, if it had been known, would have disqualified him outright from taking the Bar Examinations as it


90

indubitably exhibited a lack of good moral character. (Leda vs. Tabang, 206 SCRA 395). The requirement of good moral character is not only a condition precedent to admission to the practice of law, continued possession is also essential for remaining in the practice of law. As said by Mr. Justice Malcolm, "A good character is essential qualification for admission of an attorney to practice. When the attorney's character is bad in such respects as to show that he is unsafe and unfit to be entrusted with the powers of an attorney, the courts retain the power to discipline him. (Leda vs. Tabang, 206 SCRA 395).

Q - A, a lawyer summoned a subordinate to his superior's office. There and then, he threatened or intimidated him by warning him of dismissal and the expense of a possible suit in court. Is the act of A proper? Why? - No. He is guilty of conduct unbecoming of a member of the Bar. A man of law should never use his legal expertise and influence in order to frighten or coerce anyone, especially the ordinary man who looks up to him for justice. (Roque vs. Clemencio, 212 SCRA 618). Q - What is the effect if a lawyer prepares a false deed in place of the proper type of deed for the sake of convenience? Why? - He can be suspended, for he violated the rule that a lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest or deceitful conduct. Q - A lawyer notarized a document without notarial commission. May he be penalized for such act? Why? Yes. In Mariano Joson vs. Atty. Gloria Baltazar, A.C. No. 575, Feb. 14, 1991, a lawyer was suspended for notarizing documents without notarial commission. The Supreme Court called it "irreprehensible", constituting not only malpractice but also commission of separate crime of falsification of public documents. (See: In the Matter of Disbarment of Dominador Flores; City Fiscal Lozada vs. Flores, 21 SCRA 1267). Notarization of a private document converts such document into a public one and renders it admissible in court without further proof of its authenticity. (Sec. 24, Rule 132; Antellon vs. Barcelona, 37 Phil. 148). Courts, administrative agencies and the public at large must be able to rely upon the acknowledgment executed by a notary public and appended to a private instrument. Notarization is not an empty routine; to the contrary, it engages public interest in a substantial degree and the protection of that interest requires preventing those who are not qualified or authorized to act as notaries public from posing upon the public and the courts and administrative offices generally. (Rebolleda


91

vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, 155 SCRA 520). Q

- If a lawyer receives money for a client and he does not remit it but instead appropriates it for himself, can he be penalized? Why? - Yes. To receive money for a client and fail to remit the same, a lawyer may be disbarred because it is a clear breach of the lawyer's oath to which he swore to observe. In Licuanan vs. Melo, 170 SCRA 100, a lawyer collected rentals of his client's apartments but failed to remit the same despite inquiries. It was held as a clear malpractice and unprofessional for him to misappropriate said funds. He displayed lack of honesty and good moral character. (See also Navarro vs. Meneses III, CBD, AC No. 313, January 30, 1998,91 SCAD 285). Money collected by a lawyer on a judgment rendered in favor of a client constitutes a trust fund and must be immediately paid to the client. (Batiller vs. Potenciano, Dec. 4, 1989). Q - A lawyer Stole a document evidence from the record of a case. State the effect of his act. Explain. - He can be disbarred. A lawyer is an officer of the court. He is like the court itself. In this case, where the lawyer was disbarred earlier but reinstated, the BC said an incorrigible practitioner of dirty tricks would be ill-suited to discharge the role of an instrument to advance the ends of justice. (Fernandez, et at. vs. Grecia, A.C. No. 3694, June 17, 1993,42 SCAD 438).

Q

- State some rules in the suspension of lawyers by the Supreme Court and the purpose of the same.

- They are: 1) There is no need to refer the case to the OSG for the initiation of the charges; 2) The Supreme Court has the authority to confront and prevent a substantive evil which is the degradation of the justice system of the country and the destruction of the standards of professional conduct required of the members of the bar; 3) The imposition of indefinite suspension is not cruel or unusual punishment. This is to give him a chance to purge himself on his own good time on his contempt and misconduct exhibiting appropriate repentance and demonstrating his willingness and capacity to live up to the existing standards of a member of the bar. (Zaldivar vs. Gonzales, 170 SCRA 1).


92

Q

- For immorality, a lawyer may be suspended. When may such suspension be lifted? Explain.

.

- For immorality, a lawyer was indefinitely suspended. In Cordova vs. Cordova, Nov. 29, 1989, the Supreme Court said that, it would lift the suspension if he could show that he has and continues to provide for the support of his legitimate family and that he has given up the immoral course of conduct that he has clung to. -

Q

For, as has been said in Tolosa vs. Cargo, March 3, 1989, a lawyer must not only comply with the rigorous standards of conduct appropriately required of a member of the bar. He must not only be .seen of good moral character, and leading the good lines in accordance with the highest standards of the community.

- What is the effect if a lawyer notarizes a document signed by a deceased person? Explain. - Notarization by a lawyer of documents signed by deceased persons constitutes negligence which should warrant suspension from the practice of law. It is the duty of the notarial officer to demand that a document be signed in his presence by the real parties thereto; the notarial officer must observe "utmost care" to comply with the elementary formalities in the performance of his duties. (Dinoy vs. Rosal, 54 SCAD 481, 235 SCRA 419, Aug. 17, 1994).

Q - What is the effect if a lawyer violates BP BIg. 22 and is convicted? Explain. - Violation of BP BIg. 22 is a crime involving moral turpitude, hence, conviction of a lawyer of such crime justifies her suspension from the practice of law. Said crime imports deceit and a violation of her attorney's oath and the Code of Professional Responsibility under both of which she was bound to "obey the laws of the land." (People vs. Tuanda, 181 SCRA 692, Jan. 30, 1990). Q - A lawyer used the IBP receipt number of another lawyer. Give the effect of such act. - A lawyer deserves to be suspended for using, apparently through negligence, the IBP official receipt number of another lawyer. (Bongalonta vs. Castillo, 58 SCAD 233, 240 SCRA 310, Jan. 20, 1995). He violated his duty not to engage in unlawful, dishonest and deceitful conduct. Q

- X engaged the services of Atty. A when he was sued by Y. He paid A but the latter failed to file the answer for his client. State the effect of such act. - He can be suspended for his failure to attend to the interest of his


93

client. Q

- How is disbarment instituted? - Disbarment is instituted: 1) By the Supreme Court, motu proprio; or 2) By the IBP Board of Governors: (a) Motu proprio; or (b)upon referral by the Supreme Court; or (c) upon referral by a chapter Board of officers at the instance of any person.

Q

- State the requirements in a complaint for disbarment. - The complaint must: 1) be verified; 2) state clearly and concisely the facts complained of; 3) be supported by affidavits of persons having personal knowledge of acts therein alleged, or document which may substantiate it; 4) be filed with six (6) copies furnished the Secretary of the IBP or any of its chapters.

Q

- State the procedure for disbarment proceeding in the IBP after complaint is filed. - The following is an outline of the procedure of a disbarment proceeding after it is filed with the IBP: 1. The case shall be assigned to a National Grievance Investigator where the Board of Governors shall appoint one from among IBP members or three (3) when special circumstances warrant; 2. If the complaint is meritorious, the respondent shall be served with a copy requiring him to answer within 15 days form service; 3. The respondent shall file an answer containing 6 ( six) copies and shall verify the same; after receipt of the answer or lapse of the period to do so, the Supreme Court may, muto 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; 4. 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 inspite of notice, the investigator may proceed ex parte. The investigation shall be terminated within three (3) months from commencement which period may be extended;


94

5. The Investigator shall make a report to the Board of Governors within 30 days from termination of the investigation which report shall contain his findings and recommendations together with the evidence; 6. 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 submission of the report of the Investigator: a) If the decision is a finding of guilt of the charges, the IBP Board of Governors shall issue a resolution setting forth its findings and recommendations which shall be transmitted to the Supreme Court for final action together with the record; b) If the decision is for exoneration, or if the sanction is less than suspension or dismissal, the Board shall issue a decision exonerating the respondent or imposing a lesser sanction. The resolution exonerating the respondent shall be considered as terminating the case unless upon petition of the complainant or other interested party filed with the Supreme Court within 15 days from notice of the Board's decision. Q

- What are the grounds to disqualify an investigator appointed by the Board of Governors? - They are the following: 1) If he is related to the respondent or counsel within the 4th degree of consanguinity or affinity; 2) If he has pecuniary interest with the respondent; 3) If he has personal bias; and 4) If he has acted as counsel for either party, unless the parties sign and enter upon the record their written consent.

Q - How may the investigator be disqualified if he does not inhibit himself? - He may be disqualified by an order of the IBP Board of Governors upon a vote of majority of the Board upon the instance of either party. Or, he may be removed for cause by a vote of at least six (6) members of the IBP Board of Governors. Q

- State the remedy of a party if the case is dismissed. - The decision is reviewed by the Supreme Court motu proprio or upon a timely appeal by complainant within 15 days from notice of dismissal.

Q

- State the procedure for disbarment in the Supreme Court:


95

1. Upon the initiation of the complaint, the SC may refer the case for investigation to the Solicitor General, or any officer of the Supreme Court, or judge of a lower court; 2. If referred, the investigator shall proceed with the investigation and make a report to the Supreme Court. Q

- Who may impose the penalty of suspension of an attorney? - Suspension of an attorney may be imposed by: 1. The Supreme Court, pending investigation under Rule 138-B; 2. The CA or RTC whose decision shall be transmitted to the Supreme Court for investigation.

Q

- Describe the nature of a disbarment/suspension proceedings against a lawyer. - The proceedings shall be private and confidential but the Supreme Court resolution shall be published.

Q

- What is the basic purpose of disbarment? - The purpose of disbarment is not meant as a punishment to deprive an attorney of a means of livelihood but is rather to protect the courts and the public from the misconduct of the officers of the court and to ensure the proper administration of justice. (Geaslin vs. Navarro, 185 SCRA 230, May 9, 1990).

Q - Describe the power of the Supreme Court to discipline lawyers. - The power to punish for contempt of court does not exhaust the scope of disciplinary authority of the court over lawyers. The disciplinary authority of the court over members of the Bar is but corollary to the court's exclusive power of admission to the Bar. An attorney will be removed not only for malpractice, and dishonesty in his profession, but also for gross misconduct not connected with his professional duties, which shows him to be unfit for the office and unworthy of the privilege which his license and the law confer upon him. (Santos vs. CFI of Cebu, Branch IV, 185 SCRA 472, May 18, 1990). Q

- May a lawyer who has been disbarred be reinstated? Explain. - Yes, but that is a matter of discretion of the Court Reinstatement to the practice of law of one who has been previously disbarred rests on whether or not the applicant has satisfied and convinced the Court by positive evidence that the efforts he has made to ward the rehabilitation of his character has been successful, and


96

therefore, he is entitled to be readmitted to a profession that is intrinsically an office of trust. (Prudential Bank vs. Grecia, 192 SCRA 381, Dec. 18, 1990).

Q

- Describe the proceedings for disbarment of lawyers.

.

- Proceedings for the disbarment of members of the bar are not in any sense civil actions where there is a plaintiff and the respondent is the defendant. Disciplinary proceedings involve no private interest and afford no redress for private grievance. They are undertaken for the purpose of preserving courts of justice from the official ministration of persons unfit to practice. The attorney is called to answer to the court for his conduct as an officer of the court. The complainant or the person who called the attention of the court to the attorney's alleged misconduct is in no sense a party, and has generally no interest in the outcome except as all good citizens may have in the proper administration of justice. (De Vera vs. Pineda, 213 SCRA 434, Sept. 2, 1992, citing Tajan vs. Hon. Vicente Cusi, Jr., 57 SCRA 154, May 30, 1974).

Q

- May a lawyer be disbarred or suspended for grounds other than those enumerated above under Rule 138, Sec. 27 of the Rules of Court? Explain. - Yes. An attorney may be disbarred or suspended for any violation of his oath or of his duties as an attorney and counsellor which include the statutory grounds enumerated in Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court. These statutory grounds are so broad as to cover practically any misconduct of a lawyer in his professional or private capacity. The enumeration of the statutory grounds for disciplinary action is not exclusive and a lawyer may be disciplined on grounds other than those specifically provided in the law. Generally, a lawyer may be disbarred or suspended for any misconduct whether in his professional or private capacity, which shows him to be wanting in moral character, in honestly, probity and good demeanor or unworthy to continue as an officer of the court, or an unfit or unsafe person to enjoy the privileges and to manage the business of others in the capacity of an attorney , or for conduct which tends to bring reproach on the legal profession or to injure it n the favorable opinion of the public. Any interested person or the court motu porprio may initiate disciplinary proceedings. (Marcelo vs. Javier, Sr., 214 SCRA 1, Sept. 18, 1992).

Q - How do you describe the power of the Supreme Court to disbar a lawyer? Explain. - It is a matter of judicial discretion. The determination of whether an attorney should be disbarred or merely suspended for a period involves the exercise of a sound judicial discretion, mindful always of the fact that disbarment is the


97

most severe form of disciplinary action and should be resorted to only in cases where the lawyer demonstrates an attitude or course of conduct wholly inconsistent with approved professional standards. In cases of lighter offenses or of first delinquency, an order of suspension, which is correctional in nature, should be inflicted. In view of the nature and consequence of a disciplinary proceeding, observance of due process, as in other judicial determinations, is imperative along with a presumption of innocence in favor of the lawyer. Consequently, the burden of proof is on the complainant to overcome such presumption and establish his charges by clear preponderance of evidence. (Marcelo vs. Javier, Sr., supra). In Resurreccion vs. Sayson, Adm. Case No. 1037, December 4, 1998, 101 SCAD 654, it was ruled that the power to disbar must be exercised with caution, and only in a clear case of misconduct that seriously affects the standing and character of the lawyer as an officer of that Court and member of the Bar. Disbarment should never be decreed where any lesser penalty, such as temporary suspension, would accomplish the end desired. (Castillo vs. Taguines, 69 SCAD 291, 254 SCRA 416). Q

- Is it possible for the Supreme Court to discipline a Register of Deeds for malfeasance of his official functions? Why? -Yes. For his misconduct as a public official also constitutes a violation of his oath as a lawyer. The lawyer's oath is a source of his obligations and its violation is a ground for his. suspension, disbarment or other disciplinary action. The Code of Professional Responsibility applies as well to lawyers in the government service in the discharge of their official tasks. (Collantes vs. Renomeron, 200 SCRA 584, Aug. 16,1991).

Q

- When a lawyer was investigated, he stated that he did not perfect an appeal in a case he handled only to say later on that he withdrew it. Can he be disciplined for such act? Why? - Yes, because he made a false statement. A lawyer must be a disciple of truth. Under the Code of Professional Responsibility, he owes candor, fairness and good faith to the courts. He shall neither do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any. He also has a duty not to mislead or allow the courts to be misled by any artifice. (Rule 10.01 of Canon 10, Code of Professional Responsibility). For this offense, he was suspended from the practice of law for another year. True, in Ordonio vs. Eduarte, 207 SCRA 229; Porac Trucking, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 202 SCRA 674 and Erectors, Inc. vs. NLRC, 166 SCRA 728, a suspension of only six months for a similar malfeasance was imposed. But in this case, his falsehood is aggravated by its brazenness, for it was committed in an attempt, vain as it was, to cover up his forum shopping. (Benguet Electric Cooperative, Inc. vs. Atty. Ernesto B. Flores, A.C. No. 4058, March 12, 1998, 92 SCAD 478).


98

- After more than four (4) years from bis suspension, on January 11, 1993, to be exact, respondent Raul M. Gonzales filed ex parte Motion to lift his suspension from the practice of law, alleging the following: 1. That respondent gave free legal aid services to the poor and needy of Zambales and Iloilo, by paying lawyers to do the same as he could not personally represent said clients by reason of his suspension; 2. That during his years of suspension, he has pursued civic work, especially for the poor and displaced people in Zambales, during the height of Mt. Pinatubo eruption; 3. That respondent has a long record in the service of human rights and the Rule of Law, especially during the Martial Law years; 4. Respondent pleads for his reinstatement to the practice of law because his suspension for 51 months has been the longest in Philippine legal annals; 5. Respondent states his profound regrets for the inconvenience which he has caused to the Court and to some of its members but he wishes to assure that he did not act with malice much less with a desire to inflict harm on the Tribunal; 6. Respondent reiterates very sincerely his respect to the institution which is the Supreme Court as he reiterates his oath to conduct himself as a lawyer according to the best of his knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well as to the Courts, as to the clients and finally restating fealty to the institution which is the Supreme Court which he has always respected as the ultimate bulwark of freedom, of the Rule of Law, of human rights and of equity and justice. Can he be reinstated? Explain. - Yes, for in fact, the Supreme Court said that this is not a court of vengeance but of justice. The respondent's contrition, so noticeably absent of his earlier pleadings, has washed clean the offense of his disrespect. His remorse has softened his arrogance and made up for his misconduct. Respondent Raul M. Gonzales' suspension from the practice of law for more than four (4) years has given him ample time and opportunity to amend his erring ways, rehabilitate himself, and thus, prove himself worthy once again to enjoy the privileges of membership of the Bar.


99

For the proper guidance of respondent Raul M. Gonzales, the SC reiterated a time-honored rule that the practice of law is a privilege burdened with conditions. Adherence to the rigid standards of mental fitness, maintenance of the highest degree of morality and faithful compliance with the rules of the legal profession are the conditions required for remaining a member of good standing of the bar and for enjoying the privilege to practice law. The Supreme Court, as guardian of the legal profession, has ultimate disciplinary power over attorneys. This authority to discipline its members is not only a right, but a bounden duty as well. The Court cannot, and will not, tolerate any outbursts from its members without running the risk of disorder, chaos and anarchy in the administration of justice. That is why respect and fidelity to the Court is demanded of its members "not for the sake ofthe temporary incumbent of the judicial office, but for the maintenance of its supreme importance." The Supreme Court further said: "Like the prodigal son in the Biblical story, respondent Raul M. Gonzales comes before Us repentant. The passage of years has indeed the effect of making people wiser and humbler, as it has to respondent Raul M. Gonzales. We are convinced of his sincerity to "reiterate his oath to conduct himself as a lawyer according to the best of his knowledge and discretion, x x x and to restate his fealty to the institution which is the Supreme Court x x x. " Q

- Constantino charged Atty. Saludares with conduct unbecoming of a lawyer for the non-payment of a loan which the latter obtained from complainant's son. It appears that respondent borrowed Pl,OOO.OO from complainant's son purportedly for an urgent personal obligation promising to pay it back promptly the following day. He did not pay despite demands. Can he be suspended for such act? Why? - Yes. By his failure to present convincing evidence to justify his non-payment of the debt, not to mention his seeming indifference to the complaint brought against him made apparent by his unreasonable absence from the proceedings before the Solicitor General, respondent failed to demonstrate that he still possessed the integrity and morality demanded of a member of the bar. Such conduct is unbecoming and does not speak well of a member of the bar. A lawyer's professional conduct must at all time be kept beyond reproach and above suspicion. He must perform his duties to the bar, to the courts, to his clients, and to the society with honor and dignity. (Constantino vs. Saludares, Dec. 7. 1993,46 SCAD 597).

Q

- The Garcia spouses, the Dionisio spouses and Felisa and Magdalena Beationg leased a parcel of land to Sotero Lee for a period of 25 years.Despite repeated verbal and written demands, Lee refused to vacate after the expiration of the lease.


100

In this disbarment case, Garcia claims that Lee's counsel, Francisco, commenced various suits before different courts to thwart Garcia's right to regain her property and that all theseproceedings were decided against Lee. The proceedings stemmed from the said lease contract and involved the same issues and parties, thus violating the proscription against forum-shopping. On the other hand, Francisco contends that he asserted in defense of his client's right only ~uch remedies as were authorized by law. Decide. - The lawyer can be suspended. By grossly abusing his right of recourse to the courts for the purpose of arguing a cause that had been repeatedly rebuffed, he was disdaining the obligation of the lawyer to maintain only such actions or proceedings as appear to him to be just and such defenses only as he believes to be honestly debatable under the law. By violating his oath not to delay any man for money or malice, he has besmirched the name of an honorable profession and has proved himself unworthy of the trust reposed in him by law as an officer of the Court. (Garcia vs. Francisco, March 30, 1993). Q

- Atty. Daarol was charged for disbarment on grounds of deceit and grossl immoral conduct.after the respondent and complainant became close to one another, respondent invited her to a party, thereafter, before taking back to her house in Dipolog City, he invited her for a joyride; parked the jeep at a beach; promised her marriage. He started caressing her down to her private parts. The complainant told her that she was afraid to give what he wanted, but respondent kept on promising to marry her; then, she obliged. The sexual intercourse continued on several occasions. The woman became pregnant, so he sent her and her mother to Manila and promised to follow them. When he arrived in Manila, he told them that he could not marry her because he was already married. He promised to work for the annulment of his marriage since he and his wife had been living separately for 16 years. Instead, the complainant was sent to Cebu and she delivered her child in Cebu. Thereafter, he did not see her anymore, hence, the complaint. Can he be disbarred? Why? Yes. By his acts of deceit and immoral tendencies to appease his sexual desires, respondent Daarol has amply demonstrated his moral delinquency. Hence, his removal for conduct unbecoming by a member of the Bar on the grounds of deceit and grossly immoral conduct (Sec. 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court) is in order. Good moral character is a condition which precedes admission to the Bar (Sec. 2, Rule 138, Rules of Court) and is not dispensed with upon admission thereto. It is a continuing qualification which all lawyers


101

must possess (People vs. Tuanda, 181 SCRA 682 [1990]; Delos Reyes vs. Aznar, 179 SCRA 653 [1989]), otherwise, a lawyer may either be suspended or disbarred. (Barrientos vs. Daarol, January 29, 1993). Q

- Mariveles engaged the services of Atty. Mallari in a criminal case. He was convicted, hence, he instructed Mallari to appeal to the CA, but at the CA, Mallari asked for numerous extensions and failed to file an appeal brief, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal. He discovered his lawyer's desertion of his duties when he was subpoenaed to appear for the execution of the decision. Explain the effects of the lawyer's acts. - He can be disbarred, because he is guilty of abandonment and dereliction of duty to his client. He demonstrated his indifference and lack of responsibility to the courts and his client as well as a shameless disregard to his duties as lawyer. He is unfit for membership in this noble profession. (Mariveles vs. Mallari, Feb. 17, 1993).

Q - Atty. Balaoing filed several cases against judges in Olongapo City and Zambales. The complaint against MTC Judge Dojillo was dismissed for lack of merit and declared that Balaoing's explanation was unsatisfactory and he was severely censured for having instituted a patently unfounded and frivolous administrative action and warned that the commission by him of the same or similar misconduct will be dealt with severely. Notwithstanding the above warning, Balaoing again filed two (2) complaints against Judge Calderon and Judge Maliwanag for grave abuse of authority and malicious delay in the administration of justice. In the case of Judge Calderon, it was shown that Balaoing won in a foreclosure case againstGavilan. After the foreclosed properties were sold in a public auction, where Balaoing was the highest bidder, a certificate of sale was issued and the same was registered. Respondent Judge allegedly prevented the implementation of the writ of possession, to the prejudice of Balaoing. Respondent Judge explained that he quashed the writ of possession she earlier issued in favor of Balaoing because Gavilan's widow and her children were residing in the foreclosed properties and the period to redeem the said properties had not yet expired. In the case of Judge Maliwanag, Balaoing, who is the plaintiff in two civil cases pending before the sala of Maliwanag, alleged that the Judge abused his authority by refusing to declare as in default the defendants in said cases


102

despite their repeated failure to attend the pretrial conferences and to submit their pre-trial briefs. Furthermore, she charged Maliwanag with gross ignorance of the law for allegedly issuing a patently unjust order. All the administrative cases were dismissed for lack of merit. May Atty. Balaoing be disbarred? Why? Yes. It is shown from the facts that Balaoing has a penchant for filing administrative charges against judges in whose sala he has pending cases, whenever the latter render decisions or issue orders adverse to him and/or his client. In Bagamasbad vs. Judge De Guzman (AM No. RTC-88, Nov. 7, 1989), the Supreme Court admonished lawyers to be more prudent in filing administrative charges against members of the judiciary. It is true that "the 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 and ability. No fear of judicial disfavor or public unpopularity should restrain him from the full charge of his duty. But it is stead fastly to be borne in mind that the great trust of the lawyer is to be performed within and not without the bounds of the law. The office of attorney does not permit, much less does it demand from him or any client, violation of law or any manner of fraud or chicanery. He must obey his own conscience and not that of his client. Balaoing went out of bounds when he filed his baseless and frivolous administrative complaints against Judges Calderon and Maliwanag with no other plain and clear purpose than to harass judges, thus, exact vengeance on them for rendering adverse judgments against him and his client. (Balaoing vs. Caideron, AM No. RTJ-90-530; Balaoing vs. Maliwanag, AM No. RTJ-676, April 27, 1993). Q

- The respondent was charged with dishonesty and grave misconduct in connection with the theft of some pages from a medical chart which was material evidence in a damage suit filed by his clients against some doctors and St. Luke's Hospital. Can he be disbarred? Why? - Yes. By stealing the said pages of the medical chart, he violated Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Codes of Professional Responsibility as well as Canon 7 which provided: "Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral and deceitful conduct." "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."

A lawyer is an officer of the courts, he is "like the court itself, an instrument or agency to advance the ends of justice". (People ex reI Karlin vs. Culkin 60 A.L.R. 851, 855). An incorrigible practitioner of "dirty tricks," like Grecia would be ill-suited to discharge the role of "an instrument to advance the ends of


103

justice." The importance of integrity and good moral character as part of a lawyer's equipment in the practice of his profession has been stressed by the Court repeatedly. "x x x. The bar should maintain a high standard of legal proficiency as wel,! as of honesty an,d fair dealing. Generally speakiTJg, a lawyer can do honor to the legal profess~on by faithfully perform,ing his d,uties to society, to the bar, to the courts and to his clients. To this end, nothing should be done by any member of the legal fraternity which might tend to lessen in any degree the confidence of the public in the fidelity, honesty and integrity of the profession. (Marcelo vs. Javier, Sr., A.c. No. 3248, September 18, 1992). "x x x. The nature of the office of an attorney at law requires that he shall be a person of good moral character. This qualification is not only a condition precedent to admission to the practice of law; its continued possession is also essential for remaining in the practice of law, in the exercise of privileges of members of the Bar. Gross misconduct on the part of a lawyer, although not related to the discharge of professional duties as member of the bar, which puts his moral character in serious doubt, renders him unfit to continue in the practice of law. (Melendrez vs. Decena, 176 SCRA 662, 676) x x x public policy demands that legal work in representation of parties litigant should be entrusted only to those possessing tested qualification and who are sworn to observe the rules and the ethics of the profession, as well as being subject to judicial disciplinary control for the protection of courts, clients and the public." (Phil Association of Free Labor Unions [PAFLU] vs. Binalbagan Isabela Sugar Company, 42 SCRA 302, 305). By descending to the level of a common thief, respondent Grecia has demeaned and disgraced the legal profession. He has demonstrated his moral unfitness to continue as a member of the honorable fraternity of lawyers. He has forfeited his membership in the Bar. "Generally, a lawyer may be disbarred or suspended for any misconduct, whether in his professional or private capacity, which shows him to be wanting in moral character, in honesty, probity and good demeanoror unworthy to continue as an officer of'the court, or an unfit or unsafe person to enjoythe privileges and to manage the business of others in the capacity of an attorney, or for conduct which tends to bring reproach onthe legal profession or to injure it in the favorable opinion of the public." (Marcelo vs. Javier, Sr. A.C. No. 3248, September 16, 1992; Fernandez vs.


104

Grecia, June 17, 1993). Q

- A sworn complaint was filed with the Supreme Court on 24 December 1981, with the complainant Dorothy B. Terre, charging respondent Jordan Terre, a member of the Philippine Bar with "grossly immoral conduct," consisting of contracting a second marriage and living with another woman other than complainant, while his prior marriage with complainant remained subsisting. His defense was that his first marriage with complainant is void, hence, his marriage with his second wife is valid. There is, therefore, no immoral conduct. Is his defense valid? Why? .- No. When the second marriage was entered into, respondent's prior marriage with the complainant was subsisting, no judicial action having been initiated or any judicial declaration as to nullity of the same. That he was in good faith was not accepted since his pretended defense was the same thing which he used to inveigle complainant into believing that her prior marriage was void. The moral character of respondent was deeply flawed, hence, his acts eloquently displayed, not only his unfitness to remain as a member of the Bar, but likewise his inadequacy to uphold the purpose and responsibility of his gender because marriage is a basic social institution. (Arroyo vs. CA, G.R. Nos. 96602 and 96715, Nov. 19, 1991). In Pomperada vs. Jochico, 133 SCRA 309 (1984), it was said, in rejecting a petition to be allowed to take the oath as a member of the Bar and to sign the Roll of Attorneys: "It is evident that respondent fails to meet the standard of moral fitness for membership in the egal profession. Whether the marriage was a joke as respondent claims, or a trick played on her as claimed by complainant, it does not speak well of respondent's moral values. Respondent had made a mockery of marriage, a basic social institution which public policy cherishes and protects. (Cordova vs. Cordova, 179 SCRA 680 [89J; Laguitan vs. Tinio, 179 SCRA 837).

In Bolivar vs. Simbol, 16 SCRA 623, the Court found the respondent guilty of "grossly immoral conduct" because he made "a dupe of complainant living on her bounty and allowing her to spend for his schooling and other personal necessities while dangling before her the mirage of a marriage, marrying another girl as soon as he had finished his studies, keeping his marriage a secret while continuing to demand money from complainant. x x x." The Court held such acts "indicative of a character not worthy of a member of the Bar."


105

The SC said that the conduct of respondent Jordan Terre in inveigling complainant Dorothy Terre to contract in a second marriage with him; in abandoning complainant Dorothy Terre after she had cared for him and supported him through law school, leaving her without means for the safe delivery of his own child; in contracting a second marriage with Helina Malicdem while his first marriage with complainant Dorothy Terre was subsisting, constituted "grossly immoral conduct" under Section 27 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, affording more than sufficient basis for disbarment of respondent Jordan Terre. He was unworthy of admission to the Bar in the first place. The Court will correct this error forthwith. (Terre vs. Terre, July 3, 1992). Q

-A lawyer enticed his 85-year old aunt to entrust all her money to him. He later on refused to return it. Can he be disbarred? Why? - Yes, because he violated the Code of Professional Responsibility as well as his oath as an attorney. His deceitful conduct makes him unworthy of membership in the legal 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. He was disbarred. (RayosOmbac vs. Rayos, 90 SCAD 742, 285 SCRA 93).

Q

- What is the effect if the complainant in a disbarment case executes an affidavit of withdrawal of the case? Why? - Nothing, as it does not exonerate the respondent. A case of disbarment or suspension may proceed regardless of interest or lack of interest of the complainant. What matters is whether, on the basis of the facts borne out by the record, the charge of deceit and grossly immoral conduct has been duly proven. (Rayos-Ombac vs. Rayos, supra).

Q

- What is the nature of a disciplinary proceeding? - A proceeding for suspension or disbarment is not in any sense a civil action where the complainant is a plaintiff and the respondent is a defendant. It involves no private interest and afford no redress for private grievance. It is undertaken and prosecuted solely for the public welfare and for preserving courts of justice from the official ministration of persons unfit to practice law in them. The attorney is called to answer to the court for his conduct as an officer of the court. (RayosOmbac vs. Rayos, supra).


106

- What is the effect if a lawyer procures personal loans through insinuations of his power as an influence peddler in the Bureau of Customs and issues bad checks and takes advantage of his government office? - He can be suspended, for a lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. In the case at bar, the lawyer's propensity for employing deceit and misrepresentation as well as his cavalier attitude towards incurring debts without the least intention of repaying them is reprehensible. This disturbing behavior cannot be tolerated most especially in a lawyer who is an officer of the court. (Co vs. Bernardino, 90 SCAD 750, 285 SCRA 102).

Q

- If a lawyer fails to appeal a case, can he be suspended? Why? Yes, because a lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable. (Villaluz, et aI. vs. Armenta, et aI., 90 SCAD 658, 285 SCRA 1).

Q

- Does it mean that he can be suspended even if he believes that such appeal is useless? Why? Yes, because it is highly improper for him to adopt such opinion without any clear instruction from his client not to appeal the adverse verdict. A lawyer owes entire devotion in protecting the interest of his client, warmth and zeal in the defense of his rights. He must use all his learning ability to the end that nothing can be taken or withheld from his client in accordance with law. He must present every remedy or defense within the authority of the law in support of his client's cause, regardless of his personal views. (Reontoy vs. Ibadlit, 90 SCAD 738, 285 SCRA 88). In fact, a lawyer has no right to waive his client's right to appeal. JUDICIAL ETHICS JUDICIAL ETHICS is the branch of moral science which treats of the right and proper conduct to be observed by all judges in trying and deciding controversies brought before them for adjudication which conduct must be demonstrative of impartiality, integrity, competence, independence and freedom from improprieties. This freedom from improprieties must be observed in both the public and private life of a judge - being the visible representation of the law. 

Sources of Judicial Ethics:


107

1. Code of Judicial Conduct 2. Constitution (Art VIII, Art IX and Art III) 3. New Civil Code (Articles 9, 20, 27, 32, 35, 739,1491,2005,2035,2046) 4. Revised Rules of Court(Rules71,135,137,139B,140) 5. Revised Penal Code (Articles 204,205,206,207) 6. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019) 7. Canons of Judicial Ethics (Adm. Order No. 162) 8. Code of Professional Responsibility 9. Judiciary Act of 1948 (RA 296) 10. Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1930 (8P129) 11. Supreme Court Decisions 12. Foreign Decisions 13. Opinions of authorities 14. Other Statutes 15. SC Circulars 

Court - a board or other tribunal which decides litigation or contest (Hidalgo vs. Manglapus, 64 D.G. 3189). A court may exist without a judge.



Judge - a public officer who, by virtue of his office, is clothed with judicial authority. A public officer lawfully appointed to decide litigated questions in accordance with law (People VS. MananttJn, 5 SCRA 687). This refers to persons only. There may be a judge without a court.

. 

De jure judge - one who is exercising the office of judge as a matter of right, an officer of a court who has been duly and legally elected or appointed and whose term has not expired. An officer of the law fully vested with all of 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, 37 Phil. 191).



De facto judge - a judge who in good faith continues to act and is recognized by common error after the abolition of his court by statute is deemed judge de facto of the new court which succeeds to the jurisdiction of that presided over by him (U.S. vs. Abalos, 1 Phil 76). An officer who is not fully vested with all the powers and duties. conceded to judges, but is exercising the office of a judge under some color of right.



Qualifications to be Supreme Court Members: 1. Natural born citizen of the Philippines 2. At least 40 years of age 3. Must have been at least for 15 years, a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law (Sec. 7(2), Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution)



Qualifications to be Judges: 1. Citizen of the Philippines 2. Member of the Bar (Sec. 7(2), Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution)

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________ 3. Must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity and independence (Sec. 7(3), Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution)

108


109



Qualifications of Justices and Judges under the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 (B.P. 129): 1. Presiding Justice and Associate Justices of the Court of Appeals shall have the same qualifications as those provided in the Constitution, for Justices of the Supreme Court (Sec. 5) 2. RTC judges shall be natural born citizens of the Philippines, at least 35 years 0 age and for at least ten years, has been engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines or has held a public office in the Philippines requiring admission to the practice of law as an indispensable requisite (Sec. 15). 3. MTC judges shall be natural born citizens of the Philippines, at least 30 years of age, and for at least five years, has been engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines, or has held a public office in the Philippines requiring admission to the practice of law as an indispensable requisite.

CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT PREAMBLE An honorable, competent and independent judiciary exists to administer justice and thus promote the unity of the country. The stability of government, and the well-being of the people.

CANON 1 A JUDGE UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY RULE 1.01 -A judge should be the embodiment of competence, integrity and independence. RULE 1.02 - A judge should administer justice impartially and without delay. RULE 1.03-A judge should be vigilant against any attempt to subvert the independence of the judiciary and should forthwith resist any pressure from whatever source intended to influence the performance of official functions.  Judges should avoid even the slightest infraction of the law. 

Must be models of uprightness, fairness and honesty


Should - not relax in his study of the law and court decisions.



Must decide motions without delay.



Should also appear impartial

110

CANON 2 A JUDGE SHOULD AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL ACTIVITIES.

RULE 2.01- A judge should so behave at times as to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. RULE 2.02- A judge should not seek publicity for personal vainglory. RULE 2.03- A judge shall not allow family, social, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgement. The prestige of judicial office shall not be used or lent to advance the private interest of others, nor convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. RULE 2.04- A judge should refrain from influencing in any manner the outcome of litigation or dispute pending before an-other court or administrative agency. 

A judge must be beyond suspicion. He has the duty not only to render a just and impartial decision but also to render it in such a manner as to be free from any suspicion as to its fairness and impartiality, and also as to his integrity.

 Every litigant is entitled to nothing short of the cold neutrality of an independent, wholly free disinterested and impartial tribunal. 

A judge must be temperate in his language and must not lose his cool.



A judge is prohibited from making public statements in the media regarding a pending case so as not to arouse public opinion for or against a party (violates the Principle of Subjudice)


111



Judges must not use or permit the use of any undignified self-laudatory statement regarding their qualifications or legal services.



A judge must not allow anyone to ride on his prestige. He should not create the impression that someone or some people are so close to him to enjoy his favor.

CANON 3 A JUDGE SHOULD PERFORM OFFICIAL DUTIES HONESTLY, AND WITH IMPARTIALITY AND DILIGENCE ADJUDICATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES.

RULE 3.01- A judges shall be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence. 

Judge should be conversant with the law and Its amendments.

RULE 3.02- In every case, a judge shall endeavor diligently to ascertain the facts and the applicable law unswayed by partisan interests, public opinion or fear of criticism. 

Finding, of facts must be based not on the personal knowledge of the judge but upon the evidence presented.



If the personal view of the judge contradicts the applicable doctrine promulgated by the Supreme Court, nonetheless, he should decide the case in accordance with that doctrine and not in accordance with his personal views. He is however not prohibited from stating his own opinion on the matter if he wants to' invite constructive attention thereto.

RULE 3.03- A judge shall maintain order and proper decorum in the court. RULE 3.04 - A judge should be patient, attentive, and courteous to lawyers, especially the inexperienced, to litigants, witnesses, and others appearing before the court. A judge should avoid unconsciously falling into the attitude of mind that the litigants are made for the courts, instead of the courts for the litigants. 

Conduct of trial must not be attended with fanfare and publicity; not permit pictures or broadcasting.


112

Must use temperate language should not make insulting remarks RULE 3.05 - A judge shall dispose of the court's business promptly and decide cases within the required periods RULE 3.06 - While a judge may, to promote justice, prevent waste of time or clear up some obscurity, properly intervene in the presentation of evidence during the trial, it should always be borne in mind that undue interference may prevent the proper presentation of the cause or the ascertainment of truth. RULE 3.07 - A judge should abstain from making public comments on any pending or impending case and should require similar restraint on the part of court personnel. 

A judge must properly organize his court to ensure prompt and convenient dispatch of its business (Canon 8, Canons of Judicial Ethics)



A judge should closely supervise court personnel so that adequate precautions are taken sending out subpoenas, summons, and court processes to ensure that they are timely served and received (SC Circular No. 13 dated July 31, 1987, Par. 4[a])



Ascertain that the records of all cases are properly kept and managed.



Maintain a checklist on the cases submitted for decision with a view to knowing exactly the specific deadlines for the resulution/decision of the said cases.



Loss of records: gross negligence



Should be a good manager



May summarily punish any person including lawyers and court personnel for direct contempt for misbehavior committed in the presence of or so near a court or a judge as to obstruct or interrupt the proceedings before the same (Rule 71, Revised Rules of Court)



May not summarily suspends a lawyer for indirect contempt.

Every court has the inherent power among others, to preserve and enforce orders in its immediate presence to compel obedience to its judgments, orders and processes and to control, In furtherance of justice the conduct of its ministerial officers (Sec. 5, Rule 135 ~O, Revised Rules of Court) . 

Judge Was the power to appoint, but the power to dismiss court employees is vested


113

in the Supreme Court. 

If knowingly nominate or appoint to any public office any person lacking the legal qualification therefor, shall be guilty of unlawful appointment punishable with imprisonment and fine (Alt. 244, Revised Penal Code).

ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES RULE 3.08 - A judge should diligently discharge administrative responsibilities, maintain professional competence in court management, and facilitate the performance of the administrative functions or other judges and court personnel. RULE 3.09 - 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 standards of public service and fidelity. RULE 3.10 - A judge should take or initiate appropriate disciplinary measures against lawyers or court personnel for unprofessional conduct of which the judge may have become aware. RULE 3.11 - A judge should appoint commissioners, receivers, trustees, guardians, administrators and others strictly on the basis of merit and qualifications, avoiding nepotism and favoritism. Unless otherwise allowed by law, the same criteria should be observed in recommending appointment of court personnel. Where the payment of compensation is allowed, it should be reasonable and commensurate with the fair value of services rendered.

DISQUALIFICATION RULE 3.12 - A judge should take no part in a proceeding where the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned. These cases include among others, proceedings where: a) the judge has personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding; b) 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; c) the judge's ruling in a lower court is the subject of review; d) the judge is related by consanguinity or affinity to a party litigant within the sixth degree or to counsel within the fourth degree; e) the judge knows that the judge's spouse or child has a financial


114

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 proceeding. In every instance, the judge shall indicate the legal reason for inhibition. 

Petition to disqualify judge must be filed before rendition of judgment by the judge; can't be raised first time on appeal.



If a judge denies petition for disqualification. the ultimate test: is whether or not the complaint was deprived of a fair and Impartial trial. Remedy seek new trial.

REMITTAL OF DISQUALIFICATION RULE 3.13 -A judge disqualified by the terms of Rule 3.12 may, instead of withdrawing from the proceeding, disclose on the record the basis of disqualification. If, based on such disclosure, the parties and lawyers independently of the judge's participation, all agree in writing that the reason for the inhibition is immaterial or insubstantial, the judge may then participate in the proceeding. The agreement, signed by all parties and lawyers, shall be incorporated in the record of the proceeding. CANON 4 - A judge may, with due regard to official duties, engage in activities to improve the law, the legal system and the administration of justice. Rule 4.01 - A judge may, to the extent that the following activities do not impair the performance of judicial duties or case doubt on the judge's impartiality: a. speak, write, lecture, teach or participate in activities concerning the law, the legal system and the administration of justice; b. appear at a public hearing before a legislative or executive body on matters concerning the .law, the legal system or the administration of Justice and otherwise consult with them on matters concerning the administration of justice; c. serve on any organization devoted to the improvement of the law, the legal system or the administration of justice. 

Decision to engage in these activities depends upon the sound judgment of the judge.


115



If has not enough time to spare (such as when caseload is too heavy prudence dictates, he must concentrate on his judicial duties.



If a judge has time to spare, the best attitude to take is to participate in activities which are closely related to the performance of his duties and which do not consume much of his time and energy.

CANON 5 A JUDGE SHOULD REGULATE EXTRA-JUDICIAL ACTIVITIES TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF CONFLICT WITH JUDICIAL DUTIES ADVOCATIONAL, CIVIC AND CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. RULE 5.01 - A judge may engage in the following activities provided that they do not interfere with the performance of judicial duties or detract from the dignity of the court: a) write, teach and speak on non-legal subjects; b) engage in the arts, sports, and other special recreational activities; c) participate in civic and charitable activities; d) serve as an officer, director, trustee, or non-legal advisor of a non-profit or non political educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organization. FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES RULE 5.02 - A judge shall refrain from financial and business dealing 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. A judge should so manage investments and other financial interests as to minimize the number of cases giving grounds for disqualifications. RULE 5.03 - Subject to the provisions of the proceeding rule, a judge may hold and manage investments but should not serve as officer, director, manager, advisor, or employee of any business except as director of a family business of the judge. RULE 5.04 -A judge or any immediate member of the family shall not accept a gift, bequest, factor or loan from anyone except as may be allowed by law. RULE 5.05 - No information acquired in a judicial capacity shall be used or disclosed by a judge in any financial dealing or for any other purpose not related to judicial activities.  Prohibitions under the Revised Penal Code:


116

Art 215. Prohibited Transaction. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine ranging from P200 to P1000 or both, shall be Imposed upon any appointive public officer who, during his incumbency, shall directly or indirectly become interested in any transaction of exchange or speculation within the territory subject to his jurisdiction. Art 216. Possession of prohibited interest by a public officer. The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prison correccional in its minimum period, or a fine ranging from P200 to P1000, or both, shall be imposed upon a public officer who directly and indirectly, shall become Interested in any contract or business which it is his official duty to intervene. 

Acceptance of gifts given by reason of the office of a public officer is indirect bribery (Art. 211, RPC)



When he agrees to perform an act constituting a crime in connection with the performance of his official duties in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present received by such officer, he is guilty of direct bribery (Art. 210, RPC)



Sec 3. Corrupt practices of public officers. In addition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law, the following shall constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful: (h) Directly or indirectly having financial or pecuniary interest in any business, or contract or transaction In connection with which here intervenes or takes part in his official capacity or in which he is prohibited by the Constitution or by any law from having any interest, (Sec. 3(h), RA 3019)



Donations given to a judge, or to his wife, descendants or ascendants by reason of his office are void (Art. 739, Civil Code)



General Rule: Avoid taking or receiving loans from litigants (Sec. 2 [b] and [c] of R.A. 3019, and Sec. 16, art. VIII of the Constitution) Exception (AGCPA): Unsolicited gifts or presents of small value offered or given as a mere ordinary token of gratitude or friendship according to local custom or usage (Sec. 14 of R.A. 3019)



No solicitation of funds by public officials (Sec. 7 [d], R.A. 6713)

FIDUCIARY ACTIVITIES RULE 5.06 - A judge should not serve as the executor, administrator, trustee, guardian, or other fiduciary, except for the estate, trust, or person of


117

a member of the immediate family, and then only if such service will not interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties. "Member of immediate family" shall be limited to the spouse and relatives within the second degree of consanguinity. As a family, a judge shall not: a) serve in proceedings that might come before the court of said judge; or b) act as such contrary to Rules 5.02 to 5.05. PRACTICE OF LAW AND OTHER PROFESSION RULE 5.07 - A judge shall not engage in the private practice of law. Unless prohibited by the Constitution or law, a judge may engage in the practice of any other profession provided that such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with judicial functions. 

Includes preparation of pleadings or papers in anticipation of litigation, and giving of legal advice to clients or persons needing the same.



Not engage in notarial work. Exception: "Notaries public ex-oficio" - may engage only in notarization of documents connected with the exercise of their official functions. Provided all notarial fees on account of the government and certification attesting to lack of any lawyer or Notary Public.



Sworn statement of assets and. liabilities including statement of amounts and services of income, the amount of personal and family expenses and the amount of income tax is paid for the next preceding calendar year.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE RULE 5.08 - A judge shall make full financial disclosures as required by law. RULE 5.09 - A judge shall not accept appointment or designation to any agency performing quasi-judicial or administrative functions.

POLITICAL ACTIVITIES RULE 5.10 – a judge is entitled to entertain personal views on political questions. But to avoid suspicion of political partisanship, a judge shall not make political speeches, contribute to party funds, publicly endorse candidates for political office or participate in other partisan political activities. COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT


118

All judges shall strictly comply with this code. DATE OF EFFECTIVITY This code, promulgated on 5 September 1989, shall take effect on 20 October 1989.

Liabilities of Judges Administrative Liabilities: 

Grounds for administrative sanctions against judges (Sec. 67 of the Judiciary Act of 1(48) 1. Serious misconduct - implies malice or wrongful intent, not mere error of judgment, judicial acts complained of must be corrupt or inspired by an intention to violate the law. or were in persistent disregard for well-known legal rules 2. Inefficiency - implies negligence, incompetence, ignorance, and carelessness, when the judge fails to observe in the performance of his duties that diligence, prudence and circumspection which the law require: in the rendition of any public service.

Instances of serious misconduct: 1. Unjustifiable failure to decide cases within reglementary period 2. Failure to deposit funds with the municipal treasurer or to produce them despite his promise to do so 3. Misappropriation of fiduciary funds 4. Extorting money from a party-litigant who has a case before his court 5. Solicitation of donation for office equipment 6. Unlawful solicitation in violation of R.A. No. 6713 7. Frequent unauthorized absences in office 8. Falsification of certificate of service to collect salary 9. Declaring Wednesdays as non-session days which the judge declared as his "Mid-week pause" 10. Indefinite postponement for, several years of a criminal case pending in his sala 11. Judges is poking his gun to another in a restaurant while in a sate of intoxication 12. Pistol-whipping the complainant on the latter's left face without any justification 13. Acting as counsel and/or attorney-in-fact for all the, parties with opposing interests on a parcel of land in pursuance of his personal self-


119

interest 14. Using intemperate language unbecoming of a judge 15. Failure to reply to a show cause resolution of the Supreme Court 16. Loss of records 17. Inaction by judge which is the tantamount to partiality in favor of one party ... among others. 

Instances of gross inefficiency: 1. Delay in the disposition of cases 2. Unduly granting repeated motions for postponement of a case 3. Gross incompetence and ignorance of the law 4. Reducing to a ridiculous amount the bail bond of the accused in a murder case 5. Including execution in the judgment itself 6. Dismissing uncalendared criminal cases without verifying whether the other parties had received the notices of court hearings…among others



Procedure for filing an administrative complaint (Rule 140 of the Revised Rules of Court): Complaint in writing setting forth clearly the facts and circumstances relied upon and sworn to and supported by affidavits and documents Service or dismissal, which must followed by an answer within 10 days from date of service ‘ Answer and hearing Report filed with the Supreme Court of findings accompanied by evidence and documents

1. 2. 3. 4.

Civil Liabilities: 

Civil Liabilities Re Official Functions: a. Obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner impedes or impairs the civil rights. b. Willful or negligent rendition of a decision which causes damages to another c. For damages: rendering/neglecting to decide a case causing loss to a party.



Civil Code Disabilities: Rule: Can't purchase properties subject of litigation is his court. Exception: Does not apply where the subject property was not acquired from any of the parties to the case, nor will it apply when the litigation is already finished.



Donations made to a judge by reason of his office are void.



Taking advantage of his position to boost his candidacy amounts to 'gross misconduct.


120

Cannot serve as officers or advisers of political groups.

Criminal Liabilities  Malfeasance under the RPC: a. Knowingly Rendering Unjust Judgment (Art. 204, RPC) The elements are. 1. That the officer is a judge; 2. That he renders judgment in a case submitted to him for decision; 3. That the judgment is unjust; 4. The judge knows that his judgment is unjust. b. Judgment Rendered Through Negligence (Art. 205, RPC) The elements are: 1. That the offender is a judge; 2. That he renders judgment in a case submitted to him for decision 3. That the judgment is manifestly unjust; 4. That it is due to his inexcusable negligence or ignorance. Notaries Public I. Qualifications (Sec 232 and 234, Revised Administrative Code (RAC)) A. Filipino citizen B. Over 21 years of age C. Should not have been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude D. Training 1. Those admitted to the practice of law 2. Those who have passed the studies of law in a reputable university 3. A clerk or deputy clerk of court or one who has at some time held the position of clerk or' deputy clerk of court for a period of not less than two (2) years 4. Those qualified for the office of Notary Public de officio under Spanish sovereignty 5. Municipal judges as notaries public de officio in municipalities or Municipal districts i. where there are no persons with the necessary qualifications ii. where there are qualified persons but they refuse Appointment


121

non-lawyers as notaries: General Rule: SC Circular No. 16 of 1985 directed appointing judges to refrain and desist from appointing and/or renewing the appointment of non-lawyers as notaries public because of the unethical practices of notaries public who are non-lawyers; Exception: In places where there are no lawyers, or there are not enough lawyers, the appointment of nonlawyers as notaries public may be allowed, but a nonlawyer who wishes to be commissioned as a notary public must apply.

Define the following: 1. Court – A board or other tribunal which decides a litigation or contest. (Hidalgo vs. Manglapus, 64 O.G. 3189). 2. Judge – A public officer who by virtue of his office, is clothed with judicial authority. A public officer lawfully appointed to decide litigated questions in accordance with law. (People vs. Manantan, 5 SCRA 687). 3. De jure judge – one who is exercising the office of judge as a matter of right; an officer of a court who has been duly and legally elected or appointed. 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. (Lino Luna vs. Rodriguez, 37 Phil. 191). A judge who is in all respect legally appointed and qualified as such and whose term of office has not expired. (Tayko vs. Capistrano, 53 Phil. 872). 4. De Facto judge – A judge who in good faith continues to act and is recognized by common error after the abolition of his court by statute is deemed judge de facto of the new court which succeeds to the jurisdiction of that presided over by him. (US. vs. Abalos, 1 Phil. 76). 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. ( Lino Luna vs. Rodriguez, ibid.) One who exercises the duties of a judicial officer under color of an appointment or election thereto. (Tayko vs. Capistrano, 53 Phil. 872). The acts of a de facto judge are just as valid for all purposes as those of a de jure judge so far as the public or third persons who


122

are interested therein are concerned. x x x. The decision of a de facto judge cannot be collaterally attacked. (Nacionalista Party vs. De Vera, 85 Phil. 132). The decision of a judge is void, if on the day it is promulgated, the judge ceased to be a judge. (Rodriguez vs. Tesorero de Filipinas, 84 Phil. 368; Ong Sui vs. Paredes, 17 SCRA 661; People vs. Solis, CA-G.R. No. 141117-R, November 20, 1965). QUESTIONS ON JUDICIAL ETHICS Q

- Are there any distinctions between the court and the judge?

ANS. - Yes. The court is an entity and the person who occupies the position is the judge. A court may exist without a judge. There may be a judge without a court. (Pamintuan vs. Llorente, 29 Phil. 346). Q

- What do you understand by the principle that the administration of justice is a shared responsibility of the judge and the lawyer?

ANS. - It means that it is the duty of both counsel and judge to maintain not to destroy, the high esteem and regard for courts. Any act on the part of one or the other that tends to undermine the people's respect for, and confidence in, the administration of justice is to be avoided. And this, even if both may have to restrain pride from taking the better part of their system. (Lugue vs. Kayanan, 29 SCRA 173). The relations of judge and lawyer should be founded on mutual respect and on a deep appreciation by one of the duties of the other. (Romero vs. Valle, 147 SCRA 197) Q

- Explain the principle that a judge should not only be impartial but must also appear impartial.

ANS. - The sole purpose of courts of justice is to enforce the laws uniformly and impartially, without regard to persons or their circumstances or to opinions of men. A judge should at all times be 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. Judges therefore, should not only be impartial but they should also appear impartial. (Tan, Jr. vs. Gallado, 73 SCRA 315). Q

- Should a judge succumb to pressure from whatever source? Why?

ANS. - No. To do so is equivalent to a case of betrayal of the public trust reposed on a judge as an arbiter of the law and a revelation of his/her


123

weak moral character. A judge is expected to be fearless in his/her pursuit to render justice, to be unafraid to displease any person, interest or power and to be equipped with a moral fiber strong enough in his/her office. (Ramirez vs. Corpuz-Macandog, 144 SCRA 462). Q

- How do you describe the appearance of a judge in his official and personal conduct? ANS. - A judge's official conduct and his behavior in the performance of judicial duties should be free from the appearance of impropriety and must be beyond reproach. (Alagas vs. Reyes, 131 SCRA 445; Li vs. Niyares, 65 SCRA 167). Even his personal behavior in his everyday life should be beyond reproach. He should avoid even the slightest infraction of the law. (Cabrera vs. Pajares, 142 SCRA 127).

Q

- How do you explain the fact that a judge should be like Caesar's wife?

ANS. - A judge should be like Caesar's wife because a judge must not only be pure but must also appear to be so. Appearance is as important as reality in the performance of judicial functions. Like Caesar's wife, a judge must not only be pure but must be beyond suspicion. (Palang vs. Zosa, 58 SCRA 776). A judge has the duty not only to render a just and impartial decision, but also render it in such a manner as to be free from any suspicion as to its fairness and impartiality, and also as to the judge's integrity. (Martinez vs. Gironella, 65 SCRA 245). Q - Explain the rule that a judge should not seek publicity for personal vainglory. ANS. - It means that judges should be prohibited from seeking publicity for vanity or self-glorification. Judges are not actors or actresses or politicians. They are also prohibited from making public comments on any pending or impending case. Judges must not be moved by a desire to cater to public opinion to the detriment of justice. (Go vs. CA, 206 SCRA 165). Q

- Maya judge invite the press during the hearing of a sensational case? Why?

ANS. - No. A judge should not allow unnecessary taking of Pictures of the court .proceedings. He should not allow the broadcasting of proceedings over the radio or allow the televising of the proceedings. The reason is that, such fanfare and publicity detract from the dignity of the court proceedings for the parties involved tend to become more self-conscious on their appearances rather than the truth of the facts and substance of the issues. The administration of justice would then ultimately suffer as the judge might be influenced by the public clamor engendered by the publicity. Finally, a judge should not seek publicity


124

for his personal vainglory. Q

- When may a judge intervene during the presentation of evidence?

ANS - A judge may intervene during the presentation of evidence in order to expedite and prevent unnecessary waste of time. (Domanico vs. CA, 122 SCRA 218). He may intervene to profound clarificatory questions. (People vs. Muit, 117 SCRA 696). He should, however, limit himself only to clarificatory questions and not to ask searching questions after the witness had given direct testimony. (Valdez vs. Aquilizan, 133 SCRA 150). His act should be done sparingly and not throughout the proceedings. (People vs. Ibanson, 120 SCRA 679). Q - What constitutes undue interference by the judge in the presentation of evidence? ANS. - There is undue interference if the judge will extensively profound questions to the witnesses which will have the effect of or will tend to build or bolster the case of one of the parties. Q

- Give the reason behind the rule that a judge should not interfere in the presentation of evidence.

ANS. - A judge should not only be impartial, but he should appear to be so. If he profounds questions to help build the case of a party, he would come out biased against or partial in favor of a party. A judge interference may likewise prevent the proper presentation of the case, and the ascertainment of the truth in respect thereto. Q

- An MTC judge was present during the meeting of his relatives before the DARAB. He even suggested the review of the land reform coverage and even talked to those who refused to obey the writ of execution issued by the DARAB. Is the act of the judge proper?

ANS. - No, because as a member of the Bench, he should have realized that his presence, opinion and participation in any proceeding could slant the evaluation and resolution of the case in favor of the party he identifies himself with. A judge need not utter any word for his sheer presence, as a member of the Judiciary, would be sufficient suggestion of persuasion and influence. (Garcia, et al. vs. Valdez, A.M. No. MTJ-98-1156, July 13, 1998, 96 SCAD 170). Q

- If a judge renders a judgment on the day after a case is submitted for decision, is the act proper? Why? ANS. - Yes, there is nothing anomalous in the act of the judge, as it is even an evidence of his intention to dispose of cases with dispatch. The immediate resolution of the decision was no more than his compliance with his duty as a judge to dispose of the court's business promptly and decide cases within required periods. Instead of being punished, he


125

should even be commended for his close attention to duty. (Fule vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 112212, March 2,1998,92 SCAD 14). Q

- Why should a judge decide a case within the reglementary period provided for by the Rules?

ANS. - A judge should decide a case within the reglementary period because failure to do so constitutes gross dereliction of duty. A judge should decide a case promptly and expeditiously, for it cannot be denied that justice delayed is justice denied. Delay in the disposition of cases undermines the people's faith and confidence on the judiciary. Hence, judges are enjoined to decide cases with dispatch. Their failure to do so constitutes gross inefficiency and warrants the imposition of administrative sanctions on them. (Fe T. Bernardo vs. Judge Amelia A Fabros, A.M. No. MTJ-99-1l89, May 12, 1999, citing Sanchez vs. Vestil, AM. No. MTJ-981419, October 13, 1998, 100 SCAD 147). Q

- A judge admitted that she failed to decide a case within the reglementary period provided for the by the Rules. Her reason was that there was oversight on her part. Is the reason proper? Why?

ANS. - No. A judge is expected to keep his own record of cases so that he may act on them promptly without undue delay. It is incumbent upon him to devise an efficient recording and filing system in his court so that no disorderliness can affect the flow of cases and their speedy disposition. x x x Proper and efficient court management is as much his responsibility. He is the one directly responsible for the proper discharge of his official functions. (See Fe T. Bernardo vs. Judge Amelia A Fabros, AM. No. MTJ-99-1l89, 106 SCAD 425, May 12, 1999). Q - When may a judge be subjected to disciplinary action for his errors? Explain. ANS. - For liability to attach for gross negligence of the law, the assailed order, decision or actuation of a judge must not only be found erroneous but, most importantly, it must be established that the judge was moved by bad faith, dishonesty, hatred, or some other like motive. (Dela Cruz vs. Concepcion, 54 SCAD 640, '235 SCRA 597). Q

- When is a judge liable for rendering an unjust judgment? Explain.

ANS. - A judge may be held liable for rendering an unjust judgment when he acts in bad faith, malice, revenge, or some other motive. (Heirs of the late Nasser Yasin vs. Felix, 66 SCAD 157, 250 SCRA 545).


126

- Discuss the import of the rule on voluntary inhibition of judges.

ANS. - The import of the rule on voluntary inhibition of judges is that the decision on 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. It makes clear to the occupants of the Bench that outside of pecuniary interest, relationship or previous participation in the matter that calls for adjudication, there might be other causes that could conceivably erode the trait of objectivity, thus calling for inhibition. This is to betray a sense of realism, for the factors that lead to preference or predelictions are many and varied. In the final reckoning, there is really no hard and fast rule when it comes to the inhibition of judges. Each case should be treated differently and decided based on its peculiar circumstances. The issue of voluntary inhibition is primarily a matter of conscience and sound discretion on the part of the judge. It is a subjective test the result of which the reviewing tribunal will not disturb in the absence of any manifest finding of arbitrariness and whimsicality. The discretion given to trial judges is an acknowledgment of the fact that these judges are in a better position to determine the issue of inhibition as they are the ones who directly deal with parties-litigants in their courtrooms. (People vs. Gallermo, G.R. No. 123546, July 7, 1998, 95 SCAD 579). Q

- A complaint was filed against a judge for reprehensible conduct in engaging in the, ,publication of a gossip tabloid, The Mirror, as editor and legal adviser and as a gossipmongering columnist of a local newspaper, Sun Star Clark. Complainant alleged that respondent used his newspaper column to ventilate his biases or personal anger at people or institutions. For instance, when respondent failed to receive payment from the Office of the Governor for advertisement in exchange for a congratulatory messages in the maiden issue of The Mirror, respondent placed a blank space purportedly for the governor's message, and expressed contempt with a few lines underneath a picture of the governor. Complainant believes that respondent judge should not engage in active, sensational, and free-for-all journalistic writing because such act degrades the judicial system and compromises his impartiality as an administrator of justice. He likewise persistently attacked the governor for his movie-making activities. Can the judge be dismissed for his acts? Why?

ANS. - Yes. The Code of Judicial Conduct mandates that a judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities. The personal behavior of a judge not only upon the Bench but also in


127

his everyday life should be above reproach and free from the appearance of impropriety. There is a difference between freedom of expression and compromising the dignity of the Court through publications of emotional outburst and destructive criticisms. Respondent's writing of active and vicious editorials compromises his duties as judge in the impartial administration of justice, for his views printed on newspapers reflect on his office as well as on the public officers that he challenges. From the standpoint of conduct and demeanor expected of a judge, resort to intemperate language only detracts from the respect due a member of the judiciary and becomes selfdestructive. Moreover, in persistently attacking the moviemaking activities of the provincial governor and repeatedly threatening to file an action against a public officer, respondent encourages litigation and causes dissension against the public officer concerned. As a judge, respondent's role is to maintain equanimity and not instigate litigation. This is not to say that one cannot question the improper activities of government officials if there are any. However, it is not proper for a judge to write publications of carelessly-worded editorials in local newspapers. (Benalfre J. Galang vs. Judge Abelardo H. Santos, A.M. No. MTJ-99-1197, May 26, 1999). Q

- After the hearing of the petition for bail, the court issued an order denying the same on the ground that the evidence of guilt is strong. The petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, but was denied, the court ruling that it has already clearly spelled out the grounds relied upon in the denial of the motion. The accused asked for the inhibition of the judge contending that because of the actuations of the judge, he has already become biased, hence, he stands no chance at all in court presided by the judge. Is the motion proper? Why?

ANS. - No. The orders denying the petition for bail and the motion for reconsideration do not sufficiently prove bias and prejudice to disqualify the judge under Sec. 1, Rule 37 of the Rules of Court. For such bias and prejudice, to be a ground for disqualification, must be shown to have stemmed from an extrajudicial source, and result in an opinion on the merits on some basis other than what the judge learned from his participation in the case. Opinions formed in the course of judicial proceedings, as long as they are based on the evidence presented and conduct observed by the judge, even if found later on as erroneous, do not prove personal bias or prejudice on the part of the judge. Extrinsic evidence is required to establish bias, bad faith, malice or corrupt purpose, in addition to palpable error which may be inferred from the decision or order itself. (Victorio Aleria, Jr. vs. Hon. Alejandro Velez, Jr., G.R. No. 127400, November 16, 1998, 100 SCAD 720, citing Webb vs. People, 85


128

SCAD 66, 276 SCRA 243). Q

- A judge ordered the release of the accused knowing that the cash deposit for his bail was not yet sufficient. Is he liable for his act? Why?

ANS. - Yes, because the error was gross and patent violation of law and the rules on bail. While it is true that a judge may not be held administratively accountable for every erroneous order or decision (Guillermo vs. Reyes, 58 SCAD 130, 240 SCRA 154), yet if the error is gross or patent, malicious, deliberate or in evident bad faith, he may still be liable. The reason for this is that he is expected to have a more than cursory acquaintance with the rules on bail. Failure to follow basic legal commands embodied in the law and the rules constitutes gross ignorance of the law (Del Rosario, Jr. vs. Bartolome, 81 SCAD 281, 270 SCRA 645; Aurillo vs. Francisco, 54 SCAD 352, 235 SCRA 283) from which no one may be excused, not even a judge. (Evelyn De Austria vs. Judge Orlando D. Beltran, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1406, September 1, 1999). Q

- Maya judge be held administratively accountable for every erroneous order or decision he rendered? Why?

ANS. - No. As a rule, a judge may not be held administratively accountable for every erroneous order or decision he renders. To unjustifiably hold otherwise, assuming that he has erred, would be short of harassment and would make his position doubly unbearable, for no one called upon to try the facts or interpret the law in the process of administering justice can be infallible in his judgment. The error must be gross or patent, malicious, deliberate or in evident bad faith. It is only in this latter instance when the judge acts fraudulently or with gross ignorance, that administrative sanctions are called for as an imperative duty of this Court. (Evelyn de Austria vs. Judge Orlando D. Beltran, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1406, September 1, 1999; Panganiban vs. Judge Pablo B. Francisco, et al., A.M. No. RTJ-98-1425, November 16, 1999). Q - Give examples of defenses of a judge charged with ignorance of the law. ANS. - Good faith and absence of malice, corrupt motives or improper considerations are sufficient defenses in which a judge charged with ignorance of the law can find refuge. (Evelyn de Austria vS. Judge Orlando D. Beltran, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1406, September 1, 1999, citing Guillermo vs. Reyes, 58 SCAD 130, 240 SCRA 154). Q

- Are the acts of a judge in his judicial capacity subject of disciplinary action? Is the rule absolute? Explain.

ANS. -No. As a matter of public policy, in the absence of fraud, dishonesty or corruption, the acts of a judge in his judicial capacity are generally not subject to disciplinary action, even though such acts are erroneous.


129

(Morada vs. Judge Tayao, 48 SCAD 131, 229 SCRA 723, citing Louis Vuitton S.A. vs. Judge Villanueva, 216 SCRA 121; Mendoza vS. Villaluz, 106 SCRA 664). As has been stated in the recent case of Santos vs. Judge Jose Orlino, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1418, September 25, 1998, 98 SCAD 752: "The fundamental propositions governing responsibility for judicial error were more recently summarized in 'In Re: Joaquin T. Borromeo,' 59 SCAD 1 [1995J, 241 SCRA (1995). There the Court stressed inter alia that given the nature of the judicial function and the power vested in the SC and the lower courts established by law, administrative or criminal complaints are neither alternative nor cumulative to judicial remedies where such are available, and must wait on the result thereof Existing doctrine is that judges are not liable for what they do in the exercise of their judicial functions when acting within their legal powers and jurisdiction. (Alzua, et al. vs. Johnson, 21 Phil. 308, 326; Sec. 9, Act No. 190). Certain it is that a judge may not be held administratively accountable for every erroneous order or decision he renders. (Rodrigo vs. Quijano, 79 SCRA 10). To hold, otherwise, would be to render judicial office untenable, for no one called upon to try the facts or interpret the law in the process of administering justice can be infallible in his judgment. (See Lopez vs. Corpuz, 78 SCRA 374; Pilipinas Bank vs. Tirona-Liwag, 190 SCRA 834). The error must be gross or patent, deliberate and malicious or incurred with evident bad faith. (Quizon vs. Baltazar, Jr., 65 SCRA 293)." If an alleged error of a judge cannot amount to gross misconduct and bereft of any persuasive showing of deliberate or malicious intent to cause prejudice to any party, the administrative complaint against him insofar as the charge for gross misconduct is concerned, must be dismissed for want of factual basis. (Jewel F. Canson vs. Hon. Francis F. Garchitorena, et al., SB-99-9-J, July 28, 1999). Q

- An applicant for a position was told by the judge that in exchange for his signature on her employment, she would become his girlfriend. Thereafter, he went on to kiss her against her will. After learning that her application had been approved, he called her to his chamber and said that she was already his girlfriend. He went on to embrace her, kiss her, and touch her right breast. Can the judge be punished? Why?

ANS. - Yes, because not only did he fail to live up to high moral standards of the judiciary, he even transgressed to ordinary norms of decency expected of every person. The conduct of a judge, whether official or private, must be beyond reproach and above suspicion. A member of the Bench must not only be a good judge; he or she must also be a good person. (Dawa vs. De Asa, 96 SCAD 373, 292 SCRA 703). This is necessary so as not to erode the faith and confidence of the public in the judiciary.


130

(Naval vs. Panday, 84 SCAD 691, 275 SCRA 654). In the final analysis, such faith and confidence is anchored on the highest standard of integrity and moral uprightness that judges are expected to possess. As ruled in Junio vs. Rivera, Jr., 44 SCAD 308, 225 SCRA 688: "All judges on all levels of the judicial hierarchy, from this Court down to the Municipal or Metropolitan Trial Courts, are bound to observe the above exacting standards. There is however, a special reason for requiring compliance with those standards from those who are front liners of the judicial department. As such, a judge is the most visible living representation of the country's legal and judicial system. He is the judicial officer who on a day-to-day basis deals with the disputes arising among simple, rural people who comprise the great bulk of our population. He is the judicial officer who comes into closest and most frequent contact with our people. The judiciary as a whole and its ability to dispense justice are inevitably measured in terms of the public and private acts of judges in the grass roots level. It is essential, therefore, if the judiciary is to engage and retain the respect and confidence of our nation, that this Court insist that municipal judges and all other judges live up to the high standards demanded by our case law and the Code of Judicial Conduct, and by our policy." The judge's lustful conduct was aggravated by the fact that he was the superior of the complainant. Instead of acting in loco parentis toward his subordinate employee, he took advantage of his position and preyed on her. (Ana May M. Simbajon vs. Judge Rogelio M. Esteban, A.M. No. MTJ-98-1162, August 11,1999, citing TalensDabon vs. Arceo, 72 SCAD 527, 259 SCRA 354). Q ANS. -

- Will the retirement of a judge preclude the finding of any administrative liability on his part? Why? No. The retirement of a judge or any judicial officer from the service does not preclude the finding of any administrative liability to which he shall still be answerable. In Gallo vs. Cordero, 61 SCAD 956, 245 SCRA 219, it was said that since the court had this jurisdiction at the time of the filing of the administrative complaint it was not lost by the mere fact that the respondent public official had ceased in office during the pendency of his case. The Court retains its jurisdiction either to pronounce the respondent official innocent of the charges or declare him guilty thereof. A contrary rule would be fraught with injustice and pregnant with dreadful and dangerous implications. If innocent, respondent official merits vindication of his name and integrity as he leaves the government which he has served well and faithfully; if guilty, he deserves to receive the corresponding censure and a penalty proper and imposable under the situation. (Villa Macasasa, et at. vs. Judge Fausto H. Imbing, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1470, August 16, 1999).


131

- A judge should act beyond reproach and suspicion. Does this mandate include his personal behavior? Why?

ANS. -

Yes. A judge should conduct himself beyond suspicion and reproach, and be free from appearance of impropriety in his personal behavior, not only in his official duties, but also in his everyday life. No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness than a seat in the judiciary. A judge must be the epitome of integrity and justice. (Assn. of Court Employee vs. Tupas, July 12, 1989).

Q

- State how a judge should conduct himself in the performance of his duties and in his dealings with others.

ANS.

-The court exists to promote justice (Canon 2, Canons of Judicial Ethics); accordingly, the judge's official conduct should be free from appearance of impropriety, and his personal behavior, not only upon the bench and in the performance of official duties, but also in his everyday life, should be beyond reproach. (Canon 3, id.). He is the visible representation of the law and, more importantly, of justice. (Office of the Court Administrator vs. Gines, 43 SCAD 76, 224 SCRA 262 [1993]; Inciong vs. De Guia, 154 SCRA 93 [1987]; Dela Paz vs. Inutan, 64 SCRA 540 [1975]). He should administer his office with a due regard to the integrity of the system of the law itself, remembering that he is not a depositary power, but a judge under the sanction of law. (Canon 18; Guillen, et al. vs. Judge Nicolas, A.M. MTJ-98-1166, 101 SCAD 397, December 4, 1998, citing Caamic vs. Galapon, 56 SCAD 14, 237 SCRA 390).

Q

-Describe the duty of a judge whenever an accused pleads guilty to a capital offense.

ANS. -Trial courts must exercise meticulous care in accepting a plea of guilty in a capital offense. Judges are duty-bound to be extra solicitous in seeing to it that when an accused pleads guilty, he understands fully the meaning of his plea and the import of his inevitable conviction. (People vs. Gonzaga, 127 SCRA 158). Courts must proceed with more care where the possible punishment is in its severest form, like death, for the reason that the execution of such a sentence is irrevocable. Experience has shown that innocent persons have at times pleaded guilty. (People vs. Albert, 66 SCAD 456, 251 SCRA 136). Only a clear, definite and unconditional plea of guilty by the accused must be accepted by trial courts. (ibid.). There is no such rule which provides that simply because the accused pleaded guilty to the charge that his conviction should automatically follow. (People vs. Mendoza, 42 SCAD 118,231 SCRA 264). A judge should always be an embodiment of competence. (Rule 1.01, Canon1, Code of Judicial Conduct). As an administrator of justice, it is imperative that the trial judge carry out his duties ably and competently so as not to erode public confidence in the judiciary. (People vs. Sevillano, et al., G.R. No. 129058, 105 SCAD 296,


132

March 29, 1999). Q

- In a criminal case for falsification and use of falsified document, the judge was charged with impartiality for having failed to inhibit himself despite the fact that he was related to the accused within the fourth degree of affinity, thewife of the accused being the first cousin of the judge. Was the act of the judge proper? Explain.

ANS.-No. Under Rule 137, Sec. 1 of the Rules of Court, ajudge who is related within the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity to a party in a case is disqualified from sitting in the case without the consent of all parties, expressed in writing, signed by them, and entered upon the record. This prohibition is not limited to cases in which he acts by resolving motions and issuing orders as respondent judge has done in the subject criminal case. The purpose of the prohibition is to prevent not only a conflict of interest but also the appearance of impropriety on the part of the judge. A judge should take no part in a proceeding where his impartiality might reasonably be questioned (Canon 3, Rule 3.12) and he should administer justice impartially and without delay. (Canon 1, Rule 1.02; Lazo vs. Judge Antonio Tiong, A.M. No. MTJ-98-1173, December 15, 1998, 101 SCAD 692). Q

- A judge was caught in the act of demanding and receiving money from a party-litigant. Is the act sufficient to remove him? Why?

ANS. -Yes. A judge should always be a symbol of rectitude and propriety, comporting himself in a manner that will raise no doubt whatsoever about his honesty. (Yuson vs. Noel, 45 SCAD 116,227 SCRA 1). The conduct of respondent judge shows that he can be influenced by monetary considerations. His act of demanding and receiving money from a party-litigant constitutes serious misconduct in office. It is this kind of gross and flaunting misconduct, no matter how nominal the amount involved on the part of those who are charged with the responsibility of administering the law and rendering justice quickly, which erodes the respect for law and the court. (Office of the Court Administrator vs. Gaticales, 208 SCRA 508). The respondent judge tainted the image of the Judiciary to which he owes fealty and the obligation to keep it at all times unsullied and worthy of the people's trust. (Garcia vs. Dela Penia, 48 SCAD 171, 229 conduct. He violated the established norms of judicial behavior and the best interest of the judiciary demands that he be dismissed from service. Q - What are some of the grounds for the dismissal of a judge? State the reasons. ANS. - Some acts that may warrant dismissal of a judge: (a)

acceptance of bribe;


133

(b)

holding office and conducting hearings at his residence;

(c)

use of physical violence against the personnel of his court who failed to deliver the entire volume of nipa ordered by him for the roof of his house; (lmpao vs. Makilala, A.M. No. MTJ-88-184, October 13, 1989, 178 SCRA 541).

(d) receiving money from litigants and borrowing from them without paying back; (e)

ordering a litigant to install an air-conditioning unit for the car of his wife. (Ompoc vs. Torres, Sept. 17, 1989).

Reasons: Members of the judiciary should display not only the highest integrity but at all times conduct themselves in such a manner as to be beyond reproach and suspicion. The respect and confidence of the public may justifiably be eroded if the conduct of an erring judge is condemned. (Paredes vs. Buduha, Dec. 7, 1989). Q

- An RTC judge was fined and required to pay an amount equivalent to three (3) months salary. He dismissed six informations for violation ofBP BIg. 22 because the checks were undated,hence, were mere promissory notes; the issuance did not constitute criminal acts; that their collection can be properly made in a civil case. Was the act of the judge proper? Why?

ANS. -No, in fact, the judge was fined for ignorance of the law. His opinion that the checks were invalid because they were not dated also revealed his unfamiliarity with Sec. 6 of the Negotiable Instrument Law. (Torres vs. Pedrosa, Aug. 22, 1989). It is the duty of a judge to keep abreast with the law and jurisprudence. Q

-Maya judge be subjected to disciplinary action in case of mis appreciation of evidence? Is the rule absolute? Explain.

ANS. -No. In Miranda vs. Manalastas, Dec. 21, 1989, the Supreme Court said that mere error in the appreciation of evidence, unless so gross and patent as to produce an inference of ignorance or bad faith or that the judge unknowingly rendered an unjust judgment, are irrelevant in administrative proceedings against the judge. A judge is not infallible in his judgment. All that is expected of him is that he follows the rules prescribed to ensure fair and impartial hearing. A judge may not be administratively liable for erroneous ruling. Q

- If a party filed an administrative case against a judge, will this incident constitute a ground to disqualify the judge from


134

trying the case? Why? ANS. - No. In Aparicio vs. Andal, July 25, 1989, the Supreme Court said that the mere filing of an administrative case does not constitute a ground to disqualify a judge from hearing the case, otherwise, many cases would have to be kept pending or there might not be enough judges to handle all the cases pending in all courts. There must first be a showing of arbitrariness or prejudice before the judge can be considered partial or bias. Hence, if a judge denies the motion to inhibit him, his continued cognizance of the case pending before him is proper, if no TRO or injunction is issued against him. Q

- State the effect if a judge shows signs of partiality and prejudgment in a case. Why?

ANS. - The judge can be inhibited from further trying the case. Partiality and pre-judgment can be just and valid reasons for the judge to voluntarily inhibit himself. But mere suspicion that he is partial is not enough. There must be evidence to prove the charge. (Fecundo vs. Benjamin, Dec. 18, 1989). A litigant is entitled to the fairness and cold neutrality of an impartial judge. Q

- Madam C sought the assistance of a judge in expediting the intestate estate proceedings of her deceased common-law husband. He, however, took advantage of her helplessness and state of material depredation and took her as his mistress. Was the act of the judge proper? Why?

ANS.

-No, because a judge should personify judicial integrity and exemplify honesty in public service. The personal behavior of a judge, both in the performance of official duties and in private life should be above suspicion. The exploitation of women becomes reprehensible when the offender commits injustice by the brute force of his position of power and authority. (Calanog case).

Q - Maya judge be held to answer for an erroneous decision which he rendered? Why? ANS. -A judge cannot be held to account or answer, criminally, civilly, or administratively for an erroneous decision rendered by him in good faith. While the Supreme Court does not require perfection and infallibility, it reasonably expects a faithful and intelligent discharge of duty by those who are selected to fill the positions of administrators of justice. Q

- A judge has already retired when an administrative case was filed against him. Is he still within the court's jurisdiction? Why?


135

ANS. - Yes. Even if a judge has already retired before the administrative case was filed against him, the Supre me Court held that the court has not lost its jurisdiction over him even if his retirement has been approved, for his retirement benefits have not yet been paid. The reason for this is that the people would have no remedy left anymore. By reason of public policy, the Court must assert and maintain jurisdiction for acts performed in office which are inimical to the service and prejudicial to the interest of the litigants and the general public. Q -Maya judge who exercises his judicial function be made liable for damages? Why? ANS. -A judge who exercises his judicial functions cannot be liable for damages. The test of liability is not jurisdiction, but the nature of the question which is being determined when the error complained of is committed by the court. (Aparicio vs. Andal, G.R. No. 8658793, July 25, 1989). He is not liable even though there is in reality absolute failure of jurisdiction over the subject matter. For, judges are excluded from liability under Art. 32, New Civil Code, provided, their acts do not constitute a violation of the Revised Penal Code. Q

- An RTC Judge was removed on charges of immorality and conduct unbecoming of a public official. It was alleged that he maintained a mistress, having been the father of two children with her, inspite his being a married man. Is the act of the judge proper? Why?

ANS. -No, because the judge has behaved in a manner not becoming of his robes and as a model of rectitude, betrayed the people's high expectations, and diminished the esteem in which they hold the judiciary in general. The circumstances show a lack of circumspection and delicadeza on the part of the respondent judge by failing to avoid situations that make him suspect to committing immorality and worse, having that suspicion confirmed especially so that under Canon 1, Rule 1.01, a judge should be the embodiment of competence, integrity, probity and independence. The Code of Judicial Ethics mandates that the conduct of a judge must be free from impropriety not only with respect to the performance of his judicial duties, but also to his behavior outside his sala and as a private individual. There is no dichotomy of morality: a public official is also judged by his private morals. The Code dictates that a judge, in order to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, must behave with propriety at all times. A judge's official life can not simply be detached or separated from his personal existence. Thus: "Being the subject of constant public scrutiny, a judge should freely and willingly accept restrictions on conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen."


136

Q - Explain the res ipsa loquitor doctrine in the investigation of errant judges. ANS. -In these res ipsa loquitur resolutions, there was on the face of the assailed decisions an inexplicable grave error bereft of any redeeming feature, a patent railroading of a case to bring about an unjust decision, or a manifestly deliberate intent to wreak an injustice against a hapless party. The res ipsa loquitur doctrine does not accept or dispense with the necessity of proving the facts on which the inference or evil intent is had. It merely expresses the clearly sound and reasonable conclusion that when such facts are admitted or are already shown by the record, and no credible explanation that would negative the strong inference of evil intent is forthcoming, no further hearing to establish them to support a judgment as to the culpability of a respondent is necessary. (In re: Judge Baltazar Dizon, Adm. Case No. 3086, May 31, 1989). Q

- In Clemencio Sabitsana, Jr. vs. Judge Adriano Villamore, RTJ No. 90-474, Oct. 4, 1991, a complaint was filed alleging that in his monthly certificates of service, he made it appear that he had resolved all cases submitted for decision within the 90-day period when in truth, he had 15 cases undecided from 5 years back or from March 1985. Was the act of the judge proper? Why?

ANS. -No. A member of the Bench cannot pay mere lip service to the 90-day requirement, but should, in fact, persevere in its implementation. The Certificate of Service is not merely a means to one's paycheck, but an instrument by which the Courts can fulfill the constitutional mandate of the people's right to a speedy disposition of cases. Thus, it has been ruled: "The people's faith in the administration of justice, especially those who belong to the low income group, would be greatly impaired if decisions are long in coming, more so from trial courts which unlike collegiate tribunals where there is a need for extended deliberation, could be expected to act with dispatch." (Magdamo vs. Pahimulin, Adm. Matter No. 662-MJ, 30 September 1976, 73 SCRA 110). Q - Should a judge show undue interest in a pending case before another court? Why? ANS. -No. Cardinal is the rule that a judge should avoid impropriety in all activities. The Canons mince no words in mandating that a judge shall refrain from influencing in any manner the outcome of litigation or dispute pending before another Court. (Canon 2, Rule 2.04). Interference by members of the Bench in pending suits with the end in view of influencing the course or the result of litigation does not only subvert the independence of the judiciary but also undermines the


137

people's faith in its integrity and impartiality. (Commentaries on the Code of Judicial Conduct). On this point, Impao vs. Makilala (A.M. No. MTJ-88-184, October 13, 1989, 178 SCRA 541) expounds: "It is an important judicial norm that a judge's private as well as official conduct must at all times be free from the appearance of impropriety." (Lugue vs. Kayanan, G.R. No. L 26828, August 29, 1969,29 SCRA 165; x x x). As held by this Court in the case of Dela Paz vs. Inutan, Adm. Matter No. 201 MJ, June 30, 1975, 64 SCRA 540: "The judge is the visible representation of the law and, more importantly, of justice. From him, the people draw their will and awareness to obey the law. They see in him an intermediary of justice between two conflicting interests, especially in the station of municipal judges, like respondent Judge, who have that close and direct contact with the people before anybody else in the judiciary. Thus, for the judge to return that regard, he must be the first to abide by the law and weave an example for the others to follow." Q - If a judge reconsiders his decision/order, can he be charged administratively? Why? ANS. -No. It is the prerogative of a judge to correct his own decision before it becomes final and executory, so as to make it conform to the evidence presented and the applicable laws. (Baguyo vs. Leviste, 107 SCRA 35). The rule is true for as long as the judge is in good faith which is always possessed. A judge is not administratively accountable for every erroneous ruling or decision rendered, provided, he acts in good faith and without malice. (Mendoza vs. Villaluz, 106 SCRA 664). The proper remedy of the aggrieved party is not an administrative charge against the judge but an appeal or petition for review of his decision. (Martin vs. Judge Placido Vallarta, A.M. No. MTJ-90-495, Aug. 12, 1991). Q

- What is the effect if a judge allows the release of an accused who was convicted of a non-bailable offense? Why?

ANS.

- The judge is guilty of gross misconduct when he allowed accused individuals duly convicted of non-bailable offenses and drug pushers at that - to enjoy provisional liberty by way of bail. Under the facts obtaining in these cases, good faith cannot be presumed on the part of the respondent judge. The suspicious circumstances attending the cases in point are far too glaring to ignore. (Villa vs. Amonoy, A.C. RTJ-89-395, Feb. 13, 1991). - How do you describe the office of a judge? Explain.

Q

ANS. -The office of a judge exists for one solemn end – to promote justice by administering it fairly and impartially. (Gonzales vs. Austria M. Abaya,


138

176 SCRA 634). The judge is the visible representation of the law and of justice. From him, the people draw their will and awareness to obey the law. As such, he should avoid even the slightest infraction of the law. (Inciong vs. De Guia, 154 SCRA 93; Dela Paz vs. Inutan, 64 SCRA 56, 177 SCRA 435). In Santos vs. Lumang, it was said that a judge who, through gross ignorance of the laws or serious misconduct, frustrates the people's search for justice, commits a rank disservice to the cause of justice which calls for rectification and the imposition of appropriate disciplinary measures. In Summers vs. Ozaeta, 81 Phil. 754, it has been said that a judge's position demands equanimity, prudence, fortitude and courage. Q

- For failure to pay a just debt, a judge was finedP20,OOO.OO. Was the penalty proper? Why?

ANS. -Yes. Willful failure to pay a just debt is a serious offense under Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, as amended by the resolution of the Supreme Court, dated July 25, 1974. The amount involved (P4,500.00) is not big. He could easily have paid it, but it appears that he was bent on frustrating the complainant's best efforts to obtain satisfaction of her lawful claim, apparently for no other intention than to annoy and oppress her for having haled him and his wife into court. While an ejectment case is supposed to be summary in nature, respondent judge, through dilatory tactics, stretched the trial over a period of ten (10) years, and dragged the case all the way from the municipal court to the Court of Appeals. After the decision had become final, he delayed payment for two more years. He came across only after the complainant in exasperation had filed this administrative charge against him. Respondent judge's conduct toward the complainant was oppressive and unbecoming a member of the judiciary. He used his position and his legal knowledge to welsh on a just debt and to harass his creditor. His example erodes public faith in the capacity of courts to administer justice. He violated Rule 2.0l. Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial conduct which requires that "a judge should so behave at all times as to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. (De Julio vs. Judge Benjamin Vega, A.M. No. RTJ-89-406, July 18, 1991). Q

- What should the Office of the Ombudsman do if a criminal complaint against judge is filed with that office? Why?

ANS. -Where a criminal complaint against a judge or other court employees arises from their administrative duties, the Ombudsman must defer action on said complaint and refer the same to the Supreme Court for determination whether said judge or court employee had acted within the scope of their administrative duties. This is so because Article VIII, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution exclusively vests in the Supreme Court administrative supervision over all courts and court personnel,


139

from the Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeals down to the lowest municipal trial court clerk. By virtue of this power, it is only the Supreme Court that can oversee the judges and court personnel's compliance with all laws, and take the proper administrative action against them if they commit any violation thereof. No other branch of government may intrude into this power, without running afoul of the doctrine of separation of powers. (Maceda vs. Vasquez, 221 SCRA 464, April 22, 1993). Q

- Mayan action of a judge in the exercise of his judicial function be the subject of a disciplinary action? Is the rule absolute?

ANS. -No. As a general rule, the acts done by a judge in his judicial capacity are not subject to disciplinary action, even though erroneous. These acts become subject to disciplinary power only when they are attended by fraud, dishonesty, corruption or bad faith. (Abiera vs. Maceda, 52 SCAD 581, 233 SCRA 520, June 30, 1994). A judge is not administratively accountable for every erroneous ruling or decision rendered, provided, he acts in good faith and without malice. (Martin vs. Vallarta, 200 SCRA 469, Aug. 12, 1991). Good faith and absence of malice, corrupt motives and improper consideration are sufficient defenses that may be availed of by a judicial officer charged with ignorance of the law and promulgation of an unjust decision from being held accountable for errors of judgment, on the premise that no one called upon to try the fact or interpret the law in the administration of justice can be infallible. (Pilipinas Bank vs. Tirona-Liwag, 190 SCRA 834, Oct. 18, 1990). Q - State the concept and elements of knowingly rendering unjust judgment. ANS. - Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment is both a criminal and an administrative charge. As a crime, it is punished under Art. 204 of the RPC, the elements of which are: (a) the offender is a judge; (b) he renders a judgment in a case submitted to him for decision; (c) the judgment is unjust; and (d) the judge knows that his judgment is unjust. The gist of the offense therefore is that an unjust judgment be rendered maliciously or in bad faith, that is, knowing it to be unjust. An unjust judgment is one which is contrary to law or is not supported by the evidence, or both. The source of an unjust judgment may be error or ill-will. There is no liability at all when required to exercise his judgment or discretion. A judge is not liable criminally for any error which he commits, provided he acts in good faith. Bad faith is therefore the ground of liability. If in rendering judgment the judge fully knew that the same was unjust in the sense aforesaid, then he acted maliciously and must have been actuated and prevailed upon by hatred, envy, revenge, greed, or some other similar motive. Mere error


140

therefore in the interpretation or application of the law does not constitute the crime. The nature of the administrative charge of knowingly rendering an unjust judgment is the same as the criminal charge. Thus, it must be established that the judge rendered a judgment or decision not supported by law and/or evidence and that he must be actuated by hatred, envy, revenge, greed, or some other similar motive. If for every error of a judge he should be punished, then perhaps no judge, however good, competent and dedicated he may be, can ever hope to retire from the judicial service without a tarnished image. Somehow along the way he may commit mistakes, however, honest. This does not exclude members of appellate courts who are not always in agreement in their views. Anyone belonging to the minority opinion may generally be considered in error, and yet, he is not punished because each one is entitled to express himself. This privilege should extend to trial judges so long as the error is not motivated by fraud, dishonesty, corruption, or any other evil motive. (Dela Cruz vs. Concepcion, 54 SCAD 640, 235 SCRA 597, Aug. 25, 1994). Q

-If a judge is charged and the complainant has lost interest in prosecuting the case, will the case be dismissed? Why?

ANS. -No. The fact the complainant has lost interest in prosecuting the administrative case against a judge will not necessarily warrant a dismissal thereof. Once charges have been filed, the Supreme Court may not be divested of its jurisdiction to investigate and ascertain the truth of the matter alleged in the complaint. The Supreme Court has an interest in the conduct of members of the Judiciary and in improving the delivery of justice to the people, and its efforts in that direction may not be derailed by the complainant's desistance from further prosecuting the case he or she initiated. 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 Court of its supervisory power to discipline erring members of the Judiciary. Definitely, personal interests are not material or controlling. What is involved here is a matter of public interest considering that a judge is no ordinary citizen but an officer of the court whose personal behavior not only upon the bench and in the performance of judicial duties, but also in his everyday life, should be beyond reproach. (Imbing vs. Tiongson, 48 SCAD 101,229 SCRA 690, Feb. 7, 1994). Q -. X applied for the position of an RTC judge without revealing that he has two pending cases. Is the act of X proper? Why? ANS. -No. A judge is held guilty of gross misrepresentation when he failed to disclose that he was facing two serious criminal charges when he


141

accepted appointment and subsequently qualified as RTC judge. The argument that he had not yet been convicted and should be presumed innocent is beside the point, and so is the contention that the crimes of homicide and attempted homicide do not involve moral turpitude. The important consideration is that he had a duty to inform the appointing authority and the SC to determine on the basis of his record his eligibility for the position he was seeking. (Office of the Court Administrator vs. Estacion, Jr., 181 SCRA 33, Jan. 11, 1990). Q

- Why should a judge regulate his extrajudicialactivities?

ANS. -Judges are enjoined not only to regulate their extrajudicial activities in order to minimize the risk of conflict with their judicial duties but also prohibited from engaging in the private practice of law. (Balayan vs. Ocampo, 218 SCRA 13, Jan. 29, 1993). Q - May a judge issue a subpoena to a person whohas no case in his sala? Why? ANS. -No. In the absence of a case in his sala in connection with which a party could be subpoenaed, a judge has absolutely no power or authority to issue a subpoena to such party.

Q

ANS.

The judge, in using a subpoena form for criminal cases to summon a party upon the request of another who had no case before his court, invited legitimate criticism against his office as an instrument of oppression. His act constitutes ignorance of the law and oppression which should warrant disciplinary sanction. (Caamic vs. Galapon, Jr., 56 SCAD 14, 237 SCRA 390, October 7, 1994). - May a judge meet one of the parties i;n a case inside his chambers without the other party and meddle with the issues confronting the parties on the pretext of settling it? Why? -No. In the absence of their lawyers, a judge ought not to meddle in issues confronting the parties even on the pretext of settling their cases as such act would compromise the integrity of his office. Judges are cautioned to avoid in-chamber sessions without the other party and his counsel present, and to observe prudence at all times in their conduct to the end that they not only act impartially and with propriety but are also perceived to be impartial and proper. The act of a judge in meeting with complainants without the presence of counsel and warning them not to tell anyone, and demanding money under the guise of forging peace between the parties constitutes grave misconduct. (Capuno vs. Jaramillo, Jr., 53 SCAD 329, 234 SCRA 212, July 20, 1994).

Q - Maya judge solemnize marriage without marriage license? Why?


142

ANS .- No. For solemnizing marriages even without the requisite marriage license, a judge is deemed to have actually trifled with the law's concern for the institution of marriage and the legal effects flowing from civil status, which should merit administrative sanction, without prejudice to the civil and criminalliabilities he may have incurred as well. (Cosca vs. Palaypayon, Jr., 55 SCAD 759,237 SCRA 249, Sept. 30, 1994).

Q

- During the incumbency of a judge, he sent out handbills indicating his intention to run for a congressional seat. Was the act of the judge proper? Why?

ANS.

-No. A judge acted improperly when he sent out letters/handbills manifesting his intention to run as a congressional candidate while still the incumbent judge and prior to the commencement of the campaign period. He took advantage of his position to boost his candidacy, demeaned the stature of his office and must be pronounced guilty of gross misconduct. (Vistan vs. Nicolas, 201 SCRA 524, Sept. 13, 1991).

Q - Should a judge report to his office even if he has no hearings? Why? ANS. -Yes. A judge must report to his office even if he has no hearings on regular days. The law regulating court sessions does not permit any "day off' from regular office hours to enable the judge to engage exclusively in research or decision-making, no matter how important. (Mendoza vs. Mabutas, 42 SCAD 423, 225 SCRA 411, June 17, 1993). Q

- A judge used his chambers as his family's residence. Was the

ANS. -No. A judge cannot use his chambers as his family's residence even with the Governor's permission. Government property is for official use only and not for the personal use of the official. (Presado vs. Geova, 42 SCAD 507, 223 SCRA 489, June 21, 1993). Court rooms cannot be used as judge's living quarters. (Felongco vs. Dictado, 42 SCAD 700, 223 SCRA 696). Q

- If the order of a judge was questioned before a higher court, should he appear personally to seek a reversal of the order that is unfavorable to his action? Why?

ANS. -No. The judge whose order is under attack is merely a nominal party. Wherefore, a judge, in his official capacity should not be made to appear as a party seeking reversal of a decision that is unfavorable to the action taken by him. A decent regard for the judicial hierarchy bars a judge from suing against the adverse opinion


143

of a higher court. (Santiago vs. CA, 184 SCRA 690, April 27, 1990). Q

- The judge failed to render judgment in a case within the reglementary period. His reason is the failure of the stenographer to transcribe the notes. Was the contention proper?

ANS. -

No. A delay in the transcription of stenographic notes cannot be considered a valid reason for the delay in rendering judgment in a case. With or without the transcribed stenographic notes, the 90-day period for deciding cases should be adhered to. (Balagot vs. Opinion, 195 SCRA 429, March 20, 1991). In one case, the Supreme Court said that the failure to decide a case particularly one involving a simple violation of the Bouncing Checks Law for over five years is an inordinate amount of procrastination tantamount to gross negligence. It is not enough for judges to pen their decisions; it is also important to promulgate and make them known to all concerned at the earliest possible time and within the mandated period. (Soyangco vs. Maglalang, 196 SCRA 5, April 19, 1991).

Q

- Describe the power of courts to cite persons in contempt.

ANS. -The power to declare a person in contempt of court and in dealing with him accordingly is an inherent power lodged in courts of justice to be used as a means to protect and preserve the dignity of the court, the solemnity of the proceedings therein and the administration of justice from callous misbehavior, offensive personalities, and contumacious refusal to comply with court orders. And as in all other power of the court, the contempt power, however, plenary it may seem, must be exercised judiciously and sparingly. Clearly then, judges are enjoined to exercise utmost restraint in the use of their contempt powers. They are expected to avail of the contempt power only as a last resort when all other alternative courses of action are exhausted in the pursuit of maintaining respect to the court and its processes. Thus, when a less harsh remedy presents itself to the judge, he should at all times hesitate to use his contempt power, and instead opt for the less harsh remedy. (De Guia vs. Guerrero, Jr., 54 SCAD 1,234 SCRA 625, August 1, 1994). Q

- Is "immorality" as a ground for imposition of ad. ministrative sanctions limited to illicit sexual intercourse alone?

ANS.

-No. Immorality has not been confined to sexual matters, but inCludes conduct inconsistent with rectitude, or indicative of corruption, indecency, depravity, and dissoluteness; or is willful,


144

flagrant or shameless conduct showing moral indifference to opinions of respectable members of the community, and as inconsiderate attitude toward good order and public welfare. (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth ed., 1990, 751; cited in Alfonso vs. Judge Juanson, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-92-904, Dec. 7, 1993,46 SCAD 603). For, it has been held that there is no dichotomy of morality; a public official is also judged by his private morals. The Code of Judicial Ethics dictates that a judge, in order to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, must behave with propriety at all times. A judge's official life can not simply be detached or separated from his personal existence. (Junio vs. Rivera Jr., 44 SCAD 308, 225 SCRA 688, Aug. 30, 1993). In Sicat vs. Alcantara, et al., 161 SCRA 284, May 11, 1988, wherein the respondent judge was chargedwith immorality for having an illicit affair with a married female court employee, the Supreme Court declared: "The personal and official actuations of every member of the Bench must be beyond reproach and above suspicion. The faith and confidence of the public in the administration of justice cannot be maintained if a judge who dispenses it is not equipped with the cardinal judicial virtue of moral integrity, and if he obtusely continues to commit an affront to public decency. In fact, moral integrity is more than a virtue; it is a necessity in the Judiciary." In another case where a municipal judge was charged with having illicit relations with a concubine under scandalous circumstances, it was stated that if good moral character is required of a lawyer, with more reason should that requirement be exacted of a member of the Judiciary who at all times is expected to observe irreproachable behavior and is bound not to outrage public decency. Thus, even as an ordinary lawyer, a judge has to conform to the strict standards of conduct demanded of members of the profession. Definitely, fathering a child with a woman other than his lawful wife fails to meet these standards. A judge suffers from moral obtuseness or has a weird notion of morality in public office when he labors under the delusion that he can be a judge and at the same time have a mistress in defiance of the mores and sense of morality of the community. (lmbing vs. Tiongson, 48 SCAD 101,229 SCRA 690, Feb. 7, 1994). Q

- Explain the basic reason for disqualification of judges.

ANS. -

The underlying reason for the Rule on Disqualification of Judges under Sec. 1, Rule 137, Rules of Court, is to ensure that a judge, sitting in a case, will at all times be free from inclinations or prejudices and be well capable to render a just and independent judgment. A litigant, we often hear, is entitled to nothing less than the cold neutrality of a judge. Due process requires it. Indeed, he not only must be able to so act without bias but should even appear to


145

be so. Impartiality is a state of mind; hence, the need for some kind of manifestation of its reality. Verily, a judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion, inhibit himself voluntarily from sitting in a case, but it should be based on good, sound or ethical grounds, or for just and valid reasons. It is not enough that a party throws 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. (Parayno vs. Meneses, 50 SCAD 170,231 SCRA 807, April 26, 1994). Q

- Why should a judge who is related to a party in a case pending in his sala disqualify himself?

ANS. -

The rule of compulsory disqualification of a judge to hear a case where the judge is related to either party within the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity 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. The law conclusively presumes that a judge cannot objectively or impartially sit in such 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. The purpose is to preserve the people's faith and confidence in the courts of justice. (Garcia vs. Dela Peiia, 48 SCAD 171, 229 SCRA 766).

Q

- The respondent was charged with immorality and violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics. The acts were allegedly committed when he was still a practitioner. The complainant alleged that respondent had carnal knowledge with his wife in at least five (5) occasions without specifying the dates. In fact, his wife allegedly admitted having sexual intercourse with him. Now that he is a judge, can he be removed for those acts he committed when he was still a practitioner? Explain.

ANS.

-No, for the acts were done before he became a judge. Proof of prior immoral conduct cannot be the basis for his administrative discipline. The respondent may have undergone moral reformation after his appointment, or his appointment could have completely transformed him upon the solemn realization that apublic office is a public trust and public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives. (Section 1, Article XI,1987 Constitution). It would be unreasonable and unfair to presume that since he had wandered from the path of moral righteousness, he could never retrace his steps and walk proud and tall again in the path. No man is beyond reformation and redemption. A lawyer who aspires for the exalted position of a magistrate knows, or ought to know, that he must pay a


146

high price for the honor - his private and official conduct must at all times be free from the appearance of impropriety. (Jagueta vs. Boncaros, 60 SCRA 27 [1974]). And the lawyer who is thereafter appointed thereto must perforce be presumed to have solemnly bound himself to a way of conduct free from any hint or suspicion of impropriety. The imputation of illicit sexual acts upon the incumbent judge must be proven by substantial evidence, which is the quantum of proof required in administrative cases. (Alfonso vs. Judge Modesto Luanson, Dec. 7, 1993,46 SCAD 603). Q - Judge Enrique A. Cube was, on May 31, 1993 appointed Presiding Judge of Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 22, Manila. Subsequently, information was received by the Judicial and Bar Council that he was previously dismissed in 1972 as Assistant Fiscal of Pasay City for gross misconduct and dereliction of duty for failure to prosecute a criminal case which led to its dismissal with prejudice. Cube applied for appointment to the Judiciary sometime in 1992. In the Personal Data Sheet he was required to accomplish, one of the questions asked was: "Have you ever been retired, dismissed, forced to resign from any employment for reason other than lack of funds or dropped from the rolls? His answer was "Optional under RA 1145." RA 1145 is entitled "An Act Creating the Philippine Coconut Administration..." and does not deal with retirement, optional or otherwise. Cube's Services Record made no mention of his having been employed in this agency. Cube explained that his removal in 1972 was WITHOUT PREJUDICE. He was in fact appointed to a municipal government position. Can he be dismissed? Why? ANS. – Yes. The circumstance that his dismissal was without prejudice is not material, and neither is his subsequent appointment to a municipal position. What is important is his non-disclosure or concealment of the fact that in 1972, he was REMOVED as Asst. Fiscal. That fact was deliberately suppressed. He did not retire, as he declared in his data sheet. He was removed for gross misconduct and dereliction of duty in the prosecution of a smuggling case. "It behooves every prospective appointee to the judiciary to apprise the appointing authority of every matter bearing on his fitness for judicial office, including such circumstances as may reflect on his integrity and probity. These are qualifications specifically required by


147

the Constitution." The fact alone of his concealment of his previous dismissal from the public service, which the Judicial and Bar Council would have taken into consideration in acting on his application, is clear proof of his lack of the said qualifications and renders him unworthy to sit as judge. Judge Cube committed an act of dishonesty that rendered him unfit to be appointed to, and to remain now in, the Judiciary, he has tarnished with his falsehood. He was DISMISSED with prejudice to his reappointment to any position in the government, including government-owned or -controlled corporations, and with forfeiture of all retirement benefits. (Re: Inquiry on the Appointment of Judge Enrique A. Cube, AM No. 93-7-4280 METC, Oct. 13, 1993, 45 SCAD 301). Q

- A 14-year old girl, Cristina Junio filed with the Provincial Prosecutor's office a complaint for acts of lasciviousness against Judge Rivera of Alaminos, Pangasinan. The investigating officer recommended that the judge be absolved of the administrative case. Is the recommendation proper? Why?

ANS. - No. In dismissing the Judge, the Supreme Court said that exacting standards of morality and decency from those who serve in the judiciary have been set. A member of the judiciary is judged not only by his official acts but also by his private morals, to the extent that such private morals are externalized in his behavior. The judge failed to measure up to those demanding standards. He was found guilty of gross misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the interest of the judiciary. (Junio vs. Judge Pedro Rivera, Aug. 30, 1993). Q - Provincial Prosecutor G. Olarte filed an information for murder against F. Banite withoutrecommendation for bail in the sala of Judge Tarriela, presiding judge Branch 44 RTC of Mamburao, Occidental Mindoro. On January 3, 1992, the accused was arraigned where he pleaded not guilty. However, on January 18, 1992, prosecutor Olarte amended the informa tion against Banite without leave of court to homicide and recommended a bail of P20,OOO.OO. Judge Tarriela ordered Olarte to explain his action. Thereafter, on February 4, 1992, Mrs. Zubiri, supervising steno-reporter of the provincial prosecutor on orders of Olarte went to Judge Aguilar herein respondent, who was then the executive and presiding judge of Branch 45 RTC of San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, to request for the release of the accused Banite on bail. On the same day, Judge Aguilar signed and issued the order approving the property bond and the release of the accused on bail. Complainants herein charged respondent judge with grave abuse of discretion, since the case was being tried in the sala of


148

Judge Tarriela. Is the judge guilty of abuse of authority? Why? ANS. -Yes. Respondent Judge is guilty of grave abuse of authority. The case was filed in Branch 44, hence, respondent judge who presides in Branch 45, had no power to act on the request to release on bail accused Banite. It was irregular for respondent judge to entertain the request considering that it did not appear that a formal motion had been filed by the accused to that effect. Respondent judge should endeavor at all times to maintain the confidence and high respect accorded to those who wield the gavel of justice. Circular No. 13 enjoins judges to conduct themselves strictly in accordance with the mandate of existing laws and the code of judicial conduct that they be exemplars in their communities and the living personification of justice and the rule of law. Respondent judge's action shows such lack of familiarity with the laws, rules and regulations as to undermine the public confidence in the integrity of our courts. Moreover, the record does not show that at that time respondent judge ordered Banite's release, judge Tarriela was absent or unavailable and could not have acted on the request. (Cuaresma vs. Judge Aguilar, Sept. 3, 1993, 44 SCAD 451). Q

- Hermina Alvos, claiming to be the niece of Paz Ramirez, surviving spouse of the late Ambrocio Pingco, filed with the RTC a petition for settlement of the estate of Ambrocio. Respondent Judge appointed Alvos as special administrator. Counsel for Alvos filed an urgent motion stating that parcels of land belonging to Ambrocio and his wife were sold to complainant Uy and requested the Court to direct the Register of Deeds to freeze any transaction without the signature of Alvos involving said properties and later requested the titles issued to Uy be cancelled. Respondent Judge ordered the cancellation and reinstatement of the names of the spouses Ambrocio and Paz. Uy filed with the CA a petition to annul the order with a prayer for a temporary restraining order to prevent the judge from further proceeding against him. Despite the decision of CA and the pendency of the petition for review to SC, respondent judge continued issuing various orders resulting in the issuance of new titles to the properties in the name of persons stated in the project of partition to the damage and prejudice of complainant. Furthermore, even after the SC had affirmed the ruling of the CA that respondent judge has no jurisdiction to entertssain further proceedings concerning


149

the ownership of the properties, respondent judge still in an attempt to defeat the proscription imposed by the higher judicial authority, issued orders approving the sale of the properties to the further prejudice of' the complainants, hence, this complaint against Judge Capulong. Is the judge guilty? Why? ANS.

- Yes. The actuation of respondent judge clearly stressed her blatant dis obedience to the lawful orders of superior courts and belie any claims that she rendered the erroneous orders in good faith as would excuse her from administrative liability. Time and time again the Supreme Court emphasized that the judge is the visible representation of law and justice from whom the people draw their will and awareness to obey the law. For the judge to return that regard, the latter must be the first to abide by the law and weave an example for the others to follow. The judge should be studiously careful to avoid even the slightest infraction to the law. To fulfill this mission, the judge should keep abreast of the law, the rulings and doctrines of the Supreme Court. If the judge is already aware of them, the latter should not deliberately refrain from applying them; otherwise, such omission can never be excused. (Uy vs. Capulong, AM No. RTJ -91-766, April 7, 1993)

Q

- The accused was the brother-in-law of the judge being the husband of her sister. She did not inhibit herself. A judgment acquitting the accused was rendered. Is the actuation of the judge correct or proper? Why?

ANS.

- No, the judge violated and deliberately disregarded Rule 3.12(d), Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial conduct considering that the accused is her brother-in-law and did not obtain the consent of the parties. She even interceded to obtain settlement, hence, bias was then present on her part, thereby necessarily blinding her impartiality and irreparably affecting the cold neutrality she is supposed to possess. She should have voluntarily disqualified herself. She may not be liable for rendering unjust judgment, but may only be guilty of gross ignorance of the law. (Ubarra vs. Judge Mapalad, March 22, 1993).

Q - Alisangco bought a stolen carabao. A complaint was filed for the violation of No. 1612 (which the respondent Judge erroneously claim to be the Anti-Cattle Rustling Law of 1979 when in reality, it is the Anti-Fencing Law of 1979)against complainant Alisangco as one of the ac-


150

cused. Consequently, Judge Tabiliran immediately issued a warrant for Alisangco's arrest without first determining his participation in the offense charged and set the bond at P20,OOO.OO. Alisangco posted cash bond after which he was served with a subpoena directing him to appear for arraignment and preliminary investigation. On such date, Alisangco no longer appeared because he had earlier filed a waiver of his right to a preliminary investigation. In view of his non-appearance, Judge Tabiliran issued an order to arrest Alisangco and requiring the latter to show cause why his bond should not be confiscated. Before the arrest could be effected, the latter's counsel intervened by filing a motion to lift the order of arrest. The respondent Judge, however, had not acted on the said motion. Hence, this complaint for grave abuse of authority, ignorance of the law and conduct unbecoming of a presiding judge. Decide. ANS.

-Considering that the MTC only had preliminary jurisdiction over the case, the respondent judge did not have any authority to set the case for arraignment. All it could do was to calendar the same for preliminary investigation. There is no law or rule requiring an arraignment during the preliminary investigation. The arraignment must be conducted by the court having jurisdiction to try the case on its merits. Thus, in this case, the RTC has exclusive original jurisdiction by reason of the prescribed penalty. Hence, respondent Judge in this case did not know the proper procedure on the matter or simply chose to ignore the same. It was duly proven that the waiver of preliminary investigation was filed by the complainant. Respondent judge exhibited ignorance of procedural law or plainly abused his authority when he issued a warrant for the arrest of the complainant and ordered the latter to show cause why his bond should not be confiscated. Even if the waiver was not seen by him because it was not attached to the expediente of the case, the most that the court could have done from the complainant's failure to appear was to consider him as having waived his right to a preliminary investigation or declare such preliminary investigation closed and terminated as to him. It is settled that even if an accused had expressed his desire to be given an opportunity to be present at the preliminary investigation, but later changed his mind and renounced his right, he cannot be compelled to be present in the said investigation, (Alisangco vs. Judge Tabiliran, June 30, 1993, 42 SCAD 797).

Q

- State Prosecutor Zuno filed an administrative complaint against Judge Dizon for gross ignorance of the law because he acquitted the defendants in four cases of illegal possession of firearms. Judge Dizon anchored his


151

decision on the case of People vs. Asuncion, 161 SCRA 490, which ruled that the prosecution must show that other than mere possession of an unlicensed firearm, the perpetrator had the intent to use the same. However, said ruling finds no application in the said cases. The rule steadfastly laid down in cases of illegal possession of firearms is that mere possession is sufficient to warrant conviction. The offense is covered by special law and is malum prohibitum; hence, intent to use is not an ingredient of the crime and need not therefore be alleged in the information. The commission of the act being prohibited by reason of public policy, it suffices that the prohibited article be found in the possession of the accused, it not being necessary to allege or prove intent to use. At the investigation, it was found that Judge Dizon's erroneous adherence to the ruling in People VB. Asuncion showed his ignorance of the history and development of the firearm law; and that he failed to ascertain first if the facts of the cases he relied upon are similar to the four criminal cases filed by State Prosecutor Zuno. Is Judge Dizon guilty of gross incompetence, gross ignorance of the law and of knowingly rendering incorrect judgment? Why? ANS.

-Yes. In dismissing him, the Supreme Court said that Judge Dizon is once more before the Supreme Court to answer charges, which are practically a repetition of an earlier case against him. As before, he stubbornly insists that malice or criminal intent should be proved even in crimes punished by special laws or laws which are mala prohibita. The Supreme Court found him guilty of having acted with gross incompetence and gross ignorance of the law, as to be almost deliberate and tantamount to knowingly rendering incorrect and unjust judgment. (Article 204, RPC). A judge should be the embodiment of competence, integrity and independence. He should be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence. In every case, he should endeavor diligently to ascertain the facts and the applicable law answered by partisan interests, public opinion or fear of criticism. When it has been clearly demonstrated, as in this case, not only once but four times, that the judge is either grossly incompetent or grossly ignorant of the penal laws especially those involving crimes committed by transients, like smuggling of foreign currency and firearms, through the international airport in Pasay City, where his court sits, he becomes unfit to discharge his judicial office. More than mere ignorance of applicable laws and jurisprudence, his intransigence and persistence in error will make people lose their faith in him as an administrator of justice. Having lost his right to be addressed by the respectful appellation of "Honorable Judge" he has likewise lost his right to continue in the


152

judicial service. (Senior State Prosecutor Zuno vs. Judge Dizon, June 23, 1993, 42 SCAD 601). Q

- The judge in an ejectment suit rendered a judgment, the dispositive portion of which reads: "Wherefore, in view of the foregoing considerations, it is hereby respectfully Prayed that judgment be rendered in accordance with the plaintiff's prayer in their complaint in the above-entitled case." In a petition for certiorari, the Court declared it void. But respondent judge changed and amended his earlier decision ordering the defendants to vacate the premises, hence, the complaint for gross ignorance of the law and incompetence. Will the complaint prosper? Why?

ANS.

-Yes. A judge should exhibit an industry and application commensurate with the duties imposed upon him and he should be conscientious, studious and thorough. He did not only issue a manifestly void decision, he even granted the motion for its execution and issued the corresponding writ with full knowledge that there was nothing to execute; exhibiting once more his inefficiency, carelessness, negligence or even his incompetence. (Santos vs. Judge Orlando Paguio, Nov. 16, 1993, 46 SCAD 295).

Q

- After due notice and hearing and upon the filing of a bond, the MTCC of Tangub City then presided over by Judge Salvanera directed the defendants to vacate the fishpond in question and restore the possession to Nique. The defendants filed a motion to lift the restraining order but the court maintained it. They filed a second motion for reconsideration and Judge Salvanera lifted the restraining order and delivered the possession of the property to them. Consequently, Nique filed a petition for certiorari in the CA to annul Judge Salvanera's order. The CA referred the case to the RTC which has concurrent jurisdiction over the case. The RTC set aside Judge Salvanera's order and directed him to reinstate the writ of preliminary mandatory injunction and restore the petitioner in the peaceful possession and occupation of the fishpond. After the RTC decision had become final and executory, Nique filed a motion for execution. The motion was heard by Judge Zapatos who had succeeded Judge Salvanera. The defendants filed a motion to lift the preliminary injunction but opposed by Nique. However, Judge Zapatos denied the motion for execution and dissolved the writ of preliminary mandatory in junction, which the RTC had ordered to be


153

reinstated. Hence, this complaint filed by Nique against Zapatos charging him with gross ignorance of the law and failure to perform an act which he had been directed to do. On theother hand, Judge Zapatos contended that he is authorized under Sees. 6 and 7, Rule 58 of Rules of Court to dissolve an injunction reinstated by the RTC since it appeared that after the injunction was issued, there was a change in the situation of the parties and that a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction is an interlocutory order that remains at all times within the control of the court that issued it before final judgment on the merits of the case. Is the judge guilty? Why? ANS.

-Yes, because a judge occupying a court that is lower in rank than the RTC, owes respect to the latter and is bound by the disposition or decision of said appellate court upon a petition for review of an order issued by him. His act of reversing the final judgment of the RTC instead of complying with his mandatory and ministerial duty of executing the same, is the height of audacity, arrogance and presumption on his part for if the decision of the RTC was unacceptable to the defendants, their remedy was to appeal it to a higher court. Having failed to do that, they, as well as the lower court, were bound by the judgment. There was no avoiding compliance with it for the execution of a final judgment is a ministerial duty of the trial court. (Nique vs. Zapatos, A.M. No. MTJ92-655, March 1993).

Q

- The judge admitted that during days he had no hearings, he stayed at his house to make some research, resolve motions, make decisions. Anyway, his house was near the court, so he can be easily reached. Is the act of the judge proper? Why?

ANS.

-No, because a judge must report to his office even if he has no hearing on regular days. In Circular No. 13 dated 1 July 1987, the Supreme Court stressed the need for punctuality and the faithful observance of office hours, with Judges being enjoined to strictly observe the requirement of eight (8) hours of service a day. This was reiterated in Administrative Circular No.1 of 28 January 1988. Also under the Interim Rules Implementing Batas Pambansa BIg. 129, Judges of the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts are required, on a rotation basis to report on Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. primarily to act on petitions for bail and similar matters, while all Executive Judges, whether in single or multiple salas, are mandated to remain on duty on Saturday afternoons. In Ubaldino A. Lacuron vs. Judge Pablo Atienza (Adm. Matter No. RTJ-90-456, 14 January 1992), it was said that the law regulating court sessions does not permit any "day off' from regular office hours to enable a judge to engage exclusively in research or decision-writing, no


154

matter how important. In Siasico vs. Sales (71 SCRA 139, 146 [1976]), the Supreme Court stated: "Reasons of public policy, the preservation of the good image of the judiciary, and avoidance of all appearances of impropriety, require that a judge should hold office at the regular place of business of the court and not at his residence. A judge holding office in his house makes criticism that his official actuation cannot bear public scrutiny, more particularly of his co-officials in the local government. All these would have deterred respondent from the course of action he had taken had he possessed some sense of decorum and good judgment." (Mendoza vs. Judge Rodolfo Mabutas, June 17, 1993,42 SCAD 423). Q

- An ejectment suit was filed. A judgment was rendered; the writ of execution was issued after five (5) years. Furthermore, the movant was not a party; nor even a substituted party. Is the judge guilty of impropriety? Why? ANS.

-Yes, because a judge's official conduct should be free from the appearance of impropriety, in his personal behavior, not only upon the bench and in the performance of judicial duties, but also his everyday life, should be beyond reproach, and he should administer his office with due regard to the integrity of the system of the law itself, remembering that he is not a depository of arbitrary power, but a judge under the sanction of law. (Canons 3 and 18, Code of Judicial Ethics). The movant had not yet been substituted as a party; the writ of demolition was issued despite the fact that his court ceased to have authority to enforce the decision by motion. The least explanation is that, he was unaware of the Rules. If he was cognizant of said rules, then he deliberately ignored them to extend benefit to a party who happened to be his compadre. In such a case, he allowed a relationship to influence his action to the prejudice of the complainant. (Vda. De Coronel vs. Judge Danan, et al., Aug. 9, 1993, 43 SCAD 926).

Q

- Who has the power to investigate a judge who falsified his certificate of service?

ANS.

The Supreme Court in Maceda vs. Vasquez, et al., G.R. No. 102781, April 22, 1993, held that the power to investigate a complaint against a judgess for alleged falsification of his certification of service is lodged in the Supreme Court, thru the Court Administrator. The Ombudsman is powerless to do so under the principle of separation of powers. If it is a criminal case, the Ombudsman has the power to investigate the judge.


ANS.

155

- A judge acquitted the accused in a case for violation of the Central Bank Act because intent to violate the law was not proven. He repeated the same mistake in another case for violation of another special law specifically the attempt to smuggle firearms into and out of the country. He was removed twice. Explain the reason. -The reason for such dismissal twice could be traced from the fact that such mistake cannot be ascribed to a simple mistake of judgment but to gross ignorance of the law, if not deliberate disregard of the same. It is tantamount to knowingly rendering unjust and incorrect judgment. A judge should be the embodiment of competence, integrity and independence. He should be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence. (Padilla vs. Dizon, 158 SCRA 127; Senior State Prosecutor Jovencito ZUllO, Jr. vs. Dizon, June 23, 1993, 42 SCAD 601).


156


157

- Are there any distinctions between the court and the judge?

ANS. - Yes. The court is an entity and the person who occupies the position is the judge. A court may exist without a judge. There may be a judge without a court. (Pamintuan vs. Llorente, 29 Phil. 346). Q

- What do you understand by the principle that the administration of justice is a shared responsibility of the judge and the lawyer?

ANS. - It means that it is the duty of both counsel and judge to maintain not to destroy, the high esteem and regard for courts. Any act on the part of one or the other that tends to undermine the people's respect for, and confidence in, the administration of justice is to be avoided. And this, even if both may have to restrain pride from taking the better part of their system. (Lugue vs. Kayanan, 29 SCRA 173). The relations of judge and lawyer should be founded on mutual respect and on a deep appreciation by one of the duties of the other. (Romero vs. Valle, 147 SCRA 197) Q

- Explain the principle that a judge should not only be impartial but must also appear impartial.

ANS. - The sole purpose of courts of justice is to enforce the laws uniformly and impartially, without regard to persons or their circumstances or to opinions of men. A judge should at all times be 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. Judges therefore, should not only be impartial but they should also appear impartial. (Tan, Jr. vs. Gallado, 73 SCRA 315). Q

- Should a judge succumb to pressure from whatever source? Why?

ANS. - No. To do so is equivalent to a case of betrayal of the public trust reposed on a judge as an arbiter of the law and a revelation of his/her weak moral character. A judge is expected to be fearless in his/her pursuit to render justice, to be unafraid to displease any person, interest or power and to be equipped with a moral fiber strong enough in his/her office. (Ramirez vs. Corpuz-Macandog, 144 SCRA 462). Q

- How do you describe the appearance of a judge in his official and personal conduct? ANS. - A judge's official conduct and his behavior in the performance


158

of judicial duties should be free from the appearance of impropriety and must be beyond reproach. (Alagas vs. Reyes, 131 SCRA 445; Li vs. Niyares, 65 SCRA 167). Even his personal behavior in his everyday life should be beyond reproach. He should avoid even the slightest infraction of the law. (Cabrera vs. Pajares, 142 SCRA 127). Q

- How do you explain the fact that a judge should be like Caesar's wife?

ANS. - A judge should be like Caesar's wife because a judge must not only be pure but must also appear to be so. Appearance is as important as reality in the performance of judicial functions. Like Caesar's wife, a judge must not only be pure but must be beyond suspicion. (Palang vs. Zosa, 58 SCRA 776). A judge has the duty not only to render a just and impartial decision, but also render it in such a manner as to be free from any suspicion as to its fairness and impartiality, and also as to the judge's integrity. (Martinez vs. Gironella, 65 SCRA 245). Q - Explain the rule that a judge should not seek publicity for personal vainglory. ANS. - It means that judges should be prohibited from seeking publicity for vanity or self-glorification. Judges are not actors or actresses or politicians. They are also prohibited from making public comments on any pending or impending case. Judges must not be moved by a desire to cater to public opinion to the detriment of justice. (Go vs. CA, 206 SCRA 165). Q

- Maya judge invite the press during the hearing of a sensational case? Why?

ANS. - No. A judge should not allow unnecessary taking of Pictures of the court .proceedings. He should not allow the broadcasting of proceedings over the radio or allow the televising of the proceedings. The reason is that, such fanfare and publicity detract from the dignity of the court proceedings for the parties involved tend to become more self-conscious on their appearances rather than the truth of the facts and substance of the issues. The administration of justice would then ultimately suffer as the judge might be influenced by the public clamor engendered by the publicity. Finally, a judge should not seek publicity for his personal vainglory. Q

- When may a judge intervene during the presentation of evidence?

ANS - A judge may intervene during the presentation of evidence in order to


159

expedite and prevent unnecessary waste of time. (Domanico vs. CA, 122 SCRA 218). He may intervene to profound clarificatory questions. (People vs. Muit, 117 SCRA 696). He should, however, limit himself only to clarificatory questions and not to ask searching questions after the witness had given direct testimony. (Valdez vs. Aquilizan, 133 SCRA 150). His act should be done sparingly and not throughout the proceedings. (People vs. Ibanson, 120 SCRA 679). Q - What constitutes undue interference by the judge in the presentation of evidence? ANS. - There is undue interference if the judge will extensively profound questions to the witnesses which will have the effect of or will tend to build or bolster the case of one of the parties. Q

- Give the reason behind the rule that a judge should not interfere in the presentation of evidence.

ANS. - A judge should not only be impartial, but he should appear to be so. If he profounds questions to help build the case of a party, he would come out biased against or partial in favor of a party. A judge interference may likewise prevent the proper presentation of the case, and the ascertainment of the truth in respect thereto. Q

- An MTC judge was present during the meeting of his relatives before the DARAB. He even suggested the review of the land reform coverage and even talked to those who refused to obey the writ of execution issued by the DARAB. Is the act of the judge proper?

ANS. - No, because as a member of the Bench, he should have realized that his presence, opinion and participation in any proceeding could slant the evaluation and resolution of the case in favor of the party he identifies himself with. A judge need not utter any word for his sheer presence, as a member of the Judiciary, would be sufficient suggestion of persuasion and influence. (Garcia, et al. vs. Valdez, A.M. No. MTJ-981156, July 13, 1998, 96 SCAD 170). Q

- If a judge renders a judgment on the day after a case is submitted for decision, is the act proper? Why? ANS. - Yes, there is nothing anomalous in the act of the judge, as it is even an evidence of his intention to dispose of cases with dispatch. The immediate resolution of the decision was no more than his compliance with his duty as a judge to dispose of the court's business promptly and decide cases within required periods. Instead of being punished, he should even be commended for his close attention to duty. (Fule vs. CA, et al., G.R. No. 112212, March 2,1998,92 SCAD 14).


160

- Why should a judge decide a case within the reglementary period provided for by the Rules?

ANS. - A judge should decide a case within the reglementary period because failure to do so constitutes gross dereliction of duty. A judge should decide a case promptly and expeditiously, for it cannot be denied that justice delayed is justice denied. Delay in the disposition of cases undermines the people's faith and confidence on the judiciary. Hence, judges are enjoined to decide cases with dispatch. Their failure to do so constitutes gross inefficiency and warrants the imposition of administrative sanctions on them. (Fe T. Bernardo vs. Judge Amelia A Fabros, A.M. No. MTJ-99-1l89, May 12, 1999, citing Sanchez vs. Vestil, AM. No. MTJ-981419, October 13, 1998, 100 SCAD 147). Q

- A judge admitted that she failed to decide a case within the reglementary period provided for the by the Rules. Her reason was that there was oversight on her part. Is the reason proper? Why?

ANS. - No. A judge is expected to keep his own record of cases so that he may act on them promptly without undue delay. It is incumbent upon him to devise an efficient recording and filing system in his court so that no disorderliness can affect the flow of cases and their speedy disposition. x x x Proper and efficient court management is as much his responsibility. He is the one directly responsible for the proper discharge of his official functions. (See Fe T. Bernardo vs. Judge Amelia A Fabros, AM. No. MTJ-99-1l89, 106 SCAD 425, May 12, 1999). Q - When may a judge be subjected to disciplinary action for his errors? Explain. ANS. - For liability to attach for gross negligence of the law, the assailed order, decision or actuation of a judge must not only be found erroneous but, most importantly, it must be established that the judge was moved by bad faith, dishonesty, hatred, or some other like motive. (Dela Cruz vs. Concepcion, 54 SCAD 640, '235 SCRA 597). Q

- When is a judge liable for rendering an unjust judgment? Explain.

ANS. - A judge may be held liable for rendering an unjust judgment when he acts in bad faith, malice, revenge, or some other motive. (Heirs of the late Nasser Yasin vs. Felix, 66 SCAD 157, 250 SCRA 545).


161

- Discuss the import of the rule on voluntary inhibition of judges.

ANS. - The import of the rule on voluntary inhibition of judges is that the decision on 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. It makes clear to the occupants of the Bench that outside of pecuniary interest, relationship or previous participation in the matter that calls for adjudication, there might be other causes that could conceivably erode the trait of objectivity, thus calling for inhibition. This is to betray a sense of realism, for the factors that lead to preference or predelictions are many and varied. In the final reckoning, there is really no hard and fast rule when it comes to the inhibition of judges. Each case should be treated differently and decided based on its peculiar circumstances. The issue of voluntary inhibition is primarily a matter of conscience and sound discretion on the part of the judge. It is a subjective test the result of which the reviewing tribunal will not disturb in the absence of any manifest finding of arbitrariness and whimsicality. The discretion given to trial judges is an acknowledgment of the fact that these judges are in a better position to determine the issue of inhibition as they are the ones who directly deal with parties-litigants in their courtrooms. (People vs. Gallermo, G.R. No. 123546, July 7, 1998, 95 SCAD 579). Q

- A complaint was filed against a judge for reprehensible conduct in engaging in the, ,publication of a gossip tabloid, The Mirror, as editor and legal adviser and as a gossipmongering columnist of a local newspaper, Sun Star Clark. Complainant alleged that respondent used his newspaper column to ventilate his biases or personal anger at people or institutions. For instance, when respondent failed to receive payment from the Office of the Governor for advertisement in exchange for a congratulatory messages in the maiden issue of The Mirror, respondent placed a blank space purportedly for the governor's message, and expressed contempt with a few lines underneath a picture of the governor. Complainant believes that respondent judge should not engage in active, sensational, and free-for-all journalistic writing because such act degrades the judicial system and compromises his impartiality as an administrator of justice. He likewise persistently attacked the governor for his movie-making activities. Can the judge be dismissed for his acts? Why?

ANS. - Yes. The Code of Judicial Conduct mandates that a judge should avoid


162

impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities. The personal behavior of a judge not only upon the Bench but also in his everyday life should be above reproach and free from the appearance of impropriety. There is a difference between freedom of expression and compromising the dignity of the Court through publications of emotional outburst and destructive criticisms. Respondent's writing of active and vicious editorials compromises his duties as judge in the impartial administration of justice, for his views printed on newspapers reflect on his office as well as on the public officers that he challenges. From the standpoint of conduct and demeanor expected of a judge, resort to intemperate language only detracts from the respect due a member of the judiciary and becomes self-destructive. Moreover, in persistently attacking the moviemaking activities of the provincial governor and repeatedly threatening to file an action against a public officer, respondent encourages litigation and causes dissension against the public officer concerned. As a judge, respondent's role is to maintain equanimity and not instigate litigation. This is not to say that one cannot question the improper activities of government officials if there are any. However, it is not proper for a judge to write publications of carelessly-worded editorials in local newspapers. (Benalfre J. Galang vs. Judge Abelardo H. Santos, A.M. No. MTJ-99-1197, May 26, 1999). Q

- After the hearing of the petition for bail, the court issued an order denying the same on the ground that the evidence of guilt is strong. The petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, but was denied, the court ruling that it has already clearly spelled out the grounds relied upon in the denial of the motion. The accused asked for the inhibition of the judge contending that because of the actuations of the judge, he has already become biased, hence, he stands no chance at all in court presided by the judge. Is the motion proper? Why?

ANS. - No. The orders denying the petition for bail and the motion for reconsideration do not sufficiently prove bias and prejudice to disqualify the judge under Sec. 1, Rule 37 of the Rules of Court. For such bias and prejudice, to be a ground for disqualification, must be shown to have stemmed from an extrajudicial source, and result in an opinion on the merits on some basis other than what the judge learned from his participation in the case. Opinions formed in the course of judicial proceedings, as long as they are based on the evidence presented and conduct observed by the judge, even if found later on as erroneous, do not prove personal bias or prejudice on the part of the judge. Extrinsic evidence is required to establish bias, bad faith, malice or corrupt purpose, in addition to palpable error which may be inferred from the decision or order itself. (Victorio Aleria, Jr. vs. Hon. Alejandro


163

Velez, Jr., G.R. No. 127400, November 16, 1998, 100 SCAD 720, citing Webb vs. People, 85 SCAD 66, 276 SCRA 243). Q

- A judge ordered the release of the accused knowing that the cash deposit for his bail was not yet sufficient. Is he liable for his act? Why?

ANS. - Yes, because the error was gross and patent violation of law and the rules on bail. While it is true that a judge may not be held administratively accountable for every erroneous order or decision (Guillermo vs. Reyes, 58 SCAD 130, 240 SCRA 154), yet if the error is gross or patent, malicious, deliberate or in evident bad faith, he may still be liable. The reason for this is that he is expected to have a more than cursory acquaintance with the rules on bail. Failure to follow basic legal commands embodied in the law and the rules constitutes gross ignorance of the law (Del Rosario, Jr. vs. Bartolome, 81 SCAD 281, 270 SCRA 645; Aurillo vs. Francisco, 54 SCAD 352, 235 SCRA 283) from which no one may be excused, not even a judge. (Evelyn De Austria vs. Judge Orlando D. Beltran, A.M. No. RTJ-981406, September 1, 1999). Q

- Maya judge be held administratively accountable for every erroneous order or decision he rendered? Why?

ANS. - No. As a rule, a judge may not be held administratively accountable for every erroneous order or decision he renders. To unjustifiably hold otherwise, assuming that he has erred, would be short of harassment and would make his position doubly unbearable, for no one called upon to try the facts or interpret the law in the process of administering justice can be infallible in his judgment. The error must be gross or patent, malicious, deliberate or in evident bad faith. It is only in this latter instance when the judge acts fraudulently or with gross ignorance, that administrative sanctions are called for as an imperative duty of this Court. (Evelyn de Austria vs. Judge Orlando D. Beltran, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1406, September 1, 1999; Panganiban vs. Judge Pablo B. Francisco, et al., A.M. No. RTJ-981425, November 16, 1999). Q - Give examples of defenses of a judge charged with ignorance of the law. ANS. - Good faith and absence of malice, corrupt motives or improper considerations are sufficient defenses in which a judge charged with ignorance of the law can find refuge. (Evelyn de Austria vS. Judge Orlando D. Beltran, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1406, September 1, 1999, citing Guillermo vs. Reyes, 58 SCAD 130, 240 SCRA 154). Q

- Are the acts of a judge in his judicial capacity subject of


164

disciplinary action? Is the rule absolute? Explain. ANS. -No. As a matter of public policy, in the absence of fraud, dishonesty or corruption, the acts of a judge in his judicial capacity are generally not subject to disciplinary action, even though such acts are erroneous. (Morada vs. Judge Tayao, 48 SCAD 131, 229 SCRA 723, citing Louis Vuitton S.A. vs. Judge Villanueva, 216 SCRA 121; Mendoza vS. Villaluz, 106 SCRA 664). As has been stated in the recent case of Santos vs. Judge Jose Orlino, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1418, September 25, 1998, 98 SCAD 752: "The fundamental propositions governing responsibility for judicial error were more recently summarized in 'In Re: Joaquin T. Borromeo,' 59 SCAD 1 [1995J, 241 SCRA (1995). There the Court stressed inter alia that given the nature of the judicial function and the power vested in the SC and the lower courts established by law, administrative or criminal complaints are neither alternative nor cumulative to judicial remedies where such are available, and must wait on the result thereof Existing doctrine is that judges are not liable for what they do in the exercise of their judicial functions when acting within their legal powers and jurisdiction. (Alzua, et al. vs. Johnson, 21 Phil. 308, 326; Sec. 9, Act No. 190). Certain it is that a judge may not be held administratively accountable for every erroneous order or decision he renders. (Rodrigo vs. Quijano, 79 SCRA 10). To hold, otherwise, would be to render judicial office untenable, for no one called upon to try the facts or interpret the law in the process of administering justice can be infallible in his judgment. (See Lopez vs. Corpuz, 78 SCRA 374; Pilipinas Bank vs. TironaLiwag, 190 SCRA 834). The error must be gross or patent, deliberate and malicious or incurred with evident bad faith. (Quizon vs. Baltazar, Jr., 65 SCRA 293)." If an alleged error of a judge cannot amount to gross misconduct and bereft of any persuasive showing of deliberate or malicious intent to cause prejudice to any party, the administrative complaint against him insofar as the charge for gross misconduct is concerned, must be dismissed for want of factual basis. (Jewel F. Canson vs. Hon. Francis F. Garchitorena, et al., SB-99-9-J, July 28, 1999). Q

- An applicant for a position was told by the judge that in exchange for his signature on her employment, she would become his girlfriend. Thereafter, he went on to kiss her against her will. After learning that her application had been approved, he called her to his chamber and said that she was already his girlfriend. He went on to embrace her, kiss her, and touch her right breast. Can the judge be punished? Why?

ANS. - Yes, because not only did he fail to live up to high moral standards of


165

the judiciary, he even transgressed to ordinary norms of decency expected of every person. The conduct of a judge, whether official or private, must be beyond reproach and above suspicion. A member of the Bench must not only be a good judge; he or she must also be a good person. (Dawa vs. De Asa, 96 SCAD 373, 292 SCRA 703). This is necessary so as not to erode the faith and confidence of the public in the judiciary. (Naval vs. Panday, 84 SCAD 691, 275 SCRA 654). In the final analysis, such faith and confidence is anchored on the highest standard of integrity and moral uprightness that judges are expected to possess. As ruled in Junio vs. Rivera, Jr., 44 SCAD 308, 225 SCRA 688: "All judges on all levels of the judicial hierarchy, from this Court down to the Municipal or Metropolitan Trial Courts, are bound to observe the above exacting standards. There is however, a special reason for requiring compliance with those standards from those who are front liners of the judicial department. As such, a judge is the most visible living representation of the country's legal and judicial system. He is the judicial officer who on a day-to-day basis deals with the disputes arising among simple, rural people who comprise the great bulk of our population. He is the judicial officer who comes into closest and most frequent contact with our people. The judiciary as a whole and its ability to dispense justice are inevitably measured in terms of the public and private acts of judges in the grass roots level. It is essential, therefore, if the judiciary is to engage and retain the respect and confidence of our nation, that this Court insist that municipal judges and all other judges live up to the high standards demanded by our case law and the Code of Judicial Conduct, and by our policy." The judge's lustful conduct was aggravated by the fact that he was the superior of the complainant. Instead of acting in loco parentis toward his subordinate employee, he took advantage of his position and preyed on her. (Ana May M. Simbajon vs. Judge Rogelio M. Esteban, A.M. No. MTJ-98-1162, August 11,1999, citing Talens-Dabon vs. Arceo, 72 SCAD 527, 259 SCRA 354). Q ANS. -

- Will the retirement of a judge preclude the finding of any administrative liability on his part? Why? No. The retirement of a judge or any judicial officer from the service does not preclude the finding of any administrative liability to which he shall still be answerable. In Gallo vs. Cordero, 61 SCAD 956, 245 SCRA 219, it was said that since the court had this jurisdiction at the time of the filing of the administrative complaint it was not lost by the mere fact that the respondent public official had ceased in office during the pendency of his case. The Court retains its jurisdiction either to pronounce the respondent official innocent of the charges or declare


166

him guilty thereof. A contrary rule would be fraught with injustice and pregnant with dreadful and dangerous implications. If innocent, respondent official merits vindication of his name and integrity as he leaves the government which he has served well and faithfully; if guilty, he deserves to receive the corresponding censure and a penalty proper and imposable under the situation. (Villa Macasasa, et at. vs. Judge Fausto H. Imbing, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1470, August 16, 1999). - A judge should act beyond reproach and suspicion. Does this mandate include his personal behavior? Why?

Q ANS. -

Yes. A judge should conduct himself beyond suspicion and reproach, and be free from appearance of impropriety in his personal behavior, not only in his official duties, but also in his everyday life. No position demands greater moral righteousness and uprightness than a seat in the judiciary. A judge must be the epitome of integrity and justice. (Assn. of Court Employee vs. Tupas, July 12, 1989).

Q

- State how a judge should conduct himself in the performance of his duties and in his dealings with others.

ANS.

-The court exists to promote justice (Canon 2, Canons of Judicial Ethics); accordingly, the judge's official conduct should be free from appearance of impropriety, and his personal behavior, not only upon the bench and in the performance of official duties, but also in his everyday life, should be beyond reproach. (Canon 3, id.). He is the visible representation of the law and, more importantly, of justice. (Office of the Court Administrator vs. Gines, 43 SCAD 76, 224 SCRA 262 [1993]; Inciong vs. De Guia, 154 SCRA 93 [1987]; Dela Paz vs. Inutan, 64 SCRA 540 [1975]). He should administer his office with a due regard to the integrity of the system of the law itself, remembering that he is not a depositary power, but a judge under the sanction of law. (Canon 18; Guillen, et al. vs. Judge Nicolas, A.M. MTJ-98-1166, 101 SCAD 397, December 4, 1998, citing Caamic vs. Galapon, 56 SCAD 14, 237 SCRA 390).

Q

-Describe the duty of a judge whenever an accused pleads guilty to a capital offense.

ANS. -Trial courts must exercise meticulous care in accepting a plea of guilty in a capital offense. Judges are duty-bound to be extra solicitous in seeing to it that when an accused pleads guilty, he understands fully the meaning of his plea and the import of his inevitable conviction. (People vs. Gonzaga, 127 SCRA 158). Courts must proceed with more care where the possible punishment is in its severest form, like death, for the reason that the execution of such a sentence is irrevocable. Experience has shown that innocent persons have at times pleaded guilty. (People vs. Albert, 66 SCAD 456, 251 SCRA 136). Only a clear, definite and unconditional plea of


167

guilty by the accused must be accepted by trial courts. (ibid.). There is no such rule which provides that simply because the accused pleaded guilty to the charge that his conviction should automatically follow. (People vs. Mendoza, 42 SCAD 118,231 SCRA 264). A judge should always be an embodiment of competence. (Rule 1.01, Canon1, Code of Judicial Conduct). As an administrator of justice, it is imperative that the trial judge carry out his duties ably and competently so as not to erode public confidence in the judiciary. (People vs. Sevillano, et al., G.R. No. 129058, 105 SCAD 296, March 29, 1999). Q

- In a criminal case for falsification and use of falsified document, the judge was charged with impartiality for having failed to inhibit himself despite the fact that he was related to the accused within the fourth degree of affinity, thewife of the accused being the first cousin of the judge. Was the act of the judge proper? Explain.

ANS.-No. Under Rule 137, Sec. 1 of the Rules of Court, ajudge who is related within the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity to a party in a case is disqualified from sitting in the case without the consent of all parties, expressed in writing, signed by them, and entered upon the record. This prohibition is not limited to cases in which he acts by resolving motions and issuing orders as respondent judge has done in the subject criminal case. The purpose of the prohibition is to prevent not only a conflict of interest but also the appearance of impropriety on the part of the judge. A judge should take no part in a proceeding where his impartiality might reasonably be questioned (Canon 3, Rule 3.12) and he should administer justice impartially and without delay. (Canon 1, Rule 1.02; Lazo vs. Judge Antonio Tiong, A.M. No. MTJ-98-1173, December 15, 1998, 101 SCAD 692). Q

- A judge was caught in the act of demanding and receiving money from a party-litigant. Is the act sufficient to remove him? Why?

ANS. -Yes. A judge should always be a symbol of rectitude and propriety, comporting himself in a manner that will raise no doubt whatsoever about his honesty. (Yuson vs. Noel, 45 SCAD 116,227 SCRA 1). The conduct of respondent judge shows that he can be influenced by monetary considerations. His act of demanding and receiving money from a partylitigant constitutes serious misconduct in office. It is this kind of gross and flaunting misconduct, no matter how nominal the amount involved on the part of those who are charged with the responsibility of administering the law and rendering justice quickly, which erodes the respect for law and the court. (Office of the Court Administrator vs. Gaticales, 208 SCRA 508). The respondent judge tainted the image of the Judiciary to which he owes fealty and the obligation to keep it at all times unsullied and worthy of the people's trust. (Garcia vs. Dela Penia, 48 SCAD 171, 229 conduct.


168

He violated the established norms of judicial behavior and the best interest of the judiciary demands that he be dismissed from service. Q - What are some of the grounds for the dismissal of a judge? State the reasons. ANS. - Some acts that may warrant dismissal of a judge: (c)

acceptance of bribe;

(d)

holding office and conducting hearings at his residence;

(c)

use of physical violence against the personnel of his court who failed to deliver the entire volume of nipa ordered by him for the roof of his house; (lmpao vs. Makilala, A.M. No. MTJ-88-184, October 13, 1989, 178 SCRA 541).

(d) receiving money from litigants and borrowing from them without paying back; (f)

ordering a litigant to install an air-conditioning unit for the car of his wife. (Ompoc vs. Torres, Sept. 17, 1989).

Reasons: Members of the judiciary should display not only the highest integrity but at all times conduct themselves in such a manner as to be beyond reproach and suspicion. The respect and confidence of the public may justifiably be eroded if the conduct of an erring judge is condemned. (Paredes vs. Buduha, Dec. 7, 1989). Q

- An RTC judge was fined and required to pay an amount equivalent to three (3) months salary. He dismissed six informations for violation ofBP BIg. 22 because the checks were undated,hence, were mere promissory notes; the issuance did not constitute criminal acts; that their collection can be properly made in a civil case. Was the act of the judge proper? Why?

ANS. -No, in fact, the judge was fined for ignorance of the law. His opinion that the checks were invalid because they were not dated also revealed his unfamiliarity with Sec. 6 of the Negotiable Instrument Law. (Torres vs. Pedrosa, Aug. 22, 1989). It is the duty of a judge to keep abreast with the law and jurisprudence. Q

-Maya judge be subjected to disciplinary action in case of mis appreciation of evidence? Is the rule absolute? Explain.

ANS. -No. In Miranda vs. Manalastas, Dec. 21, 1989, the Supreme Court said


169

that mere error in the appreciation of evidence, unless so gross and patent as to produce an inference of ignorance or bad faith or that the judge unknowingly rendered an unjust judgment, are irrelevant in administrative proceedings against the judge. A judge is not infallible in his judgment. All that is expected of him is that he follows the rules prescribed to ensure fair and impartial hearing. A judge may not be administratively liable for erroneous ruling. Q

- If a party filed an administrative case against a judge, will this incident constitute a ground to disqualify the judge from trying the case? Why?

ANS. - No. In Aparicio vs. Andal, July 25, 1989, the Supreme Court said that the mere filing of an administrative case does not constitute a ground to disqualify a judge from hearing the case, otherwise, many cases would have to be kept pending or there might not be enough judges to handle all the cases pending in all courts. There must first be a showing of arbitrariness or prejudice before the judge can be considered partial or bias. Hence, if a judge denies the motion to inhibit him, his continued cognizance of the case pending before him is proper, if no TRO or injunction is issued against him. Q

- State the effect if a judge shows signs of partiality and prejudgment in a case. Why?

ANS. - The judge can be inhibited from further trying the case.

Q

ANS.

Partiality and pre-judgment can be just and valid reasons for the judge to voluntarily inhibit himself. But mere suspicion that he is partial is not enough. There must be evidence to prove the charge. (Fecundo vs. Benjamin, Dec. 18, 1989). A litigant is entitled to the fairness and cold neutrality of an impartial judge. - Madam C sought the assistance of a judge in expediting the intestate estate proceedings of her deceased common-law husband. He, however, took advantage of her helplessness and state of material depredation and took her as his mistress. Was the act of the judge proper? Why? -No, because a judge should personify judicial integrity and exemplify honesty in public service. The personal behavior of a judge, both in the performance of official duties and in private life should be above suspicion. The exploitation of women becomes reprehensible when the offender commits injustice by the brute force of his position of power and authority. (Calanog case).


170

Q - Maya judge be held to answer for an erroneous decision which he rendered? Why? ANS. -A judge cannot be held to account or answer, criminally, civilly, or administratively for an erroneous decision rendered by him in good faith. While the Supreme Court does not require perfection and infallibility, it reasonably expects a faithful and intelligent discharge of duty by those who are selected to fill the positions of administrators of justice. Q

- A judge has already retired when an administrative case was filed against him. Is he still within the court's jurisdiction? Why?

ANS. - Yes. Even if a judge has already retired before the administrative case was filed against him, the Supre me Court held that the court has not lost its jurisdiction over him even if his retirement has been approved, for his retirement benefits have not yet been paid. The reason for this is that the people would have no remedy left anymore. By reason of public policy, the Court must assert and maintain jurisdiction for acts performed in office which are inimical to the service and prejudicial to the interest of the litigants and the general public. Q -Maya judge who exercises his judicial function be made liable for damages? Why? ANS. -A judge who exercises his judicial functions cannot be liable for damages. The test of liability is not jurisdiction, but the nature of the question which is being determined when the error complained of is committed by the court. (Aparicio vs. Andal, G.R. No. 8658793, July 25, 1989). He is not liable even though there is in reality absolute failure of jurisdiction over the subject matter. For, judges are excluded from liability under Art. 32, New Civil Code, provided, their acts do not constitute a violation of the Revised Penal Code. Q

- An RTC Judge was removed on charges of conduct unbecoming of a public official. It was maintained a mistress, having been the father with her, inspite his being a married man. Is the proper? Why?

immorality and alleged that he of two children act of the judge

ANS. -No, because the judge has behaved in a manner not becoming of his robes and as a model of rectitude, betrayed the people's high expectations, and diminished the esteem in which they hold the judiciary in general. The circumstances show a lack of circumspection and delicadeza on the part of the respondent judge by failing to avoid situations that make him suspect to committing immorality and worse, having that suspicion confirmed especially so that under Canon 1, Rule 1.01, a judge should be


171

the embodiment of competence, integrity, probity and independence. The Code of Judicial Ethics mandates that the conduct of a judge must be free from impropriety not only with respect to the performance of his judicial duties, but also to his behavior outside his sala and as a private individual. There is no dichotomy of morality: a public official is also judged by his private morals. The Code dictates that a judge, in order to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, must behave with propriety at all times. A judge's official life can not simply be detached or separated from his personal existence. Thus: "Being the subject of constant public scrutiny, a judge should freely and willingly accept restrictions on conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen." Q - Explain the res ipsa loquitor doctrine in the investigation of errant judges. ANS. -In these res ipsa loquitur resolutions, there was on the face of the assailed decisions an inexplicable grave error bereft of any redeeming feature, a patent railroading of a case to bring about an unjust decision, or a manifestly deliberate intent to wreak an injustice against a hapless party. The res ipsa loquitur doctrine does not accept or dispense with the necessity of proving the facts on which the inference or evil intent is had. It merely expresses the clearly sound and reasonable conclusion that when such facts are admitted or are already shown by the record, and no credible explanation that would negative the strong inference of evil intent is forthcoming, no further hearing to establish them to support a judgment as to the culpability of a respondent is necessary. (In re: Judge Baltazar Dizon, Adm. Case No. 3086, May 31, 1989). Q

- In Clemencio Sabitsana, Jr. vs. Judge Adriano Villamore, RTJ No. 90-474, Oct. 4, 1991, a complaint was filed alleging that in his monthly certificates of service, he made it appear that he had resolved all cases submitted for decision within the 90-day period when in truth, he had 15 cases undecided from 5 years back or from March 1985. Was the act of the judge proper? Why?

ANS. -No. A member of the Bench cannot pay mere lip service to the 90-day requirement, but should, in fact, persevere in its implementation. The Certificate of Service is not merely a means to one's paycheck, but an instrument by which the Courts can fulfill the constitutional mandate of the people's right to a speedy disposition of cases. Thus, it has been ruled: "The people's faith in the administration of justice, especially those who


172

belong to the low income group, would be greatly impaired if decisions are long in coming, more so from trial courts which unlike collegiate tribunals where there is a need for extended deliberation, could be expected to act with dispatch." (Magdamo vs. Pahimulin, Adm. Matter No. 662-MJ, 30 September 1976, 73 SCRA 110). Q - Should a judge show undue interest in a pending case before another court? Why? ANS. -No. Cardinal is the rule that a judge should avoid impropriety in all activities. The Canons mince no words in mandating that a judge shall refrain from influencing in any manner the outcome of litigation or dispute pending before another Court. (Canon 2, Rule 2.04). Interference by members of the Bench in pending suits with the end in view of influencing the course or the result of litigation does not only subvert the independence of the judiciary but also undermines the people's faith in its integrity and impartiality. (Commentaries on the Code of Judicial Conduct). On this point, Impao vs. Makilala (A.M. No. MTJ-88-184, October 13, 1989, 178 SCRA 541) expounds: "It is an important judicial norm that a judge's private as well as official conduct must at all times be free from the appearance of impropriety." (Lugue vs. Kayanan, G.R. No. L 26828, August 29, 1969,29 SCRA 165; x x x). As held by this Court in the case of Dela Paz vs. Inutan, Adm. Matter No. 201 MJ, June 30, 1975, 64 SCRA 540: "The judge is the visible representation of the law and, more importantly, of justice. From him, the people draw their will and awareness to obey the law. They see in him an intermediary of justice between two conflicting interests, especially in the station of municipal judges, like respondent Judge, who have that close and direct contact with the people before anybody else in the judiciary. Thus, for the judge to return that regard, he must be the first to abide by the law and weave an example for the others to follow." Q - If a judge reconsiders his decision/order, can he be charged administratively? Why? ANS. -No. It is the prerogative of a judge to correct his own decision before it becomes final and executory, so as to make it conform to the evidence presented and the applicable laws. (Baguyo vs. Leviste, 107 SCRA 35). The rule is true for as long as the judge is in good faith which is always possessed. A judge is not administratively accountable for every erroneous ruling or decision rendered, provided, he acts in good faith and without


Q ANS.

Q

173

malice. (Mendoza vs. Villaluz, 106 SCRA 664). The proper remedy of the aggrieved party is not an administrative charge against the judge but an appeal or petition for review of his decision. (Martin vs. Judge Placido Vallarta, A.M. No. MTJ-90-495, Aug. 12, 1991). - What is the effect if a judge allows the release of an accused who was convicted of a non-bailable offense? Why? - The judge is guilty of gross misconduct when he allowed accused individuals duly convicted of non-bailable offenses and drug pushers at that - to enjoy provisional liberty by way of bail. Under the facts obtaining in these cases, good faith cannot be presumed on the part of the respondent judge. The suspicious circumstances attending the cases in point are far too glaring to ignore. (Villa vs. Amonoy, A.C. RTJ-89-395, Feb. 13, 1991). - How do you describe the office of a judge? Explain.

ANS. -The office of a judge exists for one solemn end – to promote justice by administering it fairly and impartially. (Gonzales vs. Austria M. Abaya, 176 SCRA 634). The judge is the visible representation of the law and of justice. From him, the people draw their will and awareness to obey the law. As such, he should avoid even the slightest infraction of the law. (Inciong vs. De Guia, 154 SCRA 93; Dela Paz vs. Inutan, 64 SCRA 56, 177 SCRA 435). In Santos vs. Lumang, it was said that a judge who, through gross ignorance of the laws or serious misconduct, frustrates the people's search for justice, commits a rank disservice to the cause of justice which calls for rectification and the imposition of appropriate disciplinary measures. In Summers vs. Ozaeta, 81 Phil. 754, it has been said that a judge's position demands equanimity, prudence, fortitude and courage. Q

- For failure to pay a just debt, a judge was finedP20,OOO.OO. Was the penalty proper? Why?

ANS. -Yes. Willful failure to pay a just debt is a serious offense under Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, as amended by the resolution of the Supreme Court, dated July 25, 1974. The amount involved (P4,500.00) is not big. He could easily have paid it, but it appears that he was bent on frustrating the complainant's best efforts to obtain satisfaction of her lawful claim, apparently for no other intention than to annoy and oppress her for having haled him and his wife into court. While an ejectment case is supposed to be summary in nature, respondent judge, through dilatory tactics, stretched the trial over a period of ten (10) years, and dragged the case all the way from the municipal court to the Court of Appeals. After the decision had become final, he delayed payment for two more years. He came across only after the complainant in exasperation had filed this administrative charge against him. Respondent judge's conduct toward the complainant was oppressive


174

and unbecoming a member of the judiciary. He used his position and his legal knowledge to welsh on a just debt and to harass his creditor. His example erodes public faith in the capacity of courts to administer justice. He violated Rule 2.0l. Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial conduct which requires that "a judge should so behave at all times as to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. (De Julio vs. Judge Benjamin Vega, A.M. No. RTJ-89-406, July 18, 1991). Q

- What should the Office of the Ombudsman do if a criminal complaint against judge is filed with that office? Why?

ANS. -Where a criminal complaint against a judge or other court employees arises from their administrative duties, the Ombudsman must defer action on said complaint and refer the same to the Supreme Court for determination whether said judge or court employee had acted within the scope of their administrative duties. This is so because Article VIII, Section 6 of the 1987 Constitution exclusively vests in the Supreme Court administrative supervision over all courts and court personnel, from the Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeals down to the lowest municipal trial court clerk. By virtue of this power, it is only the Supreme Court that can oversee the judges and court personnel's compliance with all laws, and take the proper administrative action against them if they commit any violation thereof. No other branch of government may intrude into this power, without running afoul of the doctrine of separation of powers. (Maceda vs. Vasquez, 221 SCRA 464, April 22, 1993). Q

- Mayan action of a judge in the exercise of his judicial function be the subject of a disciplinary action? Is the rule absolute?

ANS. -No. As a general rule, the acts done by a judge in his judicial capacity are not subject to disciplinary action, even though erroneous. These acts become subject to disciplinary power only when they are attended by fraud, dishonesty, corruption or bad faith. (Abiera vs. Maceda, 52 SCAD 581, 233 SCRA 520, June 30, 1994). A judge is not administratively accountable for every erroneous ruling or decision rendered, provided, he acts in good faith and without malice. (Martin vs. Vallarta, 200 SCRA 469, Aug. 12, 1991). Good faith and absence of malice, corrupt motives and improper consideration are sufficient defenses that may be availed of by a judicial officer charged with ignorance of the law and promulgation of an unjust decision from being held accountable for errors of judgment, on the premise that no one called upon to try the fact or interpret the law in the administration of justice can be infallible. (Pilipinas Bank vs. Tirona-Liwag, 190 SCRA 834, Oct. 18, 1990).


175

Q - State the concept and elements of knowingly rendering unjust judgment. ANS. - Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment is both a criminal and an administrative charge. As a crime, it is punished under Art. 204 of the RPC, the elements of which are: (a) the offender is a judge; (b) he renders a judgment in a case submitted to him for decision; (c) the judgment is unjust; and (d) the judge knows that his judgment is unjust. The gist of the offense therefore is that an unjust judgment be rendered maliciously or in bad faith, that is, knowing it to be unjust. An unjust judgment is one which is contrary to law or is not supported by the evidence, or both. The source of an unjust judgment may be error or ill-will. There is no liability at all when required to exercise his judgment or discretion. A judge is not liable criminally for any error which he commits, provided he acts in good faith. Bad faith is therefore the ground of liability. If in rendering judgment the judge fully knew that the same was unjust in the sense aforesaid, then he acted maliciously and must have been actuated and prevailed upon by hatred, envy, revenge, greed, or some other similar motive. Mere error therefore in the interpretation or application of the law does not constitute the crime. The nature of the administrative charge of knowingly rendering an unjust judgment is the same as the criminal charge. Thus, it must be established that the judge rendered a judgment or decision not supported by law and/or evidence and that he must be actuated by hatred, envy, revenge, greed, or some other similar motive. If for every error of a judge he should be punished, then perhaps no judge, however good, competent and dedicated he may be, can ever hope to retire from the judicial service without a tarnished image. Somehow along the way he may commit mistakes, however, honest. This does not exclude members of appellate courts who are not always in agreement in their views. Anyone belonging to the minority opinion may generally be considered in error, and yet, he is not punished because each one is entitled to express himself. This privilege should extend to trial judges so long as the error is not motivated by fraud, dishonesty, corruption, or any other evil motive. (Dela Cruz vs. Concepcion, 54 SCAD 640, 235 SCRA 597, Aug. 25, 1994). Q

-If a judge is charged and the complainant has lost interest in prosecuting the case, will the case be dismissed? Why?

ANS. -No. The fact the complainant has lost interest in prosecuting the administrative case against a judge will not necessarily warrant a dismissal thereof. Once charges have been filed, the Supreme Court may not be divested of its jurisdiction to investigate and ascertain the truth of the matter alleged in the complaint. The Supreme Court has an


176

interest in the conduct of members of the Judiciary and in improving the delivery of justice to the people, and its efforts in that direction may not be derailed by the complainant's desistance from further prosecuting the case he or she initiated. 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 Court of its supervisory power to discipline erring members of the Judiciary. Definitely, personal interests are not material or controlling. What is involved here is a matter of public interest considering that a judge is no ordinary citizen but an officer of the court whose personal behavior not only upon the bench and in the performance of judicial duties, but also in his everyday life, should be beyond reproach. (Imbing vs. Tiongson, 48 SCAD 101,229 SCRA 690, Feb. 7, 1994). Q -. X applied for the position of an RTC judge without revealing that he has two pending cases. Is the act of X proper? Why? ANS. -No. A judge is held guilty of gross misrepresentation when he failed to disclose that he was facing two serious criminal charges when he accepted appointment and subsequently qualified as RTC judge. The argument that he had not yet been convicted and should be presumed innocent is beside the point, and so is the contention that the crimes of homicide and attempted homicide do not involve moral turpitude. The important consideration is that he had a duty to inform the appointing authority and the SC to determine on the basis of his record his eligibility for the position he was seeking. (Office of the Court Administrator vs. Estacion, Jr., 181 SCRA 33, Jan. 11, 1990). Q

- Why should a judge regulate his extrajudicialactivities?

ANS. -Judges are enjoined not only to regulate their extrajudicial activities in order to minimize the risk of conflict with their judicial duties but also prohibited from engaging in the private practice of law. (Balayan vs. Ocampo, 218 SCRA 13, Jan. 29, 1993). Q - May a judge issue a subpoena to a person whohas no case in his sala? Why? ANS. -No. In the absence of a case in his sala in connection with which a party could be subpoenaed, a judge has absolutely no power or authority to issue a subpoena to such party. The judge, in using a subpoena form for criminal cases to summon a party upon the request of another who had no case before his court, invited legitimate criticism against his office as an instrument


Q

ANS.

177

of oppression. His act constitutes ignorance of the law and oppression which should warrant disciplinary sanction. (Caamic vs. Galapon, Jr., 56 SCAD 14, 237 SCRA 390, October 7, 1994). - Maya judge meet one of the parties i;n a case inside his chambers without the other party and meddle with the issues confronting the parties on the pretext of settling it? Why? -No. In the absence of their lawyers, a judge ought not to meddle in issues confronting the parties even on the pretext of settling their cases as such act would compromise the integrity of his office. Judges are cautioned to avoid in-chamber sessions without the other party and his counsel present, and to observe prudence at all times in their conduct to the end that they not only act impartially and with propriety but are also perceived to be impartial and proper. The act of a judge in meeting with complainants without the presence of counsel and warning them not to tell anyone, and demanding money under the guise of forging peace between the parties constitutes grave misconduct. (Capuno vs. Jaramillo, Jr., 53 SCAD 329, 234 SCRA 212, July 20, 1994).

Q

- Maya judge solemnize marriage without marriage license? Why?

ANS .- No. For solemnizing marriages even without the requisite marriage license, a judge is deemed to have actually trifled with the law's concern for the institution of marriage and the legal effects flowing from civil status, which should merit administrative sanction, without prejudice to the civil and criminalliabilities he may have incurred as well. (Cosca vs. Palaypayon, Jr., 55 SCAD 759,237 SCRA 249, Sept. 30, 1994). Q

ANS.

- During the incumbency of a judge, he sent out handbills indicating his intention to run for a congressional seat. Was the act of the judge proper? Why? -No. A judge acted improperly when he sent out letters/handbills manifesting his intention to run as a congressional candidate while still the incumbent judge and prior to the commencement of the campaign period. He took advantage of his position to boost his candidacy, demeaned the stature of his office and must be pronounced guilty of gross misconduct. (Vistan vs. Nicolas, 201 SCRA 524, Sept. 13, 1991).

Q - Should a judge report to his office even if he has no hearings? Why? ANS. -Yes. A judge must report to his office even if he has no hearings on


178

regular days. The law regulating court sessions does not permit any "day off' from regular office hours to enable the judge to engage exclusively in research or decision-making, no matter how important. (Mendoza vs. Mabutas, 42 SCAD 423, 225 SCRA 411, June 17, 1993). Q

- A judge used his chambers as his family's residence. Was the

ANS. -No. A judge cannot use his chambers as his family's residence even with the Governor's permission. Government property is for official use only and not for the personal use of the official. (Presado vs. Geova, 42 SCAD 507, 223 SCRA 489, June 21, 1993). Court rooms cannot be used as judge's living quarters. (Felongco vs. Dictado, 42 SCAD 700, 223 SCRA 696). Q

- If the order of a judge was questioned before a higher court, should he appear personally to seek a reversal of the order that is unfavorable to his action? Why?

ANS. -No. The judge whose order is under attack is merely a nominal party. Wherefore, a judge, in his official capacity should not be made to appear as a party seeking reversal of a decision that is unfavorable to the action taken by him. A decent regard for the judicial hierarchy bars a judge from suing against the adverse opinion of a higher court. (Santiago vs. CA, 184 SCRA 690, April 27, 1990). Q - The judge failed to render judgment in a case within the reglementary period. His reason is the failure of the stenographer to transcribe the notes. Was the contention proper? ANS. -

No. A delay in the transcription of stenographic notes cannot be considered a valid reason for the delay in rendering judgment in a case. With or without the transcribed stenographic notes, the 90-day period for deciding cases should be adhered to. (Balagot vs. Opinion, 195 SCRA 429, March 20, 1991). In one case, the Supreme Court said that the failure to decide a case particularly one involving a simple violation of the Bouncing Checks Law for over five years is an inordinate amount of procrastination tantamount to gross negligence. It is not enough for judges to pen their decisions; it is also important to promulgate and make them known to all concerned at the earliest possible time and within the mandated period. (Soyangco vs. Maglalang, 196 SCRA 5, April 19, 1991).

Q

- Describe the power of courts to cite persons in contempt.

ANS. -The power to declare a person in contempt of court and in dealing with


179

him accordingly is an inherent power lodged in courts of justice to be used as a means to protect and preserve the dignity of the court, the solemnity of the proceedings therein and the administration of justice from callous misbehavior, offensive personalities, and contumacious refusal to comply with court orders. And as in all other power of the court, the contempt power, however, plenary it may seem, must be exercised judiciously and sparingly. Clearly then, judges are enjoined to exercise utmost restraint in the use of their contempt powers. They are expected to avail of the contempt power only as a last resort when all other alternative courses of action are exhausted in the pursuit of maintaining respect to the court and its processes. Thus, when a less harsh remedy presents itself to the judge, he should at all times hesitate to use his contempt power, and instead opt for the less harsh remedy. (De Guia vs. Guerrero, Jr., 54 SCAD 1,234 SCRA 625, August 1, 1994). Q

- Is "immorality" as a ground for imposition of ad. ministrative sanctions limited to illicit sexual intercourse alone?

ANS.

-No. Immorality has not been confined to sexual matters, but inCludes conduct inconsistent with rectitude, or indicative of corruption, indecency, depravity, and dissoluteness; or is willful, flagrant or shameless conduct showing moral indifference to opinions of respectable members of the community, and as inconsiderate attitude toward good order and public welfare. (Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth ed., 1990, 751; cited in Alfonso vs. Judge Juanson, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-92-904, Dec. 7, 1993,46 SCAD 603). For, it has been held that there is no dichotomy of morality; a public official is also judged by his private morals. The Code of Judicial Ethics dictates that a judge, in order to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, must behave with propriety at all times. A judge's official life can not simply be detached or separated from his personal existence. (Junio vs. Rivera Jr., 44 SCAD 308, 225 SCRA 688, Aug. 30, 1993). In Sicat vs. Alcantara, et al., 161 SCRA 284, May 11, 1988, wherein the respondent judge was chargedwith immorality for having an illicit affair with a married female court employee, the Supreme Court declared: "The personal and official actuations of every member of the Bench must be beyond reproach and above suspicion. The faith and confidence of the public in the administration of justice cannot be maintained if a


180

judge who dispenses it is not equipped with the cardinal judicial virtue of moral integrity, and if he obtusely continues to commit an affront to public decency. In fact, moral integrity is more than a virtue; it is a necessity in the Judiciary." In another case where a municipal judge was charged with having illicit relations with a concubine under scandalous circumstances, it was stated that if good moral character is required of a lawyer, with more reason should that requirement be exacted of a member of the Judiciary who at all times is expected to observe irreproachable behavior and is bound not to outrage public decency. Thus, even as an ordinary lawyer, a judge has to conform to the strict standards of conduct demanded of members of the profession. Definitely, fathering a child with a woman other than his lawful wife fails to meet these standards. A judge suffers from moral obtuseness or has a weird notion of morality in public office when he labors under the delusion that he can be a judge and at the same time have a mistress in defiance of the mores and sense of morality of the community. (lmbing vs. Tiongson, 48 SCAD 101,229 SCRA 690, Feb. 7, 1994). Q

- Explain the basic reason for disqualification of judges.

ANS. -

Q

The underlying reason for the Rule on Disqualification of Judges under Sec. 1, Rule 137, Rules of Court, is to ensure that a judge, sitting in a case, will at all times be free from inclinations or prejudices and be well capable to render a just and independent judgment. A litigant, we often hear, is entitled to nothing less than the cold neutrality of a judge. Due process requires it. Indeed, he not only must be able to so act without bias but should even appear to be so. Impartiality is a state of mind; hence, the need for some kind of manifestation of its reality.

Verily, a judge may, in the exercise of his sound discretion, inhibit himself voluntarily from sitting in a case, but it should be based on good, sound or ethical grounds, or for just and valid reasons. It is not enough that a party throws 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. (Parayno vs. Meneses, 50 SCAD 170,231 SCRA 807, April 26, 1994). - Why should a judge who is related to a party in a case pending in his sala disqualify himself?

ANS. -

The rule of compulsory disqualification of a judge to hear a case where the judge is related to either party within the sixth degree of consanguinity or affinity 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. The law conclusively


181

presumes that a judge cannot objectively or impartially sit in such 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. The purpose is to preserve the people's faith and confidence in the courts of justice. (Garcia vs. Dela Peiia, 48 SCAD 171, 229 SCRA 766). - The respondent was charged with immorality and violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics. The acts were allegedly committed when he was still a practitioner. The complainant alleged that respondent had carnal knowledge with his wife in at least five (5) occasions without specifying the dates. In fact, his wife allegedly admitted having sexual intercourse with him. Now that he is a judge, can he be removed for those acts he committed when he was still a practitioner? Explain.

Q

ANS.

-No, for the acts were done before he became a judge. Proof of prior immoral conduct cannot be the basis for his administrative discipline. The respondent may have undergone moral reformation after his appointment, or his appointment could have completely transformed him upon the solemn realization that apublic office is a public trust and public officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency, act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives. (Section 1, Article XI,1987 Constitution). It would be unreasonable and unfair to presume that since he had wandered from the path of moral righteousness, he could never retrace his steps and walk proud and tall again in the path. No man is beyond reformation and redemption. A lawyer who aspires for the exalted position of a magistrate knows, or ought to know, that he must pay a high price for the honor - his private and official conduct must at all times be free from the appearance of impropriety. (Jagueta vs. Boncaros, 60 SCRA 27 [1974]). And the lawyer who is thereafter appointed thereto must perforce be presumed to have solemnly bound himself to a way of conduct free from any hint or suspicion of impropriety. The imputation of illicit sexual acts upon the incumbent judge must be proven by substantial evidence, which is the quantum of proof required in administrative cases. (Alfonso vs. Judge Modesto Luanson, Dec. 7, 1993,46 SCAD 603). Q - Judge Enrique A. Cube was, on May 31, 1993 appointed Presiding Judge of Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 22, Manila. Subsequently, information was received by the Judicial and Bar Council that he was previously dismissed in 1972 as Assistant Fiscal of Pasay City for gross misconduct and dereliction of duty for failure to prosecute a criminal case which led to its dismissal with prejudice. Cube applied for appointment to the Judiciary sometime in 1992. In the Personal Data Sheet he was required to accomplish,


182

one of the questions asked was: "Have you ever been retired, dismissed, forced to resign from any employment for reason other than lack of funds or dropped from the rolls? His answer was "Optional under RA 1145." RA 1145 is entitled "An Act Creating the Philippine Coconut Administration..." and does not deal with retirement, optional or otherwise. Cube's Services Record made no mention of his having been employed in this agency. Cube explained that his removal in 1972 was WITHOUT PREJUDICE. He was in fact appointed to a municipal government position. ANS. - YES Can he be dismissed? Why? The circumstance that his dismissal was without prejudice is not material, and neither is his subsequent appointment to a municipal position. What is important is his non-disclosure or concealment of the fact that in 1972, he was REMOVED as Asst. Fiscal. That fact was deliberately suppressed. He did not retire, as he declared in his data sheet. He was removed for gross misconduct and dereliction of duty in the prosecution of a smuggling case. "It behooves every prospective appointee to the judiciary to apprise the appointing authority of every matter bearing on his fitness for judicial office, including such circumstances as may reflect on his integrity and probity. These are qualifications specifically required by the Constitution." The fact alone of his concealment of his previous dismissal from the public service, which the Judicial and Bar Council would have taken into consideration in acting on his application, is clear proof of his lack of the said qualifications and renders him unworthy to sit as judge.

Q

Judge Cube committed an act of dishonesty that rendered him unfit to be appointed to, and to remain now in, the Judiciary, he has tarnished with his falsehood. He was DISMISSED with prejudice to his reappointment to any position in the government, including government-owned or -controlled corporations, and with forfeiture of all retirement benefits. (Re: Inquiry on the Appointment of Judge Enrique A. Cube, AM No. 93-7-4280 METC, Oct. 13, 1993, 45 SCAD 301). - A 14-year old girl, Cristina Junio filed with the Provincial Prosecutor's office a complaint for acts of lasciviousness against Judge Rivera of Alaminos, Pangasinan. The investigating officer recommended that the judge be absolved of the administrative case. Is the recommendation proper? Why?

ANS. - No. In dismissing the Judge, the Supreme Court said that exacting standards of morality and decency from those who serve in the


183

judiciary have been set. A member of the judiciary is judged not only by his official acts but also by his private morals, to the extent that such private morals are externalized in his behavior. The judge failed to measure up to those demanding standards. He was found guilty of gross misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the interest of the judiciary. (Junio vs. Judge Pedro Rivera, Aug. 30, 1993). Q - Provincial Prosecutor G. Olarte filed an information for murder against F. Banite withoutrecommendation for bail in the sala of Judge Tarriela, presiding judge Branch 44 RTC of Mamburao, Occidental Mindoro. On January 3, 1992, the accused was arraigned where he pleaded not guilty. However, on January 18, 1992, prosecutor Olarte amended the informa tion against Banite without leave of court to homicide and recommended a bail of P20,OOO.OO. Judge Tarriela ordered Olarte to explain his action. Thereafter, on February 4, 1992, Mrs. Zubiri, supervising stenoreporter of the provincial prosecutor on orders of Olarte went to Judge Aguilar herein respondent, who was then the executive and presiding judge of Branch 45 RTC of San Jose, Occidental Mindoro, to request for the release of the accused Banite on bail. On the same day, Judge Aguilar signed and issued the order approving the property bond and the release of the accused on bail. Complainants herein charged respondent judge with grave abuse of discretion, since the case was being tried in the sala of Judge Tarriela. Is the judge guilty of abuse of authority? Why? ANS. -Yes. Respondent Judge is guilty of grave abuse of authority. The case was filed in Branch 44, hence, respondent judge who presides in Branch 45, had no power to act on the request to release on bail accused Banite. It was irregular for respondent judge to entertain the request considering that it did not appear that a formal motion had been filed by the accused to that effect. Respondent judge should endeavor at all times to maintain the confidence and high respect accorded to those who wield the gavel of justice. Circular No. 13 enjoins judges to conduct themselves strictly in accordance with the mandate of existing laws and the code of judicial conduct that they be exemplars in their communities and the living personification of justice and the rule of law. Respondent judge's action shows such lack of familiarity with the laws, rules and regulations as to undermine the public confidence in the integrity of our courts. Moreover, the record does not show that at that time respondent judge ordered Banite's release, judge Tarriela was absent or unavailable and could not have acted on the request. (Cuaresma vs. Judge Aguilar, Sept. 3, 1993, 44 SCAD 451).


184

- Hermina Alvos, claiming to be the niece of Paz Ramirez, surviving spouse of the late Ambrocio Pingco, filed with the RTC a petition for settlement of the estate of Ambrocio. Respondent Judge appointed Alvos as special administrator. Counsel for Alvos filed an urgent motion stating that parcels of land belonging to Ambrocio and his wife were sold to complainant Uy and requested the Court to direct the Register of Deeds to freeze any transaction without the signature of Alvos involving said properties and later requested the titles issued to Uy be cancelled. Respondent Judge ordered the cancellation and reinstatement of the names of the spouses Ambrocio and Paz. Uy filed with the CA a petition to annul the order with a prayer for a temporary restraining order to prevent the judge from further proceeding against him. Despite the decision of CA and the pendency of the petition for review to SC, respondent judge continued issuing various orders resulting in the issuance of new titles to the properties in the name of persons stated in the project of partition to the damage and prejudice of complainant. Furthermore, even after the SC had affirmed the ruling of the CA that respondent judge has no jurisdiction to entertssain further proceedings concerning the ownership of the properties, respondent judge still in an attempt to defeat the proscription imposed by the higher judicial authority, issued orders approving the sale of the properties to the further prejudice of' the complainants, hence, this complaint against Judge Capulong. Is the judge guilty? Why?

ANS.

Q

- Yes. The actuation of respondent judge clearly stressed her blatant dis obedience to the lawful orders of superior courts and belie any claims that she rendered the erroneous orders in good faith as would excuse her from administrative liability. Time and time again the Supreme Court emphasized that the judge is the visible representation of law and justice from whom the people draw their will and awareness to obey the law. For the judge to return that regard, the latter must be the first to abide by the law and weave an example for the others to follow. The judge should be studiously careful to avoid even the slightest infraction to the law. To fulfill this mission, the judge should keep abreast of the law, the rulings and doctrines of the Supreme Court. If the judge is already aware of them, the latter should not deliberately refrain from applying them; otherwise, such omission can never be excused. (Uy vs. Capulong, AM No. RTJ -91-766, April 7, 1993) - The accused was the brother-in-law of the judge being the husband of her sister. She did not inhibit herself. A judgment


185

acquitting the accused was rendered. Is the actuation of the judge correct or proper? Why? ANS.

- No, the judge violated and deliberately disregarded Rule 3.12(d), Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial conduct considering that the accused is her brother-in-law and did not obtain the consent of the parties. She even interceded to obtain settlement, hence, bias was then present on her part, thereby necessarily blinding her impartiality and irreparably affecting the cold neutrality she is supposed to possess. She should have voluntarily disqualified herself. She may not be liable for rendering unjust judgment, but may only be guilty of gross ignorance of the law. (Ubarra vs. Judge Mapalad, March 22, 1993). Q - Alisangco bought a stolen carabao. A complaint was filed for the violation of No. 1612 (which the respondent Judge erroneously claim to be the Anti-Cattle Rustling Law of 1979 when in reality, it is the Anti-Fencing Law of 1979)against complainant Alisangco as one of the accused. Consequently, Judge Tabiliran immediately issued a warrant for Alisangco's arrest without first determining his participation in the offense charged and set the bond at P20,OOO.OO. Alisangco posted cash bond after which he was served with a subpoena directing him to appear for arraignment and preliminary investigation. On such date, Alisangco no longer appeared because he had earlier filed a waiver of his right to a preliminary investigation. In view of his nonappearance, Judge Tabiliran issued an order to arrest Alisangco and requiring the latter to show cause why his bond should not be confiscated. Before the arrest could be effected, the latter's counsel intervened by filing a motion to lift the order of arrest. The respondent Judge, however, had not acted on the said motion. Hence, this complaint for grave abuse of authority, ignorance of the law and conduct unbecoming of a presiding judge. Decide.

ANS.

-Considering that the MTC only had preliminary jurisdiction over the case, the respondent judge did not have any authority to set the case for arraignment. All it could do was to calendar the same for preliminary investigation. There is no law or rule requiring an arraignment during the preliminary investigation. The arraignment must be conducted by the court having jurisdiction to try the case on its merits. Thus, in this case, the RTC has exclusive original jurisdiction by reason of the prescribed penalty. Hence, respondent Judge in this case did not know the proper procedure on the matter or simply chose to ignore the


186

same. It was duly proven that the waiver of preliminary investigation was filed by the complainant. Respondent judge exhibited ignorance of procedural law or plainly abused his authority when he issued a warrant for the arrest of the complainant and ordered the latter to show cause why his bond should not be confiscated. Even if the waiver was not seen by him because it was not attached to the expediente of the case, the most that the court could have done from the complainant's failure to appear was to consider him as having waived his right to a preliminary investigation or declare such preliminary investigation closed and terminated as to him. It is settled that even if an accused had expressed his desire to be given an opportunity to be present at the preliminary investigation, but later changed his mind and renounced his right, he cannot be compelled to be present in the said investigation, (Alisangco vs. Judge Tabiliran, June 30, 1993, 42 SCAD 797). Q

- State Prosecutor Zuno filed an administrative complaint against Judge Dizon for gross ignorance of the law because he acquitted the defendants in four cases of illegal possession of firearms. Judge Dizon anchored his decision on the case of People vs. Asuncion, 161 SCRA 490, which ruled that the prosecution must show that other than mere possession of an unlicensed firearm, the perpetrator had the intent to use the same. However, said ruling finds no application in the said cases. The rule steadfastly laid down in cases of illegal possession of firearms is that mere possession is sufficient to warrant conviction. The offense is covered by special law and is malum prohibitum; hence, intent to use is not an ingredient of the crime and need not therefore be alleged in the information. The commission of the act being prohibited by reason of public policy, it suffices that the prohibited article be found in the possession of the accused, it not being necessary to allege or prove intent to use. At the investigation, it was found that Judge Dizon's erroneous adherence to the ruling in People VB. Asuncion showed his ignorance of the history and development of the firearm law; and that he failed to ascertain first if the facts of the cases he relied upon are similar to the four criminal cases filed by State Prosecutor Zuno. Is Judge Dizon guilty of gross incompetence, gross ignorance of the law and of knowingly rendering incorrect judgment? Why?

ANS.

-Yes. In dismissing him, the Supreme Court said that Judge Dizon is once more before the Supreme Court to answer charges, which are


187

practically a repetition of an earlier case against him. As before, he stubbornly insists that malice or criminal intent should be proved even in crimes punished by special laws or laws which are mala prohibita. The Supreme Court found him guilty of having acted with gross incompetence and gross ignorance of the law, as to be almost deliberate and tantamount to knowingly rendering incorrect and unjust judgment. (Article 204, RPC). A judge should be the embodiment of competence, integrity and independence. He should be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence. In every case, he should endeavor diligently to ascertain the facts and the applicable law answered by partisan interests, public opinion or fear of criticism. When it has been clearly demonstrated, as in this case, not only once but four times, that the judge is either grossly incompetent or grossly ignorant of the penal laws especially those involving crimes committed by transients, like smuggling of foreign currency and firearms, through the international airport in Pasay City, where his court sits, he becomes unfit to discharge his judicial office. More than mere ignorance of applicable laws and jurisprudence, his intransigence and persistence in error will make people lose their faith in him as an administrator of justice. Having lost his right to be addressed by the respectful appellation of "Honorable Judge" he has likewise lost his right to continue in the judicial service. (Senior State Prosecutor Zuno vs. Judge Dizon, June 23, 1993, 42 SCAD 601). Q - The judge in an ejectment suit rendered a judgment, the dispositive portion of which reads: "Wherefore, in view of the foregoing considerations, it is hereby respectfully Prayed that judgment be rendered in accordance with the plaintiff's prayer in their complaint in the above-entitled case." In a petition for certiorari, the Court declared it void. But respondent judge changed and amended his earlier decision ordering the defendants to vacate the premises, hence, the complaint for gross ignorance of the law and incompetence. Will the complaint prosper? Why? ANS.

-Yes. A judge should exhibit an industry and application commensurate with the duties imposed upon him and he should be conscientious, studious and thorough. He did not only issue a manifestly void decision, he even granted the motion for its execution and issued the corresponding writ with full knowledge that there was nothing to execute; exhibiting once more his inefficiency, carelessness, negligence or even his incompetence. (Santos vs. Judge Orlando Paguio, Nov. 16, 1993, 46 SCAD

FOR PRIVATE AND PERSONAL USE ONLY ________________________________________________________________ 295). Q

- After due notice and hearing and upon the filing of a bond, the MTCC of Tangub City then presided over by Judge Salvanera directed the defendants to vacate the fishpond in question and restore the possession to Nique. The defendants filed a motion to lift the restraining order but the court maintained it. They filed a second motion for reconsideration and Judge Salvanera lifted the restraining order and delivered the possession of the property to them. Consequently, Nique filed a petition for certiorari in the CA to annul Judge Salvanera's order. The CA referred the case to the RTC which has concurrent jurisdiction over the case. The RTC set aside Judge Salvanera's order and directed him to reinstate the writ of preliminary mandatory injunction and restore the petitioner in the peaceful possession and occupation of the fishpond. After the RTC decision had become final and executory, Nique filed a motion for execution. The motion was heard by Judge Zapatos who had succeeded Judge Salvanera. The defendants filed a motion to lift the preliminary injunction but opposed by Nique. However, Judge Zapatos denied the motion for execution and dissolved the writ of preliminary mandatory in junction, which the RTC had ordered to be reinstated. Hence, this complaint filed by Nique against Zapatos charging him with gross ignorance of the law and failure to perform an act which he had been directed to do. On theother hand, Judge Zapatos contended that he is authorized under Sees. 6 and 7, Rule 58 of Rules of Court to dissolve an injunction reinstated by the RTC since it appeared that after the injunction was issued, there was a change in the situation of the parties and that a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction is an interlocutory order that remains at all times within the control of the court that issued it before final judgment on the merits of the case. Is the judge guilty? Why?

ANS.

-Yes, because a judge occupying a court that is lower in rank than the RTC, owes respect to the latter and is bound by the disposition or decision of said appellate court upon a petition for review of an order issued by him. His act of reversing the final judgment of the RTC instead of complying with his mandatory and ministerial duty of executing the same, is the height of audacity, arrogance and presumption on his part for if the decision of the RTC was unacceptable to the defendants, their remedy was to appeal it to a higher court. Having failed to do that, they, as well as the lower court, were bound by the judgment. There was no avoiding compliance with it for the ex-

188


189

ecution of a final judgment is a ministerial duty of the trial court. (Nique vs. Zapatos, A.M. No. MTJ-92-655, March 1993). Q

- The judge admitted that during days he had no hearings, he stayed at his house to make some research, resolve motions, make decisions. Anyway, his house was near the court, so he can be easily reached. Is the act of the judge proper? Why?

ANS.

-No, because a judge must report to his office even if he has no hearing on regular days. In Circular No. 13 dated 1 July 1987, the Supreme Court stressed the need for punctuality and the faithful observance of office hours, with Judges being enjoined to strictly observe the requirement of eight (8) hours of service a day. This was reiterated in Administrative Circular No.1 of 28 January 1988. Also under the Interim Rules Implementing Batas Pambansa BIg. 129, Judges of the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts are required, on a rotation basis to report on Saturdays from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. primarily to act on petitions for bail and similar matters, while all Executive Judges, whether in single or multiple salas, are mandated to remain on duty on Saturday afternoons. In Ubaldino A. Lacuron vs. Judge Pablo Atienza (Adm. Matter No. RTJ90-456, 14 January 1992), it was said that the law regulating court sessions does not permit any "day off' from regular office hours to enable a judge to engage exclusively in research or decision-writing, no matter how important. In Siasico vs. Sales (71 SCRA 139, 146 [1976]), the Supreme Court stated: "Reasons of public policy, the preservation of the good image of the judiciary, and avoidance of all appearances of impropriety, require that a judge should hold office at the regular place of business of the court and not at his residence. A judge holding office in his house makes criticism that his official actuation cannot bear public scrutiny, more particularly of his co-officials in the local government. All these would have deterred respondent from the course of action he had taken had he possessed some sense of decorum and good judgment." (Mendoza vs. Judge Rodolfo Mabutas, June 17, 1993,42 SCAD 423).

Q

- An ejectment suit was filed. A judgment was rendered; the writ of execution was issued after five (5) years. Furthermore, the movant was not a party; nor even a substituted party. Is the judge guilty of impropriety? Why? ANS.

-Yes, because a judge's official conduct should be free from the appearance of impropriety, in his personal behavior, not only upon the bench and in the performance of judicial duties, but also


190

his everyday life, should be beyond reproach, and he should administer his office with due regard to the integrity of the system of the law itself, remembering that he is not a depository of arbitrary power, but a judge under the sanction of law. (Canons 3 and 18, Code of Judicial Ethics). The movant had not yet been substituted as a party; the writ of demolition was issued despite the fact that his court ceased to have authority to enforce the decision by motion. The least explanation is that, he was unaware of the Rules. If he was cognizant of said rules, then he deliberately ignored them to extend benefit to a party who happened to be his compadre. In such a case, he allowed a relationship to influence his action to the prejudice of the complainant. (Vda. De Coronel vs. Judge Danan, et al., Aug. 9, 1993, 43 SCAD 926). Q

- Who has the power to investigate a judge who falsified his certificate of service?

ANS.

The Supreme Court in Maceda vs. Vasquez, et al., G.R. No. 102781, April 22, 1993, held that the power to investigate a complaint against a judgess for alleged falsification of his certification of service is lodged in the Supreme Court, thru the Court Administrator. The Ombudsman is powerless to do so under the principle of separation of powers. If it is a criminal case, the Ombudsman has the power to investigate the judge.

Q

ANS.

- A judge acquitted the accused in a case for violation of the Central Bank Act because intent to violate the law was not proven. He repeated the same mistake in another case for violation of another special law specifically the attempt to smuggle firearms into and out of the country. He was removed twice. Explain the reason. -The reason for such dismissal twice could be traced from the fact that such mistake cannot be ascribed to a simple mistake of judgment but to gross ignorance of the law, if not deliberate disregard of the same. It is tantamount to knowingly rendering unjust and incorrect judgment. A judge should be the embodiment of competence, integrity and independence. He should be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence. (Padilla vs. Dizon, 158 SCRA 127; Senior State Prosecutor Jovencito Zunio, Jr. vs. Dizon, June 23, 1993, 42 SCAD 601).


191

Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court Manila EN BANC A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC

2004 Rules on Notarial Practice RESOLUTION Acting on the compliance dated 05 July 2004 and on the proposed Rules on Notarial Practice of 2004 Submitted by the Sub-Committee for the Study, Drafting and Formulation of the Rules Governing the Appointment of Notaries Public and the Performance and Exercise of Their Official Functions, of the Committees on Revision of the Rules of Court and on Legal Education and Bar Matters, the Court Resolved to APPROVE the proposed Rules on Notarial Practice of 2004, with modifications, thus:

2004 RULES ON NOTARIAL PRACTICE RULE I IMPLEMENTATION SECTION 1. Title. - These Rules shall be known as the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. SEC. 2. Purposes. - These Rules shall be applied and construed to advance the following purposes: (a) to promote, serve, and protect public interest; (b) to simplify, clarify, and modernize the rules governing notaries

public; and


192

(c) to foster ethical conduct among notaries public.

SEC. 3. Interpretation. - Unless the context of these Rules otherwise indicates, words in the singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular.

RULE II DEFINITIONS SECTION 1. Acknowledgment. - "Acknowledgment" refers to an act in which an individual on a single occasion: (a)

appears in person before the notary public and presents an integrally complete instrument or document; (b) is attested to be personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules; and (c) 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. SEC. 2. Affirmation or Oath. - The term "Affirmation" or "Oath" refers to an act in which an individual on a single occasion: (a) appears in person before the notary public; (b) is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules; and (c) avows under penalty of law to the whole truth of the contents of the instrument or document. SEC. 3. Commission. - "Commission" refers to the grant of authority to perform notarial acts and to the written evidence of the authority. SEC. 4. Copy Certification. - "Copy Certification" refers to a notarial act in which a notary public: (a) is presented with an instrument or document that is neither a vital record, a public record, nor publicly recordable;


193

(b)copies or supervises the copying of the instrument or document; (c) compares the instrument or document with the copy; and (d)determines that the copy is accurate and complete. SEC. 5. Notarial Register. - "Notarial Register" refers to a permanently bound book with numbered pages containing a chronological record of notarial acts performed by a notary public. SEC. 6. Jurat. - "Jurat" refers to an act in which an individual on a single occasion: (a) appears in person before the notary public and presents an instrument or document; (b)is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules; (c) signs the instrument or document in the presence of the notary; and (d)takes an oath or affirmation before the notary public as to such instrument or document. SEC. 7. Notarial Act and Notarization. - "Notarial Act" and "Notarization" refer to any act that a notary public is empowered to perform under these Rules. SEC. 8. Notarial Certificate. - "Notarial Certificate" refers to the part of, or attachment to, a notarized instrument or document that is completed by the notary public, bears the notary's signature and seal, and states the facts attested to by the notary public in a particular notarization as provided for by these Rules. SEC. 9. Notary Public and Notary. - "Notary Public" and "Notary" refer to any person commissioned to perform official acts under these Rules. SEC. 10. Principal. - "Principal" refers to a person appearing before the notary public whose act is the subject of notarization. SEC. 11. Regular Place of Work or Business. - The term "regular place of work or business" refers to a stationary office in the city or province wherein the notary public renders legal and notarial services. SEC. 12. Competent Evidence of Identity. - The phrase “competent evidence of identity" 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;


194

(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 to the notary public documentary identification. SEC. 13. Official Seal or Seal. - "Official seal" or "Seal" refers to a device for affixing a mark, image or impression on all papers officially signed by the notary public conforming the requisites prescribed by these Rules. SEC. 14. Signature Witnessing. - The term "signature witnessing" refers to a notarial act in which an individual on a single occasion. (a) appears in person before the notary public and presents an instrument or document; (b)is personally known to the notary public or identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules; and (c) signs the instrument or document in the presence of the notary public. SEC. 15. Court. - "Court" refers to the Supreme Court of the Philippines. SEC. 16. Petitioner. - "Petitioner" refers to a person who applies for a notarial commission. SEC. 17. Office of the Court Administrator. - "Office of the Court Administrator" refers to the Office of the Court Administrator of the Supreme Court. SEC. 18. Executive Judge. - "Executive Judge" refers to the Executive Judge of the Regional Trial Court of a city or province who issues a notarial commission. SEC. 19. Vendor. - "Vendor" under these Rules refers to a seller of a notarial seal and shall include a wholesaler or retailer. SEC. 20. Manufacturer. - "Manufacturer" under these Rules refers to one who produces a notarial seal and shall include an engraver and seal maker.


195

RULE III COMMISSIONING OF NOTARY PUBLIC SECTION 1. Qualifications. - A notarial commission may be issued by an Executive Judge to any qualified person who submits a petition in accordance with these Rules. To be eligible for commissioning as notary public, the petitioner: (1)must be a citizen of the Philippines; (2)must be over twenty-one (21) years of age; (3)must be a resident in the Philippines for at least one (1) year and maintains a regular place of work or business in the city or province where the commission is to be issued; (4)must be a member of the Philippine Bar in good standing with clearances from the Office of the Bar Confidant of the Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and (5)must not have been convicted in the first instance of any crime involving moral turpitude. SEC. 2. Form of the Petition and Supporting Documents. - Every petition for a notarial commission shall be in writing, verified, and shall include the following: (a) a statement containing the petitioner's personal qualifications, including the petitioner's date of birth, residence, telephone number, professional tax receipt, roll of attorney's number and IBP membership number; (b)certification of good moral character of the petitioner by at least two (2) executive officers of the local chapter of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines where he is applying for commission; (c) proof of payment for the filing of the petition as required by these Rules; and (d)three (3) passport-size color photographs with light background taken within thirty (30) days of the application. The photograph should not be retouched. The petitioner shall sign his name at the bottom part of the photographs. SEC. 3. Application Fee. - Every petitioner for a notarial commission shall pay the application fee as prescribed in the Rules of Court. SEC. 4. Summary Hearing on the Petition. - The Executive Judge shall conduct a summary hearing on the petition and shall grant the same if: (a) the petition is sufficient in form and substance;


196

(b)the petitioner proves the allegations contained in the petition; and (c) the petitioner establishes to the satisfaction of tile Executive Judge that he has read and fully understood these Rules. The Executive Judge shall forthwith issue a commission and a Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal in favor of the petitioner. SEC. 5. Notice of Summary Hearing. (a) The notice of summary hearing shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the city or province where the hearing shall be conducted and posted in a conspicuous place in the offices of the Executive Judge and of the Clerk of Court. The cost of the publication shall be borne by the petitioner. The notice may include more than one petitioner. (b)The notice shall be substantially in the following form: NOTICE OF HEARING Notice is hereby given that a summary hearing on the petition for notarial commission of (name of petitioner) shall be held on (date) at (place) at (time). Any person who has any cause or reason to object to the grant of the petition may file a verified written opposition thereto, received by the undersigned before the date of the summary hearing.


197

Executive Judge SEC. 6. Opposition to Petition. - Any person who has any cause or reason to object to the grant of the petition may file a verified written opposition thereto. The opposition must be received by the Executive Judge before the date of the summary hearing. SEC. 7. Form of Notarial Commission. - The commissioning of a notary public shall be in a formal order signed by the Executive Judge substantially in the following form: REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF ------------------This is to certify that (name of notary public) of (regular place of work or business) in (city or province) was on this (date) day of (month) two thousand and (year) commissioned by the undersigned as a notary public, within and for the said jurisdiction, for a term ending the thirtyfirst day of December (year). ________________________ Executive Judge SEC. 8. Period Of Validity of Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal. - The Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal shall be valid for a period of three (3) months from date of issue, unless extended by the Executive Judge. A mark, image or impression of the seal that may be purchased by the notary public pursuant to the Certificate shall be presented to the Executive Judge for approval prior to use. SEC. 9. Form of Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal. The Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal shall substantially be in the following form:


198

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF ____________ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE A NOTARIAL SEAL: This is to authorize (name of notary public) of (city or province) who was commissioned by the undersigned as a notary public, within and for the said jurisdiction, for a term ending, the thirty-first of December (year) to purchase a notarial seal. Issued this (day) of (month) (year). ______________________ Executive Judge SEC. 10. Official Seal of Notary Public. - Every person commissioned as notary public shall have only one official seal of office in accordance with these Rules. SEC. 11. Jurisdiction and Term. - 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. SEC. 12. Register of Notaries Public. - The Executive Judge shall keep and maintain a Register of Notaries Public in his jurisdiction which shall contain, among others, the dates of issuance or revocation or suspension of notarial commissions, and the resignation or death of notaries public. Tile Executive Judge shall furnish the Office of the Court Administrator information and data recorded in the register of notaries public. The Office of the Court Administrator shall keep a permanent, complete and updated database of such records. SEC. 13. Renewal of Commission. - A notary public may file a written application with the Executive Judge for the renewal of his commission within forty-five (45) days before the expiration thereof. A mark, image or impression of the seal of the notary public shall be attached to the application. Failure to file said application will result in the deletion of the name of the notary public in the register of notaries public. The notary public thus removed from the Register of Notaries Public may only be reinstated therein after he is issued a new commission in


199

accordance with these Rules. SEC. 14. Action on Application for Renewal of Commission. - The Executive Judge shall, upon payment of the application fee mentioned in Section 3 above of this Rule, act on an application for the renewal of a commission within thirty (30) days from receipt thereof. If the application is denied, the Executive Judge shall state the reasons therefor. RULE IV POWERS AND LIMITATIONS OF NOT ARIES PUBLIC SECTION 1. Powers. - (a) A notary public is empowered to perform the following notarial acts: (1)acknowledgments; (2)oaths and affirmations; (3)jurats; (4)signature witnessings; (5)copy certifications; and (6)any other act authorized by these Rules. (b) A notary public is authorized to certify the affixing of a signature by thumb or other mark on an instrument or document presented for notarization if: (1)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; (2)both witnesses sign their own names in addition to the thumb or other mark; (3)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 (4)the notary public notarizes the signature by thumb or other mark through an acknowledgment, jurat, or signature witnessing. (c) A notary public is authorized to sign on behalf of a person who is physically unable to sign or make a mark on an instrument or document if: (1)the notary public is directed by the person unable to sign or make a mark to sign on his behalf; (2)the signature of the notary public is affixed in the presence of


200

two disinterested and unaffected witnesses to the instrument or document; (3)both witnesses sign their own names; (4)the notary public writes below this signature: "Signature affixed by notary in presence of (names and addresses of person and two [2] witnesses)"; and (5)the notary public notarizes his signature by acknowledgment or jurat. SEC. 2. Prohibitions. - (a) A notary public shall not perform a notarial act outside his regular place of work or business; provided, however, that on certain exceptional occasions or situations, a notarial act may be performed at the request of the parties in the following sites located within his territorial jurisdiction: (1)public offices, convention halls, and similar places where oaths of office may be administered; (2)public function areas in hotels and similar places for the signing of instruments or documents requiring notarization; (3)hospitals and other medical institutions where a party to an instrument or document is confined for treatment; and (4)any place where a party to an instrument or document requiring notarization is under detention. (b) A person shall not perform a notarial act if the person involved as signatory to the instrument or document – (1)is not in the notary's presence personally at the time of the notarization; and (2)is not personally known to the notary public or otherwise identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules. SEC. 3. Disqualifications. - A notary public is disqualified from performing a notarial act if he: (a) is a party to the instrument or document that is to be notarized; (b)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 (c) is a spouse, common-law partner, ancestor, descendant, or relative by affinity or consanguinity of tile principal within the fourth civil degree. SEC. 4. Refusal to Notarize. - A notary public shall not perform any notarial act described in these Rules for any person requesting such an act even if he tenders the appropriate fee specified by these


201

Rules if: (a) the notary knows or has good reason to believe that the notarial act or transaction is unlawful or immoral; (b)the signatory shows a demeanor which engenders in the mind of the notary public reasonable doubt as to the former's knowledge of the consequences of the transaction requiring a notarial act; and (c) in the notary's judgment, the signatory is not acting of his or her own free will. SEC. 5. False or Incomplete Certificate. - A notary public shall not: (a) execute a certificate containing information known or believed by the notary to be false. (b) affix an official signature or seal on a notarial certificate that is incomplete. SEC. 6. Improper Instruments or Documents. - A notary public shall not notarize: (a) a blank or incomplete instrument or document; (b) an instrument or document without appropriate

notarial

certification.

RULE V FEES OF NOTARY PUBLIC SECTION 1. Imposition and Waiver of Fees. - For performing a notarial act, a notary public may charge the maximum fee as prescribed by the supreme Court unless he waives the fee in whole or in part. SEC. 2. Travel Fees and Expenses. - A notary public may charge travel fees and expenses separate and apart from the notarial fees prescribed in the preceding section when traveling to perform a notarial act if the notary public and the person requesting the notarial act agree prior to the travel. SEC. 3. Prohibited Fees. - No fee or compensation of any kind, except those expressly prescribed and allowed herein, shall be collected or received for any notarial service. SEC. 4. Payment or Refund of Fees. - A notary public shall not require payment of any fees specified herein prior to the performance of a


202

notarial act unless otherwise agreed upon. Any travel fees and expenses paid to a notary public prior to the performance of a notarial act are not subject to refund if the notary public had already traveled but failed to complete in whole or in part the notarial act for reasons beyond his control and without negligence on his part. SEC. 5. Notice of Fees. - A notary public who charges a fee for notarial services shall issue a receipt registered with the Bureau of Intemal Revenue and keep a journal of notarial fees. He shall enter in the journal all fees charged for services rendered. A notary public shall post in a conspicuous place in his office a complete schedule of chargeable notarial fees.

RULE VI NOTARIAL REGISTER SECTION 1. Form of Notarial Register. - (a) A notary public shall keep, maintain, protect and provide for lawful inspection as provided in these Rules, a chronological official notarial register of notarial acts consisting of a permanently bound book with numbered pages. 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. For purposes of this provision, a Memorandum of Agreement or Understanding may be entered into by the Office of the Solicitor General and the Office of the Court Administrator. (b) A notary public shall keep only one active notarial register at any given time. SEC. 2. Entries in the Notarial Register. - (a) For every notarial act, the notary shall record in the notarial register at the time of notarization the following: (1) the entry number and page number; (2) the date and time of day of the notarial act; (3) the type of notarial act;


203

(4) the title or description of the instrument, document or

proceeding; (5) the name and address of each principal; (6) the competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules if

the signatory is not personally known to the notary (7) the name and address of each credible witness swearing to or affirming the person's identity; (8) the fee charged for the notarial act; (9) the address where the notarization was performed if not in the notary's regular place of work or business; and (10) any other circumstance the notary public may deem of significance or relevance. (b) A notary public shall record in the notarial register the reasons and circumstances for not completing a notarial act. (c) A notary public shall record in the notarial register the circumstances of any request to inspect or copy an entry in the notarial register, including the requester's name, address, signature, thumbmark or other recognized identifier, and evidence of identity. The reasons for refusal to allow inspection or copying of a journal entry shall also be recorded. (d) 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. (e) 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 pages of his register on which the same is recorded. No blank line shall be left between entries. (f) 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. (g) 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.


204

(h) 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 statement to this effect in lieu of certified copies herein required. SEC. 3. Signatures and Thumbmarks. - At the time of notarization, the notary's notarial register shall be signed or a thumb or other mark affixed by each: (a) principal; (b)credible witness swearing or affirming to the identity of a principal; and (c) witness to a signature by thumb or other mark, or to a signing by the notary public on behalf of a person physically unable to sign. SEC. 4. Inspection, Copying and Disposal. - (a) In the notary's presence, any person may inspect an entry in the notarial register, during regular business hours, provided; (1) the person's identity is personally known to the notary public or proven through competent evidence of identity as defined in these Rules; (2) the person affixes a signature and thumb or other mark or other recognized identifier, in the notarial register in a separate, dated entry; (3) the person specifies the month, year, type of instrument or document, and name of the principal in the notarial act or acts sought; and (4) the person is shown only the entry or entries specified by him. (b) The notarial register may be examined by a law enforcement officer in the course of an official investigation or by virtue of a court order. (c) If the notary public has a reasonable ground to believe that a person has a criminal intent or wrongful motive in requesting information from the notarial register, the notary shall deny access to any entry or entries therein. SEC. 5. Loss, Destruction or Damage of Notarial Register. - (a) In case the notarial register is stolen, lost, destroyed, damaged, or otherwise rendered unusable or illegible as a record of notarial acts, the notary public shall, within ten (10) days after informing the appropriate law enforcement agency in the case of theft or vandalism, notify the


205

Executive Judge by any means providing a proper receipt or acknowledgment, including registered mail and also provide a copy or number of any pertinent police report. (b) Upon revocation or expiration of a notarial commission, or death of the notary public, the notarial register and notarial records shall immediately be delivered to the office of the Executive Judge. SEC. 6. Issuance of Certified True Copies. - The notary public shall supply a certified true copy of the notarial record, or any part thereof, to any person applying for such copy upon payment of the legal fees.

RULE VII SIGNA TURE AND SEAL OF NOTARY PUBLIC SECTION 1. Official Signature. - In notarizing a paper instrument or document, a notary public shall: (a) sign by hand on the notarial certificate only the name indicated and as appearing on the notary's commission shall: (b)not sign using a facsimile stamp or printing device; and (c) affix his official signature only at the time the notarial act is performed. SEC. 2. Official Seal. - (a) Every person commissioned as notary public shall have a seal of office, to be procured at his own expense, which shall not be possessed or owned by any other person. It shall be of metal, circular in shape, two inches in diameter, and shall have the name of the city or province and the word "Philippines" and his own name on the margin and the roll of attorney's number on the face thereof, with the words "notary public" across the center. A mark, image or impression of such seal shall be made directly on the paper or parchment on which the writing appears. (b) The official seal shall be affixed only at the time the notarial act is performed and shall be clearly impressed by the notary public on every page of the instrument or document notarized. (c) When not in use, the official seal shall be kept safe and secure and shall be accessible only to the notary public or the person duly authorized by him. (d) Within five (5) days after the official seal of a notary public is stolen,


206

lost, damaged or other otherwise rendered unserviceable in affixing a legible image, the notary public, after informing the appropriate law enforcement agency, shall notify the Executive Judge in writing, providing proper receipt or acknowledgment, including registered mail, and in the event of a crime committed, provide a copy or entry number of the appropriate police record. Upon receipt of such notice. if found in order by the Executive Judge, the latter shall order the notary public to cause notice of such loss or damage to be published, once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks, in a newspaper of general circulation in the city or province where the notary public is commissioned. Thereafter. the Executive Judge shall issue to the notary public a new Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal. (e) Within five (5) days after the death or resignation of the notary public, or the revocation or expiration of a notarial commission, the official seal shall be surrendered to the Executive Judge and shall be destroyed or defaced in public during office hours. In the event that the missing, lost or damaged seal is later found or surrendered, it shall be delivered by the notary public to the Executive Judge to be disposed of in accordance with this section. Failure to effect such surrender shall constitute contempt of court. In the event of death of the notary public, the person in possession of the official seal shall have the duty to surrender it to the Executive Judge. SEC. 3. Seal Image. - The notary public shall affix a single, clear, legible, permanent, and photographically reproducible mark, image or impression of the official seal beside his signature on the notarial certificate of a paper instrument or document. SEC. 4. Obtaining and Providing Seal. - (a) A vendor or manufacturer of notarial seals may not sell said product without a written authorization from the Executive Judge. (b) Upon written application and after payment of the application fee, the Executive Judge may issue an authorization to sell to a vendor or manufacturer of notarial seals after verification and investigation of the latter's qualifications. The Executive Judge shall charge an authorization fee in the amount of PhP 4,000 for the vendor and PhP 8,000 for the manufacturer. If a manufacturer is also a vendor, he shall only pay the manufacturer's authorization fee. (c) The authorization shall be in effect for a period of four (4) years from the date of its issuance and may be renewed by the Executive Judge for a similar period upon payment of the authorization fee mentioned in the preceding paragraph.


207

(d) A vendor or manufacturer shall not sell a seal to a buyer except upon submission of a certified copy of the commission and the Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal issued by the Executive Judge. A notary public obtaining a new seal as a result of change of name shall present to the vendor or manufacturer a certified copy of the Confirmation of the Change of Name issued by the Executive Judge. (e) Only one seal may be sold by a vendor or manufacturer for each Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal. (f) After the sale, the vendor or manufacturer shall affix a mark, image or impression of the seal to the Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal and submit the completed Certificate to the Executive Judge. Copies of the Certificate of Authorization to Purchase a Notarial Seal and the buyer's commission shall be kept in the files of the vendor or manufacturer for four (4) years after the sale. (g) A notary public obtaining a new seal as a result of change of name shall present to the vendor a certified copy of the order confirming the change of name issued by the Executive Judge.

RULE VIII NOTARIAL CERTIFICA TES SECTION 1. Form of Notarial Certificate. - The notarial form used for any notarial instrument or document shall conform to all the requisites prescribed herein, the Rules of Court and all other provisions of issuances by the Supreme Court and in applicable laws. SEC. 2. Contents of the Concluding Part of the Notarial Certificate. – The notarial certificate shall include the following: (a) the name of the notary public as exactly indicated in the commission; (b) the serial number of the commission of the notary public; (c) the words "Notary Public" and the province or city where the notary public is commissioned, the expiration date of the commission, the office address of the notary public; and (d) the roll of attorney's number, the professional tax receipt number and the place and date of issuance thereof, and the IBP membership number.


208

RULE IX CERTIFICA TE OF AUTHORITY OF NOTARIES PUBLIC SECTION 1. Certificate of Authority for a Notarial Act. - A certificate of authority evidencing the authenticity of the official seal and signature of a notary public shall be issued by the Executive Judge upon request in substantially the following form: CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY FOR A NOTARIAL ACT I, (name, title, jurisdiction of the Executive Judge), certify that (name of notary public), the person named in the seal and signature on the attached document, is a Notary Public in and for the (City/Municipality/Province) of the Republic of the Philippines and authorized to act as such at the time of the document's notarization. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have affixed below my signature and seal of this office this (date) day of (month) (year). _________________ (official signature) (seal of Executive Judge)

RULE X CHANGES OF STATUS OF NOTARY PUBLIC SECTION 1. Change of Name and Address. Within ten (10) days after the change of name of the notary public by court order or by marriage, or after ceasing to maintain the regular place of work or business, the notary public shall submit a signed and dated notice of such fact to the Executive Judge. The notary public shall not notarize until: (a) he receives from the Executive Judge a confirmation of the new name of the notary public and/or change of regular place of work or business; and (b)a new seal bearing the new name has been obtained. The foregoing notwithstanding, until the aforementioned steps have been completed, the notary public may continue to use the former name or


209

regular place of work or business in performing notarial acts for three (3) months from the date of the change, which may be extended once for valid and just cause by the Executive Judge for another period not exceeding three (3) months. SEC. 2. Resignation. - A notary public may resign his commission by personally submitting a written, dated and signed formal notice to the Executive Judge together with his notarial seal, notarial register and records. Effective from the date indicated in the notice, he shall immediately cease to perform notarial acts. In the event of his incapacity to personally appear, the submission of the notice may be performed by his duly authorized representative. SEC. 3. Publication of Resignation. - The Executive Judge shall immediately order the Clerk of Court to post in a conspicuous place in the offices of the Executive Judge and of the Clerk of Court the names of notaries public who have resigned their notarial commissions and the effective dates of their resignation. RULE XI REVOCA T/ON OF COMMISSION AND DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS SECTION 1. Revocation and Administrative Sanctions. - (a) The Executive Judge shall revoke a notarial commission for any ground on which an application for a commission may be denied. (b) In addition, the Executive Judge may revoke the commission of, or impose appropriate administrative sanctions upon, any notary public who: (1)fails to keep a notarial register; (2)fails to make the proper entry or entries in his notarial register concerning his notarial acts; (3)fails to send the copy of the entries to the Executive Judge within the first ten (10) days of the month following; (4)fails to affix to acknowledgments the date of expiration of his commission; (5)fails to submit his notarial register, when filled, to the Executive Judge; (6)fails to make his report, within a reasonable time, to the Executive Judge concerning the performance of his duties, as may be required by the judge; (7)fails to require the presence of a principal at the time of the notarial act; (8)fails to identify a principal on the basis of personal knowledge or competent evidence;


210

(9)executes a false or incomplete certificate under Section 5, Rule IV; (10) knowingly performs or fails to perform any other act prohibited or mandated by these Rules; and (11) commits any other dereliction or act which in the judgment of the Executive Judge constitutes good cause for revocation of commission or imposition of administrative sanction. (c) 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. (d) The Executive Judge may motu proprio initiate administrative proceedings against a notary public, subject to the procedures prescribed in paragraph (c) above and impose the appropriate administrative sanctions on the grounds mentioned in the preceding paragraphs (a) and (b). SEC. 2. Supervision and Monitoring of Notaries Public. - The Executive Judge shall at all times exercise supervision over notaries public and shall closely monitor their activities. SEC. 3. Publication of Revocations and Administrative Sanctions. - The Executive Judge shall immediately order the Clerk of Court to post in a conspicuous place in the offices of the Executive Judge and of the Clerk of Court the names of notaries public who have been administratively sanctioned or whose notarial commissions have been revoked. SEC. 4. Death of Notary Public. - If a notary public dies before fulfilling the obligations in Section 4(e), Rule VI and Section 2(e), Rule VII, the Executive Judge, upon being notified of such death, shall forthwith cause compliance with the provisions of these sections. RULE XII SPECIAL PROVISIONS SECTION 1. Punishable Acts. - The Executive Judge shall cause the prosecution of any person who:


211

(a) (b)

knowingly acts or ott1erwise impersonates a notary public. knowingly obtains, conceals, defaces, or destroys the seal, notarial register, or official records of a notary public; and (c) knowingly solicits, coerces, or in any way influences a notary public to commit official misconduct. SEC 2. Reports to the Supreme Court. - The Executive Judge concerned shall submit semestral reports to the Supreme Court on discipline and prosecution of notaries public. RULE XIII REPEALING AND EFFECTIVITY PROVISIONS SECTION 1. Repeal. - All rules and parts of rules, including issuances of the Supreme Court inconsistent herewith, are hereby repealed or accordingly modified. SEC. 2. Effective Date. - These Rules shall take effect on the first day of August 2004, and shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines which provides sufficiently wide circulation. Promulgated this 6th day of July, 2004.

Agpalo- Ethics- Reviewer

Recommend Documents