Basic Legal Ethics Notes 1

Dean Aquino

Module 1: Practice of Law

1. Basic Concepts
a) Definition of the Practice of Law
Legal ethics – branch of moral science which treats
Significance of Legal Ethics:
 Guards against the abuses and ills of the profession, such as dishonesty, deceit,
negligence, immorality and other forms of malpractice
 Raises the standard of the legal profession
 Encourages and enhances the respect for the law
 Assures an effective and efficient administration of justice
 Assists in the keeping and maintenance of law and order
 Provides basis for the weeding out of the unfit and the misfit

Practice of Law is any activity, in or out of court, which requires the application
of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. Generally, to practice law
is to give advice or render any kind of service which advice or service requires the use
in any degree of legal knowledge or skill (Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R. No. 100113,
September 3, 1991)
The Practice of Law is not limited to the conducts of cases or litigation in court; it
embraces the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special
proceedings, the management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients, and
all action taken for them in matters connected with the law have been held to constitute
law practice, as do the preparation and drafting of legal instruments, where the work
done involves the determination by the legal mind of the legal effect of facts and
conditions (Philippine Lawyer’s Association v. Agrava, G.R. No. L-12426, February 16,
1959)

b) Practice of Law as a Privilege, Not a Right

The practice of law is not a right but a privilege bestowed by the State upon those
who show that they possess, and continue to possess, the qualifications required by law
for the conferment of such privilege. Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened
with conditions. A lawyer has the privilege and right to practice law only during good
behavior and can be deprived of it for misconduct ascertained and declared by
judgement of the court after opportunity to be heard has been afforded him (Alcantara
v. De Vera, A.C. No. 5859 (Resolution), November 23, 2010).
c) Law as a Profession, Not a Business or Trade
The practice of law is a profession in which duty to public service, not money, is
the primary consideration. The practice of law is not a business. Lawyering is not
primarily meant to be a money-making venture, and law advocacy is not a capital that
necessarily yield profits. The gaining of a livelihood should be a secondary
consideration. The duty to public service and to the administration of justice should be
the primary consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate their personal interests or
what they owe to themselves (Brunet v. Guaren, A.C. No. 10164 (Resolution), March 10,
2014).

The primary characteristics, which distinguish the legal profession from business, are
the following:
1) A Duty of public service, of which the emolument is a by-product, and which
one may attain the highest eminence without making much money;
2) A relation as an “Officer of the court” to the administration of justice involving
thorough sincerity, integrity, and reliability;
3) A relation to the clients in the highest degree of Fiduciary; and
4) A relation to colleagues 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, G.R. No. X92-1
(Resolution), July 30, 1979)

2. Qualifications for Admission to the Bar (Bar Matter No. 1153)

The following are the requirements for admission to the bar:

1) Of Good moral character
2) Resident of the Philippines
3) At least 21 years of Age
4) Citizen of the Philippines
5) Must produce before the Supreme Court (SC) satisfactory Evidence of good
moral character
6) Pass the Bar examinations (RULES OF COURT, RULE 138, Secs. 7-14)
7) No charges, involving Moral turpitude, have been filed or are pending against
him in any court in the Philippines (RULES OF COURT, RULE 138, Sec. 2)
8) Must have compiled with the Academic requirements under the law:
 o Pre-law education:
i. Must have taken his or her’s bachelor's degree in an authorized and
recognized university or college which requires for admission
thereto the completion of a four-year high school course
ii. Must have pursued and satisfactorily completed in an authorized
and recognized university or college the course of study prescribed
therein for a bachelor's degree in arts or sciences; and
o Law Education:
i. Successfully completed all the prescribed courses for the degree of
Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent degree, in a law school or
university officially recognized by the Philippine Government or by
the proper authority in the foreign jurisdiction where degree was
granted
ii. Must have satisfactorily completed the following courses in a law
school or university duly recognized by the government: Civil Law,
Commercial Law, Remedial Law, Criminal Law, Public, and
Private International Law, Political Law, Labor and Social
Legislation, Medical Jurisprudence, Taxation and Legal Ethics
(RULES OF COURT, RULE 138, Sec. 5 as amended by B.M. No.
1153)
9) Take the Lawyer’s Oath (RULES OF COURT, RULE 138, Sec. 17); and
10) Sign the Roll of Attorneys (RULES OF COURT, RULE 138, Sec. 19)

A Filipino citizen who graduated from a foreign law school shall be admitted to the bar
examination only upon submission to the Supreme Court of certifications showing:
1) A completion of all Courses leading to the degree of Bachelor of Laws or its
equivalent degree
2) Recognition or Accreditation of the law school by the proper authority
3) Completion of all the Fourth-year subjects of the Bachelor of Laws academic
program in a law school duly recognized by the Philippine Government (RULES
OF COURT, RULE 138, Sec. 5, as amended by B.M. No. 1153)

3. Continuing Requirements for Membership in the Bar (Rules of Court)

The following are the continuing requirements for the practice of law:
1) Payment of Professional Tax
2) Membership in the IBP
 3) Payment of IBP dues
4) Good and regular Standing
5) Compliance with the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) –
Requirements (B.M. No. 850, October 2, 2001)
6) Possession of Good moral character
7) Compliance with the Citizenship Requirement

Good moral character is what a person really is, as distinguished from good
reputation, or from the opinion generally entertained of him, or the estimate in which
he is held by the public in the place where he is known. Moral character is not a
subjective term but one which corresponds to objective reality. Good moral character
includes at least common honesty.

Good moral character is a continuing requirement. It is a requirement possession

of which must be demonstrated not only at the time of application for permission to
take the bar examinations but also, and more importantly, at the time of application for
admission to the bar and to take the attorney’s oath of office.

The requirement of good moral character has four ostensible purposes namely:
1) To protect the public
2) To protect the public image of lawyers
3) To protect prospective clients
4) To protect errant lawyers from themselves

What are the conditions to be complied with for a lawyer, who has reacquired his
citizenship in accordance with the Citizenship Retention and Reacquisition Act of 2003
or R.A. No. 9225 to resume his law practice?
1) The Updating and payment in full of the annual membership dues in the IBP
2) The payment of Professional tax
3) The completion of at least 36 credit hours of Mandatory Continuing Legal
Education (MCLE) which is especially significant to refresh the
applicant/petitioner’s knowledge of the Philippine laws and update him of legal
developments.
4) The retaking of the lawyer’s Oath not only remind him of his duties and
responsibilities of a lawyer and as an officer of the Court, but also renew his
pledge to maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines (Petition for
 Leave to Resume Practice of Law, Benjamin M. Dacanay, B.M. No. 1678,
December 17, 2007)

4. Appearance of Non-lawyers

Who may appear before the court?

Generally, only those who are licensed to practice law can appear and handle
cases in court (RULES OF COURT, RULE 138, Sec. 1)

The following are the exceptions to Rule 138, Sec.1:

1) Law Student Practice Rule (RULES OF COURT, RULE 138-A)
2) Instances when non-lawyers may appear in court (RULES OF COURT, RULE
138, Sec. 34; RULE 116, Sec. 7)
3) Instances when non-lawyers may appear in administrative tribunals
4) Appearance of non-lawyers before the Labor Arbiter and/or the National Labor
Relations Commission (2011 NLRC RULES OF PROCEDURE, RULE III, Sec. 6)

a) Law Student Practice Rule (Rule 138-A, as amended by A.M. No. 19-03-24-SC)
What are the requisites under the Law Student Practice Rule
1) Has successfully completed 3rd year of the regular 4-year prescribed law
curriculum;
2) Is Enrolled in a recognized law school’s clinical legal education program
approved by the Supreme Court;
3) Must appear without Compensation
4) May Appear in any civil, criminal, or administrative case before any trial
court, tribunal, board, or officer;
5) Must represent Indigent clients accepted by the legal clinic of the law
school (RULES OF COURT, RULE 138-A, Sec. 1)

The student shall be under the direct supervision and control of a member of the
IBP duly accredited by the law school, if he appears, in the RTC. However, in
inferior courts, a law student may appear in his personal capacity without the
supervision of a lawyer.

Direct supervision and control – require the physical presence of the supervising
lawyer during the hearing
b) Non-lawyers in Courts and/or Administrative Tribunals
 The following are limitations on appearances of non-lawyers before the courts:
1) He should confine his work to non-adversarial contentions
2) His services should not be habitually rendered
3) He should not collect attorney’s fees

A non-lawyer may appear before the NLRC (National Labor Relations

Commission) under any of the following circumstances:
1) They represent themselves as Party to the case
2) They represent a legitimate labor Organization which is a party to the case
3) They represent a Member or members of a legitimate labor organization
that is existing within the employer’s establishment, who are parties to the
case
4) They are a duly accredited member of any Legal aid office recognized by
the Department of Justice or IBP
5) They are the Owner or President of a corporation or establishment which
is a party to the case
c) Proceedings Where Lawyers are Prohibited to Appear as Counsels
Lawyers are prohibited to appear in the following proceedings:
1) In all Katarungang Pambarangay proceedings, where the parties must
appear in person without the assistance of counsel or representative,
except for minors and incompetents who may be assisted by their next-of-
kin who are not lawyers (R.A. No. 7160, Sec. 415)
2) Under the “The Indigenous People’s Right Act of 1997”, the general rule is
that lawyers are prohibited to appear for any party as counsel. The
exception is when such lawyer is appearing in his/her capacity as a
member of the council of elders or due to his/her obligation as member of
the Indigenous People’s community or for the purpose of defending or
prosecuting his/her case (Administrative Circular No. 1, S. 2003, Sec. 10
pursuant to R.A. 8371, Section 44 (o))
3) Under the Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases, no attorney shall
appear in behalf of or represent at a party at the hearing, unless the
attorney is the plaintiff or the defendant. If the court determines that a
party cannot properly present his/her claim or defense and needs
assistance, the court may, in its discretion, allow another individual who
is not an attorney to assist that party upon the latter’s consent (A.M. No.
08-8-7 SC, Sec. 17)
5. Prohibited Practice of Non-lawyers and Appearance Without Authority

While a lawyer is not required to present proof of his representation, when a

court requires that he show such authorization, it is imperative that he show his
authority to act. A lawyer is not even required to present a written authorization from
the client. In fact, the absence of a formal notice of entry of appearance will not
invalidate the acts performed by the counsel in his client's name. However, a court, on
its own initiative or on motion of the other party may require a lawyer to adduce
authorization from the client (Villahermosa, Sr. v. Caracol. A.C. No. 7325 (Resolution),
January 21, 2015).

The following are the sanctions for appearing in court without authority:
1) Suspension (Tapay v. Bancolo, A.C. No. 9604, March 20, 2013; In Re: Petition to
Sign in the Roll of Attorneys, B.M. No. 2540, September 24, 2013)
2) Administrative complaint against the erring lawyer or government official (Code
of Professional Responsibility, Canon 9)
3) Petition for Injunction
4) Contempt of Court (RULES OF COURT, RULE 138, Sec. 21; RULE 71, Sec. 3, Par.
(e))
5) Criminal complaint for Estafa against a person who falsely represented himself
to be an attorney to the damage of a party (REVISED PENAL CODE, Art. 315)
6) Disqualification and complaints for disbarment (RULES OF COURT, RULE 139)

A person may be punished for indirect contempt for assuming to be an attorney or an

officer of a court and acting as such without authority. (RULES OF COURT, RULE 71,
Sec. 3, par. (e))

Shyster – is an unscrupulous practitioner who disgraces his profession by doing mean

work, and resorts to sharp practice to do it (Bailey v. Kalamazoo Pub. Co., 40 Mich. 251)

Shar’a Bar Passers – are not lawyers, because they are not full-fledged members of the
Philippine Bar. They may only practice before Shari’a Courts. Both are counselors, but
only the latter is an “attorney”. (Alawi v. Alauya, A.M. SDC-97-2-P, February 24, 1997)

6. Public Officials and the Practice of Law (Local Government Code and Constitution)
a) Prohibitions and Disqualifications of Former Government Attorneys
 A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service, accept engagement or
employment in connection with any matter in which he had intervened while in said
service (CPR, RULE 6.03).

Matter (defined in Rule 6.03) – refers to any discrete, isolatable act as well as identifiable
transaction or conduct involving a particular situation and specific party, and not
merely an act of drafting, enforcing, or interpreting government or agency procedures,
regulations, or laws, or briefing abstract principles of law (PCGG v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. Nos. 151809-12, April 12, 2005)

Intervene (defined in Rule 6.03) – it only includes an act of a person who has the power
to influence the subject proceedings (PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 151809-12,
April 12, 2005)

b) Public Officials Who Cannot Practice Law or Can Practice Law with Restrictions

Public officials – includes elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent or
temporary, whether in the career or non-career service, including military and police
personnel, whether or not they receive compensation, regardless of amount (R.A. No.
6713, Sec. 3, par. (b)).

While certain local elective officials (like governors, mayors, provincial board members
and councilors) are expressly subjected to a total or partial proscription to practice their
profession or engage in any occupation, no such interdiction is made on the Punong
Barangay and the members of the Sangguniang Barangay

Under Sec. 7(b)(2) of R.A. No. 6713, otherwise known as the Code of Conduct and
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, in addition to acts and omissions
of public officials and employees which are already provided by the Constitution and
existing laws, public officials and employees during their incumbency, shall not engage
in the private practice of their profession unless authorized by the Constitution or law,
provided that, such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with their official
functions.

Expressio unius est exclusion alterius. Since they are excluded from any prohibition, the
presumption is that they are allowed to practice their profession. However, one should
procure prior permission or authorization from the head of his Department, as required
by the Civil Service Regulation (Catu v. Rellosa, A.C. No. 5738 (Resolution), February
19, 2008)

The professional concerned cannot practice his profession in connection with any
matter before the office he used to be with for a period of 1 year after resignation,
retirement, or separation from public office (Rules Implementing the Code of Conduct
and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees or R.A. No. 6713, Rule X, Sec.
1 (c)).

The following public officials are specifically not allowed to practice law;
1) Judges and other officials or employees of the superior court (RULES OF
COURT, RULE 138, Sec. 35)
2) Members of the Judicial Bar Council (CONST., Art. IX-A, Sec. 2)
3) Chairman and members of the Constitutional Commissions (CONST. Art. IX,
Sec. 2)
4) Those who, by special Law, are prohibited from engaging in the practice of their
legal profession, but if so authorized by the department head, he may, in an
isolated case, act as counsel for a relative or close family friend (Noriega v. Sison,
A.C. No. 2266, October 27, 1983)
5) Ombudsman and his deputies (CONST. Art IX, Sec. 8, par. (2))
6) Governors, city, and municipal mayors (R.A. No. 7160, Sec. 90)
7) Officials and employees of the Office of Solicitor General (RULES OF COURT,
RULE 138, Sec. 35)
8) Government Prosecutors (People v. Villanueva, G.R. No. L-19450, May 27, 1965)
9) President, Vice-President, members of the Cabinet, their deputies and assistants
(CONST. Art. VII, Sec. 13)
10) Civil service officers or employees whose duties require them to devote their
entire time at the disposal of the government (Catu v. Rellosa, A.C. No. 5738
(Resolution), February 19, 2008)

The following are public officials who are allowed to practice law with restrictions:
1) Senators and Members of the House of Representatives (CONST., Art. VI, Sec.
14)
2) Members of the Sanggunian (LGC, Sec. 90, par. (b))
3) Retired Justices or Judges (R.A. 9946)
4) Civil Service officers or employees whose duty does not require his entire time
to be at the disposal of the government with written permit from their respective
 department heads (Rule XVIII of the Revised Civil Service Rules, Sec. 12).
However, officials who by express mandate of the law are prohibited from
practicing law, may not, even with the consent of the department head, engage in
the practice of law (Zeta v. Malinao, A.M. No. P-220, December 20, 1978)

7. Lawyers Authorized to Represent the Government