EASTERN SAMAR STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF LAW AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Borongan City, Eastern Samar

Course Syllabus
2nd Semester, SY 2019-2020
LEGAL & JUDICIAL ETHICS
By: Atty. ARJUN D. GERMONES

Description: A course that examines the lawyer’s noble function in society, whether as a
private practitioner, as a crafter or implementer of laws and rules, as a prosecutor of
criminal offenders or a Judge. It introduces the students to a general overview of the ethical
and moral values to which every lawyer needs to commit his/her life and talents.

I. LEGAL ETHICS
A. Practice of law (Rule 138)
1. Concept
a. Definition of the practice of law
 Cayetano vs Monsod, G.R. No. 100113, 3 September 1991, 201
SCRA 210
 Aguirre vs Rana, B. M. No. 1036. June 10, 2003
b. Practice of law is a privilege, not a right
 Samonte vs Abellana, A.C. No. 3452, June 23, 2014
 Alcantara vs De Vera, A.C. No. 5859, November 23, 2010
c. Practice of law is a profession, not business or trade
 Khan vs Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299. August 19, 2003
 Burbe vs Magulta, AC No. 99-634, June 10, 2002
2. Qualifications for admission to the Bar
a. Bar Matter No. 1153, amending Sections 5 & 6 of rule 138
3. Continuing requirements for membership in the bar
a. Good moral character
b. Citizenship
i. Reacquisition of the privilege to practice law in the Philippines
under RA 9225
4. Appearance of Non-lawyers
a. Law student practice rule (Rule 138-A)
b. Non-lawyers in courts
c. Non-lawyers in administrative tribunals
d. Proceedings where lawyers are prohibited in appearing as counsels;
5. Sanctions for practice and appearance without authority
a. Lawyers without authority
b. Persons who are not lawyers
 Arienda vs Monilla A.M. No. P-11-2980, June 10, 2013
 Beltran Jr. vs Abad, Bar Matter No. 139, 28 March 1983, 121
SCRA 217.
6. Public officials and the practice of law
a. Prohibition or disqualification of former government attorneys
b. Public officials who cannot practice law or can practice law with
restrictions
7. Lawyers who are authorized to represent government
8. Lawyer’s Oath
B. The Code of Professional Responsibility (Four-fold duties of a Lawyer)

1. To Society (Canons 1-6)

a. Respect for law and legal processes
b. Efficient and convenient legal services
c. True, honest, fair, dignified and objective information on legal services
d. Participation in the improvement and reforms in the legal system
e. Participation in legal education program
Cases:
 Donton vs Atty. Tansingco, A.C. No. 6057, June 27, 2006
 Figueroa vs Barranco, SBC Case No. 519, July 31, 1997
 Obusan vs Obusan, Jr., Admin Case No. 1392, April 2, 1984
 Terre vs Terre, A.M. No. 2349, July 3, 1992
 Radjaie vs Alovera, A.C No. 4748, Aug. 4, 2000
 Mecaral vs Velazquez, A.C. No. 8392, June 29, 2010
 Advincula vs Macabata, A.C. No. 7204, March 7, 2007

1|Page
  Toledo vs Abalos, A.C. No. 5141, Sept. 29,
1999
 Lao vs Medel, A.C. No 5916, July 1, 2003
 Vitug vs Rongcal, A.C. No. 6313, September 7, 2006
 Villanueva vs Sta. Ana, CBD Case No. 251, July 11, 1995
 Soriano vs Dizon, A.c No. 6792, January 25, 2006
 People vs Estebia, G.R. No. L-26868, Feb. 27, 1969)

2. To the legal profession (Canons 7-9)

a. Integrated Bar of the Philippines (Rule 139-A)
i. Membership and dues
b. Upholding the dignity and integrity of the profession
c. Courtesy, fairness and candor towards professional colleagues
d. No assistance in unauthorized practice of law
Cases:
 In the Matter of the Integration of the Bar of the Philippines,
49SCRA22, Jan. 9, 1973
 In the Matter of IBP Membership Dues Delinquency of Atty.
Edillon, A.C. No. 1928, Dec. 19, 1980
 Santos Jr. vs Atty. Llamas, A.C. No 4749, January 20, 2000
 Letter of Atty. Arevalo, Jr. Requesting Exemption from Payment of
Dues, B.M No. 1370, May 9, 2005
 Suo vs Cloribel, A.M. No. 01-1-15-RTC, July 10, 2003
 Castillo vs Padilla, Jr., A.M. No. 2339, February 1984
 National Security Co. vs Jarvis, 278 U.S 610
 In Re Climaco, A.C. No 134-J, January 21, 1974
 Tiongco Yared vs Ilarde, G.R. No. 114732, August 1, 2000

3. To the courts (Canons 10-13)

a. Candor, fairness and good faith towards the courts
b. Respect for courts and judicial officers
c. Assistance in the speedy and efficient administration of justice
d. Reliance on merits of his cause and avoidance of any impropriety
which tends to influence or gives the appearance of influence upon the
courts
 Maligaya vs Doronilla, A.C. No. 6198, Sept. 15, 2006;
 Olivarez vs Villalon, A.C. No. 6323, April 13, 2007;
 Pobre vs Senator Santiago, A.C. No: 7399, Aug. 25, 2009
 Jardin vs Atty. Villar Jr. ,A.C. No. 5474, Aug. 28, 2003;
 Paredes vs Sandiganbayan, G.R. No: 108251, Jan. 31, 1996;
 Foronda vs Atty. Guerero, A.C. No. 5469, Aug. 10, 2004;
 People vs Boras, G.R. No. 127495, Dec. 22, 2000;

4. To the clients (Canons 14-22)

a. Availability of service without discrimination
i. Services regardless of person’s status
ii. Services as counsel de officio
 Ledesma vs Climaco, G.R. No. L-23815, June 28,1974;
iii. Valid grounds for refusal to serve as counsel de officio
 People vs Daeng, G.R. No. L-34091, Jan. 30, 1973;
b. Candor, fairness and loyalty to clients
i. Confidentiality Rule
ii. Privileged communications
 Regala vs Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 105938, Sept. 20,
1996;
iii. Conflict of interest
 Artueza vs Atty. Maderazo, A.C. No. 4354, Apr 22, 2002;
 Dee vs Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 77439, Aug. 24, 1989;
 Nakpil vs Valdez, A.C. No. 2040, Mar. 4, 1998;
iv. Candid and honest advise to clients
 Rollon vs Naraval, A.C. N0. 6424, Mar. 4, 2005;
v. Compliance with laws
vi. Concurrent practice of another profession
c. Client’s moneys and properties
 De Guzman vs Atty. Basa, A.C. 5554, June 29, 2004;
 Espiritu vs Ulep, A.C. No. 5808, May 4, 2005;
 Espiritu vs Cabredo, A.C. 5831, Jan. 13, 2005;

2|Page
  Fernandez vs Atty. Cabrera II, A.C.
No. 5623, Dec. 11, 2003;
 Frias vs Lozada, A.C. No. 6656, Dec. 13, 2005
d. Fidelity to client’s cause
e. Competence and diligence
f. Representation with zeal within legal bounds
g. Attorney’s fees
 Concept Placement Resources vs Atty. Funk, G.R. No.
137680, Feb. 6, 2004;
 Bautista vs Gonzales, A.M. No. 1625, Feb. 12, 1990;
 Pineda vs De Jesus, G.R. No. 155224, Aug. 23, 2006;
 DOY Mercantile vs AMA, G.R. No. 155311, Mar. 31, 2004;
h. Preservation of client’s confidences;
 Samson vs Era, A.C. No. 6664, July 16, 2013;
i. Withdrawal of services

C. Suspension, disbarment, and discipline of lawyers (Rule 139-B as amended by

Bar Matter 1645)
1. Nature and characteristic of disciplinary actions against lawyers
a. Sui generis
 In Re Almacen, GR No: L-27654, Feb. 18,1970
b. Prescription
 Heirs of Falame vs Atty. Baguio, AC No: 6876, Mar. 7,
2008
2. Grounds
 In Re Puno, AC No. 389, Feb. 28, 1967
3. Proceedings
 Rayos-Ombac vs Rayos, AC No. 2884, Jan. 28, 1998
4. Discipline of Filipino lawyers practicing abroad

D. Readmission to the bar

1. Lawyers who have been suspended
 Maniago vs Atty De Dios, AC No. 7472, Mar. 30, 2010
2. Lawyers who have been disbarred
 In Re Rovero, A.M. No. 126, Dec. 29, 1980
3. Lawyers who have been repatriated
 Petition for leave to resume practice of law of Benjamin
Dacanay, B.M. No. Dec. 17, 2007

E. Mandatory Continuing Legal Education

1. Purpose
2. Requirements
3. Compliance
4. Exemptions
5. Sanctions

F. Notarial Practice (A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC)

1. Qualifications of Notary Public
2. Term of Office of Notary Public
3. Powers and limitations
4. Notarial Register
5. Jurisdiction of notary public & place of notarization
6. Revocation of commission
7. Competent evidence of identity
8. Sanctions

II. JUDICIAL ETHICS

A. Sources
1. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary (Bangalore Draft)
a. Independence
 Alfonso vs Alonzo – Legasto, AM No. MTJ-94-995, Sept. 5,
2002;
b. Integrity
 In re Del Castillo, AM No. 10-7-17-SC, Feb. 8, 2011;

3|Page
 c. Impartiality
 Gochan vs Gochan, G.R. No. 143089, Feb. 27, 2003;
 Ty vs Banco Filipino Savings, G.R. No. 149797-98, Feb.
13, 2004;
 Re: Inhibition of Judge Eddie R. Rojas, A.M. No. 98-6-185-
RTC. Oct. 30, 1998
d. Propriety
 Vidal vs Judge Dojillo Jr., A.M. No. MTJ-05-1591, July 14,
2005;
 Reyes vs Duque, A.M. No. RTJ-08-2136, Sept. 21, 2010;
 Jamsani-Rodriguez vs Ong, A.M. No. 08-19-SB-J, Aug. 24,
2010;
 Gordon vs Lilagam, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1564, July 26, 2001;
 Binalay vs Lelina, Jr., A.M No. RTJ-08-2132, July 31, 2009;
 Heirs of late Rev. Fr. Jose Aspiras vs Judge Ganay, A.M.
No. RTJ-07-2055, Dec. 17, 2009;
e. Equality
 Atty. Quinto vs Judge Vios, A.M. No. MTJ-04-1551, May
21, 2004;
 People vs Boras, G.R. No. 127495, Dec. 22, 2000;
f. Competence and diligence
 Bayaca vs Judge Ramos, A.M. No. MTJ-07-1676, Jan. 29,
2009;
 Judge Delos Santos vs Judge Mangino, A.M. No. MTJ-03-
1496, July 10, 2003;

2. Code of Judicial Conduct

B. Administrative jurisdiction over Judges and Justices

C. Disqualification of Judicial Officers (Rule 137)
1. Compulsory
2. Voluntary
D. Initiation of complaint against Judges and Justices
E. Discipline of members of the Judiciary
1. Supreme Court
2. Lower Court Judges and Justices of the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan,
and Court of Tax Appeals (Rule 140)
3. Grounds
4. Sanctions imposed by the Supreme Court on erring members of the
Judiciary

- END -

4|Page