Bar Subject: Legal and Judicial Ethics

2019 Bar Examinations

2019 Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises, Q1

Atty. A, a duly licensed notary public, has maintained several notarial registers in his separate offices in order to cater to the needs of his clients and accommodate their growing number. Due to Atty. A’s busy schedule, Atty. A’s secretary would usually perform the notarial acts on his behalf.
Sometime in April 2017, Mrs. B, an Overseas Filipino Worker staying in Singapore, sought the legal services of Atty. A for the nullification of her marriage. Consequently, Atty. A drafted a petition with verification which was sent from his law office in Manila to Singapore for the signature of Mrs. B, who, after signing the same, sent it back to Atty. A. When the document arrived in Atty. A’s office, his secretary, as per usual practice, notarized the signed document upon Atty. A’s instruction.
(a) Name at least two (2) violations of the Rules on Notarial Practice committed by Atty. A. (3%)
(b) May Atty. A be also held liable under the Code of Professional Responsibility for the same infractions committed by him as a notary public? Explain. (2%)
(c) What does the phrase “competent evidence of identity” refer to under the Rules on Notarial Practice? (3%)

Quick check

How many active notarial registers may a duly commissioned notary public maintain simultaneously?

May a notary public delegate the performance of notarial acts to a law office secretary?

What is the legal effect of notarizing a document without the physical personal appearance of the affiant?

Which of the following constitutes competent evidence of identity under the Rules on Notarial Practice?

Can a notary public be held administratively liable under the Code of Professional Responsibility for notarial infractions?

Learn more about these topics

1. Notarial Practice Rules
Under the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, a notary public is strictly prohibited from maintaining more than one active notarial register. Moreover, notarial duties are strictly personal and cannot be delegated to a secretary, clerk, or any third person. The notary public must personally perform every step of the notarial act, including verifying the identity of the principal, administering the oath or affirmation, and signing and affixing the notarial seal. Performing notarial acts through an agent or employee constitutes a severe violation of the Notarial Rules.

2. Personal Appearance Requirement
A notary public is expressly forbidden from notarizing any document unless the principal personally appears before the notary at the time of notarization. The personal appearance requirement enables the notary to verify the voluntariness of the execution, administer the requisite oath, and confirm the affiant's identity through competent evidence of identity or personal knowledge. Notarizing an instrument in the absence of the principal, such as when the affiant is abroad, invalidates the notarial act and subjects the notary to administrative sanctions, including revocation of commission and disqualification.

3. Competent Evidence Identity
Under Rule II, Section 12 of the Notarial Rules, competent evidence of identity refers to at least one current identification document issued by an official agency bearing the photograph and signature of the individual. Alternatively, identity may be established by the oath or affirmation of one credible witness personally known to the notary and who personally knows the individual, or two credible witnesses not personally known to the notary who show their own government-issued IDs. Community tax certificates are no longer considered competent evidence of identity.

TopicsCompetent Evidence of Identity2Delegation of Notarial Duties1Rules on Notarial Practice1

2019 Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises, Q2

Y, who is a businessman, and Atty. X are good friends. Due to their closeness, Atty. X was able to borrow ₱300,000.00 from Y, which amount was intended to refurbish Atty. X’s law office.
Months after, Y got into a contractual dispute with Z, one of his business partners. Hence, Y sought the legal services of Atty. X for the filing of the proper action against Z. In consideration for his legal services, Y paid Atty. X an acceptance fee of ₱50,000.00.
Unfortunately, Atty. X and Y’s relationship turned sour. Thus, all communications between them were cut, and worse, Atty. X failed to file the required initiatory pleading against Z on the date agreed upon. Aggrieved, Y filed an administrative complaint, seeking that Atty. X be sanctioned and that the ₱50,000.00 acceptance fee and the ₱300,000.00 personal loan be returned to him.
(a) What administrative violation/s did Atty. X commit, if any? Explain. (3%)
(b) May Y’s prayer for the return of the ₱50,000.00 acceptance fee and the ₱300,000.00 personal loan prosper? Explain. (5%)

Quick check

What administrative violation is committed when a lawyer accepts a case and fee but fails to file the required pleading and abandons the client?

May the Supreme Court order the return of an acceptance fee in an administrative disciplinary proceeding against a lawyer?

Can a personal loan contracted by a lawyer outside the attorney-client relationship be recovered in an administrative complaint?

What is the primary purpose of an administrative disciplinary proceeding against a lawyer?

Under the CPRA, what is the lawyer's duty regarding client communications?

Learn more about these topics

1. Duty of Diligence
Under the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA), a lawyer owes fidelity, competence, and diligence to every client. Once a lawyer accepts an engagement and receives an acceptance fee, he is bound to handle the matter with zeal and dispatch. Failing to file the agreed initiatory pleading and cutting off communications with the client constitutes gross neglect and abandonment of duty. Such professional misconduct warrants administrative sanctions against the attorney, as a lawyer must continuously keep the client updated on the status of the case.

2. Unearned Legal Fees
When an attorney fails to render the agreed legal services after receiving an acceptance fee, the attorney is legally and ethically bound to return the amount in full. In administrative disciplinary proceedings against lawyers, the Supreme Court possesses the authority to order the restitution of unearned attorney's fees or unexpended litigation expenses. Since acceptance fees are paid in consideration of legal representation, failing to perform any legal work renders the retention of such fees unwarranted and unjust.

3. Personal Loan Recovery
Administrative disciplinary proceedings against lawyers are strictly intended to determine their fitness to continue practicing law, not to collect private debts. A personal loan contracted by a lawyer in a private capacity outside the professional attorney-client relationship cannot be ordered refunded in a disciplinary proceeding. The recovery of purely civil obligations or personal debts must be pursued through an ordinary civil action in the proper court, as administrative proceedings do not serve as a substitute for civil collection suits.

TopicsCode of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA)45Recovery of Personal Loans in Disciplinary Cases1Return of Unearned Legal Fees1

2019 Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises, Q3

Pending resolution of a high-profile case against him, Justice K uttered, in a public forum hosted by a local Integrated Bar of the Philippines chapter, his comments on the perceived bias of the court against him, as well as on the issues raised by the complainants, his defenses, and the commentaries published by some local newsmen in relation to the case. This is only one instance of his many appearances in different gatherings of such nature in order to defend his public image.
(a) Did Justice K, in his capacity as a lawyer, commit any violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility? If so, what rule did Justice K violate? Explain. (3%)
(b) Arguing that he should be treated as any other ordinary litigant in the said case, may Justice K validly claim that his comments were made in a purely private capacity and hence, not subject to administrative sanction? Explain. (3%)

Quick check

Which rule restricts a lawyer from making public statements regarding a pending case that tend to influence the court?

Can a lawyer who is a party litigant claim exemption from ethical rules by acting in a purely private capacity?

Under Canon II, Section 19 of the CPRA, what is the primary purpose of enforcing the sub judice rule against lawyers?

What is the proper forum for a lawyer to present defenses and challenge perceived court bias in a pending case?

What administrative effect arises when a lawyer publicly criticizes a court handling his own pending case?

Learn more about these topics

1. Sub Judice Rule
Under Canon II, Section 19 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA), a lawyer must strictly observe the sub judice rule regarding pending judicial proceedings. A lawyer is prohibited from making public statements or commentaries that tend to arouse public opinion, prejudge the merits of a pending case, or influence the court's impartiality. Publicly airing defenses, criticizing the tribunal for perceived bias, and debating evidentiary issues outside the courtroom undermine public confidence in the administration of justice and constitute punishable professional misconduct.

2. Dual Personality Doctrine
A lawyer cannot divide his personality by acting as an attorney at one moment and as an ordinary citizen or private litigant at another. The high ethical standards imposed upon members of the legal profession apply unconditionally in both public and private capacities. When a lawyer becomes a party litigant in a court action, he remains bound by the canons of professional ethics. Consequently, claiming that improper public statements were made in a purely private capacity to protect one's personal image does not exempt a lawyer from administrative liability.

3. Judicial Administration Integrity
The sub judice rule safeguards the integrity and independence of judicial proceedings against external pressure and public campaign efforts. Lawyers, as officers of the court, bear a primary duty to maintain respect toward courts and judicial officers. Utilizing media platforms or public forums to air grievances against an adjudicating tribunal degrades the dignity of the judiciary. Rather than attempting to litigate cases through public relations campaigns, lawyers must restrict their arguments, evidence, and defenses to formal pleadings submitted directly to the court.

TopicsCode of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA)45Dual Personality of Lawyers1Sub Judice Rule3

2019 Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises, Q4

Mr. L sought legal advice from his lawyer, Atty. M, regarding the possibility of annulling his marriage. In the course of their conversation, Mr. L mentioned that he would be able to immediately pay Atty. M’s legal fees because he received a huge kickback from a favored supplier in relation to his work as member of his Municipality’s Bids and Awards Committee.
(a) Is the communication made by Mr. L to Atty. M regarding the kickback he received presumed to be confidential? Explain. (3%)
(b) What is the duty of a lawyer when, in the course of his representation, he discovered that his client committed fraud upon a person or a tribunal? (2%)

Quick check

Under Rule 130, Section 24(b), what is the legal status of a client's disclosure of a past crime made during legal consultation?

When does the future crime or fraud exception apply to attorney-client privilege?

Under Canon III, Section 9 of the CPRA, what must a lawyer do upon discovering client fraud upon a tribunal?

Why is a client's admission of a previously received kickback protected under attorney-client privilege?

If a client refuses to rectify a fraud committed upon a court despite the lawyer's advice, what is the lawyer's ethical duty?

Learn more about these topics

1. Attorney-Client Privilege
Under Rule 130, Section 24(b) of the Rules of Court and Canon III of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA), communications made by a client to an attorney in the course of professional employment are strictly confidential and privileged. This protection covers past crimes or illegal acts disclosed during consultations, encouraging clients to disclose all facts fully without fear of public exposure or prosecution. Unless the communication falls under a recognized statutory exception, the lawyer is legally bound to preserve client confidences indefinitely.

2. Future Crime Exception
The attorney-client privilege does not extend to communications made in furtherance of a future crime or perpetration of fraud. For the exception to apply, the client must consult the lawyer to facilitate, plan, or commit a crime or fraudulent act. Disclosures regarding completed past crimes, such as a kickback previously received by the client, remain fully covered by attorney-client privilege because they are not intended to aid or abet an ongoing or future criminal enterprise.

3. Rectification of Fraud
Under Canon III, Section 9 of the CPRA, when a lawyer discovers that a client has committed fraud upon a person or tribunal during the representation, the lawyer must immediately advise and urge the client to rectify the fraudulent act. If the client refuses or fails to rectify the fraud, the lawyer must promptly terminate the attorney-client relationship and withdraw from representation to avoid becoming complicit in illegal or unethical conduct before the court.

TopicsAttorney-Client Privilege10Client Fraud Rectification1Future Crime Exception1

2019 Legal Ethics and Practical Exercises, Q5

P was dismissed by his former employer, Company X, for allegedly misappropriating company funds entrusted to him. P alleged that there was no proof to substantiate the same; hence, his dismissal was invalid.
Aggrieved, P engaged the services of ABCDE Law Office to represent him in an illegal dismissal case against Company X. Atty. A, a partner of the said law firm, was assigned to handle P’s case. Eventually, the illegal dismissal case was terminated upon settlement by all parties, and thus, P’s engagement with ABCDE Law Office ceased.
Two (2) years after, a criminal case for Qualified Theft was filed by Company X against P based on the same events which led to his dismissal. To his surprise, P found out that Company X was being represented by ABCDE Law Office in the criminal case. Decrying a violation of the rule on conflict of interest, P filed an administrative complaint against Attys. A, B, C, D, and E, the partners of ABCDE Law Office.
(a) Was the rule on conflict of interest violated in this case? Explain. (3%)
(b) Is the prior termination of P’s engagement with ABCDE Law Office a valid defense to the administrative charge against Attys. A, B, C, D, and E? Explain. (2.5%)
(c) May Attys. B, C, D, and E be held administratively liable for violating the rule on conflict of interest despite the fact that it was only Atty. A, the handling lawyer, who had knowledge of P’s engagement as a client? Explain. (2.5%

Quick check

May a law firm represent a new client against a former client in a case arising from the exact same facts?

Does the termination of an attorney-client engagement extinguish the lawyer's duty of confidentiality to the client?

What is the effect of the doctrine of imputed knowledge among partners in a law firm regarding client representation?

Why are non-handling partners in a law firm held administratively liable for a conflict of interest committed by the firm?

Under Canon III of the CPRA, what is required before a lawyer may accept representation adverse to a former client?

Learn more about these topics

1. Conflict of Interest
Under Canon III of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA), a lawyer or law firm is strictly prohibited from representing a new client with interests adverse to a former client in the same or a substantially related matter without the express written informed consent of the former client. The prohibition protects client confidences and preserves absolute fidelity, ensuring that information acquired during a prior engagement is never used to the detriment or prejudice of the former client in subsequent litigation.

2. Duration of Duty
The attorney's duty of confidentiality and loyalty does not terminate upon the expiration, settlement, or formal cessation of the attorney-client relationship. Even after the lawyer's retainer has ended, the lawyer remains perpetually bound to preserve all confidential communications and disclosures made by the former client. Consequently, the prior termination of a professional engagement offers no valid defense against an administrative charge for representing an adverse party in a related criminal or civil proceeding.

3. Imputed Knowledge Rule
Under the doctrine of imputed knowledge, a law firm operates as a single entity, and knowledge acquired by any partner or associate during a client engagement is legally imputed to all other members of the firm. Notice to one partner is notice to all. Therefore, even if individual partners had no actual personal knowledge or direct participation in handling the former client's case, they remain administratively liable for conflict of interest when the law firm subsequently represents an adverse party.

TopicsCode of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA)45Conflict of Interest8Imputed Knowledge Rule1