CHAPTER I. THE LAW AND SOCIETY 10. State the significance of the lawyer’s oath.
10. State the significance of the lawyer’s oath. What in effect, does a lawyer
CANON 1 - A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS
OF THE LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL PROCESSES.
Heirs of Pedro Alilano vs. Atty. Roberto E. Examen (A. C. No. 10132)
Enriquez Sr. vs. Gimenez (G. R. No. L-12817)
Villegas vs. Legaspi
In Re: Guitierrez
Casals vs. Cusi
Far Eastern Shipping Co. vs. CA
Questions:
1. What are the duties of an attorney? (2007)
2. Why is an attorney considered an officer of the court? (2006)
3. Being a lawyer and/or a member of the bar an exceptional privilege
worth aspiring for although it entails a lot of responsibilities and
obligations (a) to the Court; (b) to fellow lawyers; (c) to the clients; and
lastly (d) to the public in general. Briefly discuss these obligations and
responsibilities. (1985)
4. (a) State what Legal Ethics is; its importance; necessity. (b) Explain the
nature between attorney and client, and how said relation is created and
governed.
5. Define Legal Ethics. Enumerate its principal sources. (1978)
6. Lawyer’s oath
7. Atty. X prepared and later acknowledged as Notary Public, a document
which stipulated among others that the contracting parties, husband and
wife authorized each other to remarry and fully renounced whatever
right of action one may take against the party to marrying. Atty. X
strongly represented to the parties that they were free to marry, on the
basis of which representation the husband remarried. Can Atty. X be
disbarred? (1976)
8. What is considered “the first and foremost duty of a lawyer”? Explain.
(1979)
9. Under the CPR what is the principal obligation of a lawyer towards: (1)
the legal profession and the Integrated Bar? (2) His professional
colleagues? (3) The development of the legal system? (4) The
administration of justice? (5) His client? (2004)
represent to a client when he accepts a professional employment for his
services? (2003)
11. Rule 138 Sec. 20
Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or
deceitful conduct.
Ui vs. Bonifacio
Melanio L. Zoreta vs. Atty. Heherson G. Simpliciano
Ting-Dumali vs. Torres
People vs. Tuanda
In Re: Al C. Argosino
Questions:
1. John Doe, former utility man in the Supreme Court and Deo Cruz were
criminally prosecuted in connection with the bar examination
irregularities which misled the Supreme Court into admitting Deo Cruz
to the bar. John Doe pleaded guilty upon being arraigned and was
thereafter sentenced accordingly sentenced. Deo Cruz on the other hand,
entered trial and was thereafter acquitted his guilt not having been
proved beyond reasonable doubt. Subsequently, disbarment
proceedings were instituted against Cruz on the basis of his participation
in the said irregularities.
What is the effect of his acquittal in the criminal case on the disbarment
proceedings against him? Discuss. (1976, 1985)
2. (a) A lawyer was apprehended with 200 cartons of untaxed and
smuggled “blue seal” cigarettes merely to accommodate a friend.
Proceedings to disbar him are commenced, and he defends himself with
the plea that his act of transporting the blue seal untaxed and smuggled
cigarettes had no relation to the practice of law, and that he cannot
therefore be disbarred for that reason. Resolve the issue, giving your
reasons.
(b) Attorney X, barely 22 years old, and just beginning his practice of
law, to accommodate Attorney Z, an old legal practitioner in whose law
 office X was accepted as an associate, and out of respect and gratitude to
his benefactor Z, ratified in his capacity as a notary public a document
personally prepared by Z, in which the latter and Y agreed to live
together as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage, and either
or both of them may marry after one year should the opportunity arise.
May attorney X and Z be disbarred for their respective acts? (1966)
3. A, a practicing attorney, was convicted of falsification of public
documents. He served a part of his sentence. He was, however,
subsequently granted absolute pardon by the President of The
Philippines. May A be thereafter disbarred?(1968)
4. Atty. John Doe is also manager of the real estate department of a
company engaged in real estate brokerage. Atty. John Doe facilitated the
sale of a real property as being owned by one person, knowing that there
is another co-owner. He did this by preparing a deed of self-adjudication
for the wife of the deceased, alleging sole heirship, thus was able to
secure the corresponding certificate of title to the land in the widow’s
sole name and subsequently sold and transferred to a buyer. Atty. John
Doe thus was able to consummate the sale, and collected his real estate
broker’s commission and attorney’s fees. The buyer and now owner,
together with the widow was then sued by the father of the deceased
husband, claiming ownership over half of the subject real estate, these
act then gave rise to the proceedings for disbarment against Atty. John
Doe. He however claimed in his defense, among others, that this
transaction was entered into by hi in his capacity as a real estate broker
and not as a lawyer, wanting to show that this fault on his part, if any,
occurred in his private dealings as a broker and not as a practicing
lawyer, and therefore should not be a ground for disbarment. Decide on
this case. (1971)
5. Lawyer A, while bachelor, cohabited with B, a married woman whose
husband is living with another woman. When A married C, B filed a
complaint for disbarment against him for immorality. Will the complaint
prosper? (1971)
6. In what ways have the Supreme Court and the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines maintained a high moral standard for the legal profession?
Discuss. (1976)
7. X is a lawyer and a Notary Public. On April 5, 1960, Y, an officemate and
friend presented to him for notarization a duly prepared and typed deed
of sale of his car. The acknowledgement clause recited that both the
vendee and the vendor personally appeared before him. X notarized the
same notwithstanding the fact that the vendee and his witnesses were
not present. Subsequently, the alleged vendee, taking advantage of the
notarized deed of sale stole the car, registered it in his name and sold the
same to a third person. When Y told X that the car was stolen, X
annotated in the Notarial Book the remarks, “Stolen and cancelled.” Can
X be disbarred? (1976)
8. Attorney X brought A single and a public school teacher, to the Paradise
Motel and had carnal knowledge of her on the promise of marriage.
Attorney X however, had no intention of marrying A. For this reason, A
filed a complaint for disbarment against X on the ground of gross
immorality and misconduct. Attorney X proved at the hearing that A
voluntarily submitted to him and that the act complained of does not
constitute a ground for disbarment or suspension under the Rules of
Court. May he be disbarred? (1978)
9. What constitutes malpractice? (1979)
10. “What is legal is moral.” (1980)
11. Upon learning from newspaper reports that bar candidate Vic Pugote
passed the bar examinations, Miss Adorable immediately lodged a
complaint with the Supreme Court, praying that Vic Pugote be
disallowed from taking the oath as a member of the Philippine Bar
because he was maintaining illicit sexual relations with several women
other than his lawfully wedded spouse. However, from unexplained
reasons, he succeeded to take his oath as a lawyer. Later, when
confronted with Miss Adorable’s complaint formally, Pugote moved for
its dismissal on the ground that it is already moot and academic. Should
Miss Adorable’s complaint be dismissed or not? (2004)
12. Alleging that Atty. Malibu seduced her when she was only 16 years old,
which resulted in her pregnancy and the birth of a baby girl, Miss
Magayon filed a complaint for his disbarment seven years after the
alleged seduction was committed. Atty. Malibu contended that,
considering the period of delay, the complaint filed against him can no
 longer be entertained much less prosecuted because the alleged offense
had already prescribed. Is Atty. Malibu’s contention tenable or not?
Explain. (2004)
13. Atty. Walasunto has been a member of the Philippine Bar for twenty
years but has never plied his profession as a lawyer. His sole means of
livelihood is selling and buying real estate. In one of his transactions as a
real estate broker, he issued a bouncing check. He was criminally
prosecuted and subsequently convicted for violating B. P. Blg. 22. In the
disbarment proceedings filed against him, Atty. Walasunto contended
that his conviction for violation of B. P. Blg. 22 was not a valid ground for
disciplinary action against a member of the bar. He further argued that
his act in issuing the check was done in relation to his calling as a real
estate broker and not in relation to the exercise of the profession of a
lawyer. Are the contentions of Atty. Walasunto meritorious or not?
14. Atty. N had extramarital affair with O a married woman, as a result of
which they begot a child, P. Atty. N admitted paternity of the child P and
undertook to support him. On the basis of this admission, is Atty. N
subject to disciplinary action by the Supreme Court? (2002)
15. Atty. BB borrowed 30k from EG to be paid in 6 months. Despite
reminders from EG, Atty. BB failed to pay the loan on its due date.
Instead of suing in court, EG lodged with an IBP chapter a complaint for
failure to pay a just debt against Atty. BB. The chapter secretary
endorsed the matter to the Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD). A
Commissioner of the CBD issued an order directing Atty. BB to answer
the complaint against him but the latter ignored the order. Another
order was issued for the parties to appear before the Commissioner at a
certain date and time but only EG showed up. A third order submitting
the case for resolution was likewise ignored by Atty. BB.
(A) May disciplinary action be taken against Atty. BB for his failure to
pay the loan? Why?
(B) Was Atty. BB justified in ignoring the orders of the Commission on
the ground that the Commission had no power to discipline him for acts
done in his private capacity? Why? (2002)
16. Atty. A is an incorrigible gambler. He borrowed money left and right and
was eventually sued for payment of debts. In the Supreme Court, he
moved to dismiss the disbarment case against him reasoning that his
unpaid debts and collection suit against him are not legally valid grounds
to discipline him. Decide? (2001)
17. X, a member of the Bar, was charged with and found guilty of estafa for
which he was sentenced to suffer imprisonment and to indemnify the
offended party for the amount involved. Not having taken an appeal
from the judgment of conviction, upon finality thereof he was taken into
custody to serve sentence. A month after he was incarcerated, he was
granted pardon by the Chief Executive on condition that he would not
commit another offense during the unserved portion of his prison
sentence. Soon after X’s release from custody after being pardoned, the
offended party in the criminal case filed a complaint for disbarment
against X in the Supreme Court. X set up the defense that having been
pardoned by the Chief Executive for which reason he was released from
imprisonment, he may not be disbarred from the practice of law
anymore. Is X’s contention tenable? (1999)
18. Ben filed proceedings for disbarment against his lawyer Atty. Co,
following the latter’s conviction for estafa for misappropriating funds
belonging to his client (Ben). While the proceedings for disbarment was
pending, the President granted absolute pardon in favor of Atty. Co. Atty.
Co, then, moved for the dismissal of the disbarment case. Should the
motion be granted? (1998)
Rule 1.02 - A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the
law or at lessening confidence in the legal system.
Re: 2003 Bar Examination B. M. No. 1222
In Re: Lanuevo
Cosmos Foundry Shop Workers Union vs. Lo Bu (63 SCRA 321)
Kupers v. Hontanosas (A.C. No. 5704. May 8, 2009, 587 SCRA 325)
Question:
1. Atty. Asilo, a lawyer and a notary public, notarized a document already
prepared by spouses Roger and Luisa when they approached him. It is
stated in the document that Roger and Luisa formally agreed to live
 separately from each other and either one can have a live in partner with
full consent of the other. What is the liability of Atty. Asilo, if any? (1998)
Rule 1.03 - A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage any
suit or proceeding or delay any man’s cause.
Reyes vs. Gaa
Castañeda vs. Ago (65 SCRA 505)
Rayos-Ombac vs. Rayos (285 SCRA 100)
De Roy vs. CA
Questions:
1. (a) What does the statement, “I will delay no man for money x x x”, in the
lawyer’s oath mean? Discuss briefly.
(b) Atty. A withdraws as counsel for his client B in the course of the trial
of the latter’s case because B failed to pay him the stipulated fee of P100
per day of actual appearance and attendance in court. Is this delaying the
man (client) for money? Is the withdrawal of A as counsel ethical?
(1966)
2. Barratry vs. Ambulance Chasing (1977)
3. A and B, brothers of full blood, have a serious controversy over a parcel
of land left by their deceased parents. Attorney X, their first cousin,
advised them to partition the property equally between them. A,
however, demanded 2/3 of the property to which B was not agreeable.
To avert any untoward incident between his cousins, X advised B to go to
court. B went to court as advised. A filed an administrative complaint in
violation of Canon 28 of the Canons of Professional Ethics. Will the
complaint against Attorney X prosper? Explain. (1978)
Rule 1.04 - A lawyer shall encourage his clients to avoid, end or settle a
controversy if it will admit of a fair settlement.
De Ysasi III vs. NLRC
Pajares vs. Abad Santos
Castañeda vs. Ago (65 SCRA 505)
Questions:
1. Atty. Cruz appeared in a case for his client, the plaintiff, who was trying
to collect the sum of P100k as per promissory note, against the
defendant. During the trial the defendant offered the sum of P70k as
complete settlement of the case, alleging that he had to sell his house to
raise that money. Atty. Cruz, believing that he should protect the interest
of his client, who is absent, and concluding that his client could no longer
get anything more from the defendant, accepted the offer of payment
and signed the prepared compromised agreement. Did Atty. Cruz act
correctly? (1971)
2. A lawyer was driving home his car from his law office along Recto
Avenue. He noticed a commotion in front of Maxim Theater. He stopped
and got off his car and he found out that there was a collision between
cars resulting to damages to both. There was a heated argument going
on between the parties as to who was at fault. So he identified himself as
a practicing lawyer, and volunteered to amicable settle the case to the
satisfaction of both parties and invited them to his law office. Has he
committed any infraction of professional ethics? Explain. (1979)
3. In a pending case before a trial Court for several years, defendant, then a
minor, was represented by lawyer X who was selected by defendant’s
mother. When defendant reached 23 years of age, he secured a lawyer, Y,
of his own choice, and together with the plaintiff, who was also assisted
by his own counsel, submitted a compromise agreement to the court for
approval, which was not contrary to laws, morals, public order or public
policy.
Lawyer X submitted to the Court a motion and manifestation asking that
action on the compromise agreement be held in abeyance until such time
as evidence is received on the amount of attorney’s fees owing to him.
Is the claim of lawyer X for attorney’s fees a valid ground for holding in
abeyance approval of the compromise agreement entered into by a client
and his adversary? (1980)
CANON 2 - A LAWYER SHALL MAKE HIS LEGAL SERVICES AVAILABLE IN AN
EFFICIENT AND CONVENIENT MANNER COMPATIBLE WITH THE
INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY AND EFFECTIVE-NESS OF THE PROFESSION.

Ledesma vs. Climaco
Rule 2.01 - A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid reasons, the cause of the
defenseless or the oppressed.
Jasper Junno F. Rodica, Vs. Atty. Manuel "Lolong" M. Lazaro, et al. (A.C. No.
9259)
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.
Jasper Junno F. Rodica, Vs. Atty. Manuel "Lolong" M. Lazaro, et al. (A.C. No.
9259)
Rolando B. Pacana, Jr. Vs. Atty. Maricel Pascual-Lopez (A.C. No. 8243)
Rule 2.03 - A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed primarily
to solicit legal business.
In Re: Tagorda (G.R. No. 32329, March 23, 1929)
Khan, Jr. V. Simbillo (A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003)
Director of Religious Affairs vs. Bayot
Ulep vs. The Legal Clinic
Questions:
1. Why is law a profession and not a trade? (2006)
2. (a) Discuss briefly but comprehensively the nature of the profession of
law. (b) Attorney S caused the publication of the following
announcement
Rule 2.04 - A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those customarily
prescribed unless the circumstances so warrant.
CANON 3 - A LAWYER IN MAKING KNOWN HIS LEGAL SERVICES SHALL USE
ONLY TRUE, HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED AND OBJECTIVE INFORMATION OR
STATEMENT OF FACTS.
San Jose Homeowners Assn. vs. Romanillos (AC No. 5580, June 18, 2005)
B.R. Sebastian Enterprises Inc. vs. Court of Appeals (206 SCRA 28)
Dacanay vs. Baker & Mckenzie
Director of Religious Affairs v. Bayot (A.C. No. L-1117, March 20, 1944)
Beltran v. Abad (A. M. No. 139 March 28, 1983)
In re Tagorda (G.R. No. 32329, March 23, 1929)
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.
Khan, Jr. V. Simbillo (A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003)
Ulep vs. The Legal Clinic (A.C. No. 553 June 17, 1993)
Director of Religious Affairs v. Bayot (A.C. No. L-1117, March 20, 1944)
Cabarrus, Jr. V. Bernas (A.C. No. 4634 September 24, 1997)
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.*
Dacanay V. Baker & Mckenzie (G.R. No. L-41862, February 7, 1992)
Pangan vs. Ramos (93 SCRA 87)
Antonio vs. CA (153 SCRA 592)
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.
Dia Anonuevo vs. Bercacio (68 SCRA 81)
Rule 3.04 - A lawyer shall not pay or give anything of value to representatives of
the mass media in anticipation of, or in return for, publicity to attract legal
business.
Ulep vs. The Legal Clinic (A.C. No. 553 June 17, 1993)
Director of Religious Affairs vs. Bayot
CANON 4 - A LAWYER SHALL PARTICIPATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
LEGAL SYSTEM BY INITIATING OR SUPPORTING EFFORTS IN LAW REFORM
AND IN THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.
Cordova V. Labayen (A.M. No. Rtj-93-1033, October 10, 1995)
Dulalia V. Atty. Cruz (A.C. No, 6854, April 25, 2007)
CANON 5 - A LAWYER SHALL KEEP ABREAST OF LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS,
PARTICIPATE IN CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS, SUPPORT
EFFORTS TO ACHIEVE HIGH STANDARDS IN LAW SCHOOLS AS WELL AS IN
THE PRACTICAL TRAINING OF LAW STUDENTS AND ASSIST IN
DISSEMINATING INFORMATION REGARDING THE LAW AND JURISPRUDENCE.
Tamayo vs. Tamayo Jr. (466 SCRA 618)
De Roy V. Court Of Appeals (G.R. No. 80718, January 29, 1988)
Dulalia V. Atty. Cruz (A.C. No, 6854, April 25, 2007)
In Re: Integration of the Bar of the Philippines
Zualo vs. CFI of Cebu (CA-G.R. No. 27718-R July 7, 1961)
CANON 6 - THESE CANONS SHALL APPLY TO LAWYERS IN GOVERNMENT
SERVICE IN THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR OFFICIAL TASKS.
Collantes vs. Renomeron
U.S. vs. Barredo, 32 Phil. 449, G.R. No. L-9278 December 7, 1915
Suarez vs. Platon, 69 Phil. 556
Gonzales-Austria, et al. vs. Abaya, 176 SCRA 634
Enriquez Sr. vs. Hon. Gimenez, 107 Phil. 933
Office of the Court Administrator v. Ladaga (A.M. No. P-99-1287, 26 January 2001,
350 SCRA 326)
Rule 6.01 - The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution is not to
convict but to see that justice is done. The suppression of facts or the
concealment of witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is
highly reprehensible and is cause for disciplinary action.
People of the Philippines vs. Madera
Enriquez vs. Gimenez
U. S. vs. Barredo (32 PHIL 449)
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.
Re: Resolution Of The Court Dated 1 June 2004 In G.R. No. 72954 Against Atty.
Avecilla (A.C. No. 6683, July 21, 2011)
Gonzales-Austria, et al. vs. Abaya, 176 SCRA 634
Collantes vs. Renomeron
Rule 6.03 - A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service, accept
engagement or employment in connection with any matter in which he had
intervened while in said service.
PNB V. Atty. Cedo (A.C. No. 3701, March 28, 1995)
CHAPTER II. LAWYER AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION
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.
St. Louis University High School Faculty and Staff vs. Atty. dela Cruz, AC No. 6010,
Aug. 28,2006
In re the Matter of the Inquiry into the 1989 Election of the IBP, B.M. No. 491, 178
SCRA 398, 06 October 1989
Santos v. Llamas, A.C. No. 4749, 322 SCRA 529, 20 January 2000
Letter of Atty. Cecilio Arevalo, B.M. No. 1370, 458 SCRA 209, 09 May 2005
Velez v. De Vera, A.C. No. 6697, 496 SCRA 345, 25 July 2006
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.
Diao vs. Martinez
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.
Melendrez vs. Decena
In re: Pelaez
Toloza vs. Cargo
Rule 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his
fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life, behave in a
scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession.
The Flight Shop Inc. vs. Barican
Samala vs. Atty. Palaña, AC No. 6395, April 15, 2005
Zaguirre v. Castillo, A.C. No. 4921, 398 SCRA 659, 06 March 2003
Tapucar v. Tapucar, A.C. No. 4148, 293 SCRA 331 , 30 July 1998
Guevarra v. Eala, A.C. No. 7136, 517 SCRA 600, 01 August 2007
Advincula v. Macabata, A.C. No. 7204, 517 SCRA 604, 07 March 2007
Re: Allegations Made Under Oath At the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee Hearing
Held on September 23, 2014 Against Associate Justice Gregory S. Ong,
Sandiganbayan (A.M. No. SB-14-21-J, 23 September 2014)
CANON 8 - A LAWYER SHALL CONDUCT HIMSELF WITH COURTESY, FAIRNESS
AND CANDOR TOWARD HIS PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES, AND SHALL AVOID
HARASSING TACTICS AGAINST OPPOSING COUNSEL.
Bugaring v. Español, G.R. No. 133090, 349 SCRA 687, 19 January 2001
Reyes v. Chiong, A.C. No. 5148, 405 SCRA 212, 01 July 2003
Jardeleza v. Chief Justice Sereno, JBC and ES Ochoa (G.R. No. 213181, 19 August
2014)
Rule 8.01 - A lawyer shall not, in his professional dealings, use language which is
abusive, offensive or otherwise improper.
Salcedo vs. Hernandez
Montecillo vs. Gica
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.
Camacho v. Pangulayan, A.C. No. 4807, 328 SCRA 631, 22 March 2000
CANON 9 - A LAWYER SHALL NOT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ASSIST IN THE
UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW.
Aguirre v. Rana, B.M. No. 1036, 403 SCRA 342, 10 June 2003
Alawi v. Alauya, A.M. SDC-97-2-P, 268 SCRA 639, 24 February 1997
Spouses Suarez v. Salazar, G.R. No. 139281, 315 SCRA 502, 29 September 1999
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.
Heirs of Pedro Alilano vs. Atty. Roberto E. Examen (A. C. No. 10132)
In Re: Elmo S. Abad B. M. No. 139
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 Adez Realty vs. CA
deceased lawyer; or Banogoon vs. Zerna
c) Where a lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer employees in a retirement
Rule 10.03 - A lawyer shall observe the rules of procedure and shall not misuse
plan, even if the plan is based in whole or in part, on a profitable sharing
them to defeat the ends of justice.
arrangement.
Canlas vs. CA
Halili v. CIR, G.R. No. L-24864, 136 SCRA 113, 19 November 1985 Macias vs. Uy Kim
Lijauco v. Terrado, A.C. No. 6317, 500 SCRA 301, 31 August 2006 Garcia vs. Francisco
Rudecon Management Corp. and Atty. Tacorda vs. Atty. Camacho
CHAPTER III. THE LAWYER AND THE COURTS Atty. Vaflor-Fabroa vs. Atty. Oscar Paguinto

CANON 10 - A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH TO THE

COURT. CANON 11 - A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND MAINTAIN THE RESPECT DUE TO
THE COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST ON SIMILAR
Rudecon Management Corp. and Atty. Tacorda vs. Atty. Camacho CONDUCT BY OTHERS.
Atty. Vaflor-Fabroa vs. Atty. Oscar Paguinto
Fernandez vs. De Ramos-Villalon Ng vs. Alar
Langen vs. Borkowski Montecillo vs. Gica
Muñoz vs. People Fernandez vs. De Ramos-Villalon
Rivera vs. Corral
Rule 10.01 - A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any Fudot vs. Cattleya Land
in Court; nor shall he mislead, or allow the Court to be misled by any artifice. Bondoc vs. Judge Simbulan
Guerrero vs. Villamor
Sevilla vs. Zoleta Catorne vs. ducusin
Monterey vs. Arayata Choa vs. Chiongson
In re: Samaniego Abiera vs. Maceda
In re: Rusina
Chavez vs. Viola Rule 11.01 - A lawyer shall appear in court properly attired.
Martin vs. Moreno Rule 11.02 - A lawyer shall punctually appear at court hearings.
Ragacejo vs. IAC
People vs. Gagul
Rule 10.02 - A lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or misrepresent the Cantelang vs. Medina
contents of paper, the language or the argument of opposing counsel, or the text
of a decision or authority, or knowingly cite as law a provision already rendered Rule 11.03 - A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous, offensive or menacing
inoperative by repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact that which has not been language or behavior before the Courts.
proved.
Ng vs. Alar
Insular Life Assurance Co. Employees Association vs. Insular Life Assurance Co. Montecillo vs. Gica
Allied Banking Corp. vs. CA Fudot vs. Cattleya Land
Guerrero vs. Villamor Vda. De Bacaling vs. Hon. Rovira
Surigao Mineral Reservation Board vs. Cloribel
Buenaseda vs. Flavier Rule 12.01 - A lawyer shall not appear for trial unless he has adequately
Sangalang vs. IAC prepared himself on the law and the facts of his case, the evidence he will
Paragas vs. Cruz adduce and the order of its preferences. He should also be ready with the
Zaldivar vs. Gonzales original documents for comparison with the copies.

Rule 11.04 - A lawyer shall not attribute to a Judge motives not supported by the Villasis vs. CA
record or have no materiality to the case.
Rule 12.02 - A lawyer shall not file multiple actions arising from the same cause.
Maceda vs. Ombudsman
In Re: Aguas Rudecon Management Corp. and Atty. Tacorda vs. Atty. Camacho
People vs. Carillo Atty. Vaflor-Fabroa vs. Atty. Oscar Paguinto
In Re: Almacen Far Eastern Shipping Co. vs. CA
Choa vs. Chiongson Garcia vs. Francisco
In Re: Lozano Capt. Cabagui vs. CA
In Re: Ponciano B. Jacinto
Rule 12.03 - A lawyer shall not, after obtaining extensions of time to file
Rule 11.05 - A lawyer shall submit grievances against a Judge to the proper pleadings, memoranda or briefs, let the period lapse without submitting the
authorities only. same or offering an explanation for his failure to do so.

Re: Suspension of Atty. Bagabuyo, Former Senior State Prosecutor People vs. Rosquetta
Maceda vs. Vasquez Achacoso vs. CA
Maglasang vs. People Garcia vs. Francisco
Urbina vs. Maceren Perez vs. Lazatin
People vs. Jardin
CANON 12 - A LAWYER SHALL EXERT EVERY EFFORT AND CONSIDER IT HIS
DUTY TO ASSIST IN THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF Rule 12.04 - A lawyer shall not unduly delay a case, impede the execution of a
JUSTICE. judgement or misuse Court processes.

People vs. Jardin People vs. Jardin

Berbano v. Barcelona
Sebastian v. Bajar Rule 12.05 - A lawyer shall refrain from talking to his witness during a break or
Hegna v. Paderanga recess in the trial, while the witness is still under examination.
Plus Builders v. Revilla
Fil-Garcia, Inc. v. Hernandez
Rudecon Management Corp. and Atty. Tacorda vs. Atty. Camacho
Atty. Vaflor-Fabroa vs. Atty. Oscar Paguinto Rule 12.06 - A lawyer shall not knowingly assist a witness to misrepresent
Far Eastern Shipping Co. vs. CA himself or to impersonate another.
Garcia vs. Francisco
US vs Ballena
People vs. Bautista Foodsphere Inc. vs. Atty. Mauricio Jr.
Bumanlag vs. Bumanlag
Rule 12.07 - A lawyer shall not abuse, browbeat or harass a witness nor
needlessly inconvenience him. CHAPTER IV. THE LAWYER AND THE CLIENT
CANON 14 - A LAWYER SHALL NOT REFUSE HIS SERVICES TO THE NEEDY.

Blanza and Pasion vs. Atty. Arcangel

Rule 12.08 - A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf of his client, except: Francisco et al. vs. Atty. Portugal
a) on formal matters, such as the mailing, authentication or custody of an Regala vs. Sandiganbayan
instrument, and the like, or Dee vs. Court of Appeals
b) on substantial matters, in cases where his testimony is essential to the ends of Hilado vs. David
justice, in which event he must, during his testimony, entrust the trial of the case Seva vs. Nolan
to another counsel. Foodsphere v. Mauricio
Suspension of Atty. Bagubayao
PNB vs. Tieng Piao

CANON 13 - A LAWYER SHALL RELY UPON THE MERITS OF HIS CAUSE AND Rule 14.01 - A lawyer shall not decline to represent a person solely on account of
REFRAIN FROM ANY IMPROPRIETY WHICH TENDS TO INFLUENCE, OR GIVES the latter’s race, sex, creed or status of life, or because of his own opinion
THE APPEARANCE OF INFLUENCING THE COURT regarding the guilt of said person.

Re: Suspension of Atty. Bagabuyo, Former Senior State Prosecutor

Foodsphere Inc. vs. Atty. Mauricio Jr.
Rule 14.02 - A lawyer shall not decline, except for serious and sufficient cause,
Rule 13.01 - A lawyer shall not extend extraordinary attention or hospitality to, an appointment as counsel de oficio or as amicus curiae, or a request from the
nor seek opportunity for cultivating familiarity with Judges. Integrated Bar of the Philippines or any of its chapters for rendition of free legal
aid.
Austria vs. Masaquel
Ledesma vs. Climaco
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 14.03 - A lawyer may not refuse to accept representation of an indigent
client unless:
Re: Suspension of Atty. Bagabuyo, Former Senior State Prosecutor a) he is in no position to carry out the work effectively or competently;
Cruz vs. Salva b) he labors under a conflict of interest between him and the prospective client
Marcelino vs. Alejandro or between a present client and the prospective client;
In re: Gomez
In re: Lozano

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.
Rule 14.04 - A lawyer who accepts the cause of a person unable to pay his Justo vs. Galing
professional fees shall observe the same standard of conduct governing his Arangan vs. Rodriguez
relations with paying clients.
Rule 15.04 - A lawyer may, with the written consent of all concerned, act as
Blanza and Pasion vs. Atty. Arcangel mediator, conciliator or arbitrator in settling disputes.

CANON 15 - A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND LOYALTY IN

ALL HIS DEALINGS AND TRANSACTIONS WITH HIS CLIENTS.
Rule 15.05 - A lawyer when advising his client, shall give a candid and honest
Lim-Santiago vs. Atty. Sagucio opinion on the merits and probable results of the client’s case, neither
Gonzales vs. Atty. Cabucana overstating nor understating the prospects of the case.
Justo vs. Galing
Arangan vs. Rodriguez Castañeda vs. Ago
Suarez vs. CA Choa vs. Chiongson
Oparel Sr. vs. Abara Periquet vs. NLRC
Hilado v. David
Nakpil v. Valdes Rule 15.06 - A lawyer shall not state or imply that he is able to influence any
Hornilla v. Salunat public official, tribunal or legislative body.
Northwestern University v. Arquillo Rule 15.07 - A lawyer shall impress upon his client compliance with the laws and
Quiambao v. Bamba principles of fairness.
Heirs of Falame v. Baguio
Pacana v. Pascual-Lopez Conge vs. Deret
Cabilan vs. Ramolete
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 Rule 15.08 - A lawyer who is engaged in another profession or occupation
client or his own interest, and if so, shall forthwith inform the prospective client. concurrently with the practice of law shall make clear to his client whether he is
acting as a lawyer or in another capacity.
Sta. Maria vs. Tuazon
CANON 16 - A LAWYER SHALL HOLD IN TRUST ALL MONEYS AND PROPERTIES
Rule 15.02 - A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on privilege communication in OF HIS CLIENT THAT MAY COME INTO HIS POSSESSION.
respect of matters disclosed to him by a prospective client.
Ordonio vs. Eduarte
Baldwin vs. CIR Meneses vs. Macalino
Celaje vs. Soriano
Rule 15.03 - A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by written Atty. Penticostes vs. Prosecutor Ibañez
consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts. Licuanan v. Melo
Posidio v. Vitan
Lim-Santiago vs. Atty. Sagucio Lemoine v. Balon
Gonzales vs. Atty. Cabucana Re: Atty. Maquera
Hilado vs. David Reddi v. Sersbio
De Chavez-Blanco v. Lumasag Cantiller vs. Potenciano
Wilson Charm v. Patta-Moya
Jerry T. Wong v. Atty. Salvador N. Moya II CANON 18 - A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT WITH COMPETENCE AND
DILIGENCE.
Rule 16.01 - A lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or
received for or from the client. Somosot vs. Lara
Suarez vs. CA
Celaje vs. Soriano Blaza vs. CA
Atty. Penticostes vs. Prosecutor Ibañez Hernandez v. Go
In Re: Tuazon PANELCO v. Montemayor
Sps. Adecer v. Akut
Rule 16.02 - A lawyer shall keep the funds of each client separate and apart from Belleza v. Macasa
his own and those of others kept by him. Overgaard v. Valdez
Angalan v. Delante
In Re: Bamberger Santon-Tan v. Robino

Rule 16.03 - A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when due Rule 18.01 - A lawyer shall not undertake a legal service which he knows or
or upon demand. However, he shall have a lien over the funds and may apply so should know that he is not qualified to render. However, he may render such
much thereof as may be necessary to satisfy his lawful fees and disbursements, service if, with the consent of his client, he can obtain as collaborating counsel a
giving notice promptly thereafter to his client. He shall also have a lien to the lawyer who is competent on the matter.
same extent on all judgements and executions he has secured for his client as
provided for in the Rules of Court. Garcia vs. Flores
Robinson vs. Villafuerte
Meneses vs. Macalino
In re: David Rule 18.02 - A lawyer shall not handle any legal matter without adequate
preparation.
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. Bautista vs. Rebueno
Neither shall a lawyer lend money to a client except, when in the interest of Javellana vs. Lutero
justice, he has to advance necessary expenses in a legal matter he is handling for Legarda vs. CA
the client.
Rule 18.03 - A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his
Bautista vs. Gonzales negligence in connection there with shall render him liable.

CANON 17 - A LAWYER OWES FIDELITY TO THE CAUSE OF HIS CLIENT AND HE Suarez vs. CA
SHALL BE MINDFUL OF THE TRUST AND CONFIDENCE REPOSED IN HIM. Philippine Bank of Commerce vs. Aruego
Adarne vs. Aldaba
Santiago vs. Fojas In re: Filart
Bautista vs. Gonzales
Sps. Aranda vs. Elayda
Rule 18.04 - A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case and Sesbreno v. CA
shall respond within a reasonable time to client’s request for information. Bautista v. Gonzales
Gamilla v. Marino
Oparel vs. Albaria Pineda v. De Jesus
Alcala vs. De Vera Roxas v. De Zuzuarregui
Law Firm of Tungol and Tibayan v. CA
CANON 19 - A LAWYER SHALL REPRESENT HIS CLIENT WITH ZEAL WITHIN
THE BOUNDS OF THE LAW. Rule 20.01 - A lawyer shall be guided by the following factors in determining his
fees:
Peña vs. Aparicio a) The time spent and the extent of the services rendered or required;
RCBI Bohol vs. Florido b) The novelty and difficulty of the questions involved;
Maglasang vs. People c) The importance of the subject matter;
Briones v. Jimenez d) The skill demanded;
e) The probability of losing other employment as a result of acceptance of the
Rule 19.01 - A lawyer shall employ only fair and honest means to attain the proffered case;
lawful objectives of his client and shall not present, participate in presenting or f) The customary charges for similar services and the schedule of fees of the IBP
threaten to present unfounded criminal charges to obtain an improper chapter to which he belongs;
advantage in any case or proceeding. g) The amount involved in the controversy and the benefits resulting to the
client form the service;
Peña vs. Aparicio h) The contingency or certainty of compensation;
Surigao Mineral Reservation Board vs. Cloribel i) The character of the employment, whether occasional or established; and
Lacsamana vs. dela Peña j) The professional standing of the lawyer.

Rule 19.02 - A lawyer who has received information that his client has, in the Bermejo vs. Sia
course of the representation, perpetrated a fraud upon a person or tribunal, Jones vs. Hortiguela
shall promptly call upon the client to rectify the same, and failing which he shall Oroso Hernaez
terminate the relationship with such client in accordance with the Rules of Fernandez vs. Bello
Court. Ledesma vs. Climaco
Rule 19.03 - A lawyer shall not allow his client to dictate the procedure on
handling the case. 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 work performed and responsibility
Caballero vs. Deiparine assumed.
Cosmos Foundry Shop Worker’s Union vs. Lo Bu Amalgamated Laborer’s Association vs. CIR

CANON 20 - A LAWYER SHALL CHARGE ONLY FAIR AND REASONABLE FEES. 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
Dalisay vs. Mauricio allowance or other compensation whatsoever related to his professional
Cueto vs. Jimenez Jr. employment from anyone other than the client.
Albano vs. Coloma
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. CA Diaz vs. Capunan
Recto vs. Harden Mercado vs. De Vera

Rule 20.04 - A lawyer shall avoid controversies with clients concerning his Rule 21.03 - A lawyer shall not, without the written consent of his client, give
compensation and shall resort to judicial action only to prevent imposition, information from his files to an outside agency seeking such information for
injustice of fraud. auditing, statistical, bookkeeping, accounting, data processing, or any similar
purpose.
Cueto vs. Jimenez Jr.
Lacson vs. Reyes People vs. Syjuco
Retuya vs. Gorduiz
Caballero vs. Deiparine 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.
CANON 21 - A LAWYER SHALL PRESERVE THE CONFIDENCE AND SECRETS OF
HIS CLIENT EVEN AFTER THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATION IS TERMINATED

Salonga vs. Hildawa Rule 21.05 - A lawyer shall adopt such measures as may be required to prevent
Palm vs. Atty. Iledan Jr. those whose services are utilized by him, from disclosing or using confidences or
Mercado vs. De Vera secrets of the client.
Rosacia vs. Bulalacao
Regala v. Sandiganbayan
Pfleider v. Palanca
Mercado v. Vitriolo Rule 21.06 - A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet conversation about a client’s affairs
Genato v. Silapan even with members of his family.
Hadjula v. Madianda
Rebecca J. Palm v. Atty. Felipe Iledan, Jr.

Rule 21.01 - A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or secrets of his client Rule 21.07 - A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been consulted about a
except: particular case except to avoid possible conflict of interest.
a) When authorized by the client after acquianting him of the consequences of
the disclosure; Palm vs. Atty. Iledan Jr.
b) When required by law;
c) When necessary to collect his fees or to defend himself, his employees or CANON 22 - A LAWYER SHALL WITHDRAW HIS SERVICES ONLY FOR GOOD
associates or by judicial action. CAUSE AND UPON NOTICE APPROPRIATE IN THE CIRTUMSTANCES.

Orcino vs. Gaspar

Cenizia vs. Rubia
Rule 21.02 - A lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his client, use information Cabildo vs. Navarro
acquired in the course of employment, nor shall he use the same to his own Palanca vs. Pecson
advantage or that of a third person, unless the client with full knowledge of the Wack Wack Gold and Country Club v. CA
circumstances consents thereto. Venterez v. Cosme
Santero v. Vance
Francisco v. Portugal
Metrobank v. CA
Doronila-Tioseco v. CA
Sesbreno v. CA

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.

Orcino vs. Gaspar

Mercado vs. Ubay
Auino vs. Blanco
Dalisay vs. Goyo
Visitacion vs. Manit

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.

Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company vs. CA

Sarmiento vs. Montagne
Ampil vs. Agrava
Candelario vs. Cañizares