ETHICS MIDTERMS REVIEWER
A. BASIC CONCEPTS
LEGAL ETHICS—branch of moral science which treats
of the duties which an attorney owes to the courts, to
his clients, to his colleagues in the profession and to
the public.
CJ Moran’s definition: Legal Ethics is the embodiment
of all principles of morality and refinement that should
govern the conduct of every member of the bar.
Bases of Legal Ethics
(a) Constitution:
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 underprivileged.
Such rules shall provide a simplified and
inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition
of cases, shall be uniform for all courts of the
same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or
modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of
special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall
remain effective unless disapproved by the
Supreme Court.
(b) Rules of Court
Rule 137—Disqualification of Judges
Rule 138-A—Law Student Practice Rule
Rule 139-A—The IBP
Rule 139-B—Disbarment and Discipline of
Attorneys
Bar Matter 1960—Amendment to Sec 1, Rule 139-
B of the RoC
(c) Statutes
Civil Code: Art. 1491; Art 2208
(d) Code of Professional Responsibility
(e) Canons of Professional Ethics
Requirements for the Admission to the Bar and to Remain
in the Practice of Law
1. Citizen of the Philippines;
2. At least 21 years of age;
3. Of Good Moral Character;
Note: This requirement is not only a condition
precedent to the admission to the practice of law;
its continued possession is also essential for
remaining in the practice of law.
4. RESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES;
5. Must product before the SC satisfactory evidence
of good moral character;
6. No charges against him involving moral turpitude
have been filed or are pending in any court in the
Philippines (Rule 138, Sec 2 ROC)
7. Must have complied with the Academic
requirements:
a. Completion of a 4-year high school course;
b. A bachelor’s degree in arts or sciences;
c. Four-year bachelor’s in law with completed
courses in civil law, commercial law, remedial
law, criminal law, public and private
international law and social legislation,
medical jurisprudence, taxation and legal
ethics. (Rule 138 Sec 5 and 6)
8. Pass the bar exams;
9. Take the lawyer’s oath; and
10. Sign the Roll of Attorneys and receive certificate
of license to practice
Case doctrines:
GOOD MORAL CHARACTER
1) Royong v Oblena: Falsification of petition to take
the bar examinations—SC asserts that one’s own
approximation of himself is not a gauge to his
moral character. Moral character as what a
person really is and not what he or other person
think he is. Respondent lived an adulterous life,
and the fact people somehow accepted him in this
status does not render him a person of GMC.
2) In Re Basa: Moral turpitude—includes everything
which is done contrary honest, modestly or good
morals. The inherent nature of the act is such that
it is against good morals and the accepted rule of
right conduct.
3) Arciga v Maniwang: Breach of Promise to Marry
warrants disbarment if it so corrupt and
unprincipled conduct.
4) In Re Vinzon: Estafa is a crime involving moral
turpitude because the act is against justice,
honesty and good morals. This may warrant
disbarment.
5) Bacarro v. Pinatacan: Wrongfulness of his
conduct was condoned by the court through his
acts of acknowledging his daughter and made to
depend on his compliance with his moral and
legal obligations as a father to Pinatacan. (stange
case)
6) Villasanta v. Peralta: Marriage which is a sacred
institution demanding respect and dignity;
contracting a second marriage is contrary to
honesty,justice, decency and morality. He made
a mockery of marriage; lacking the good moral
character required by the RoC. He was
disqualified from being admitted to the Bar.
7) In Re Lanuevo: A bar applicant was required to
produce before the Supreme Court satisfactory
testimonials of good moral character. Every
applicant is duty bound to lay before the Court all
his involvement in any criminal case, pending or
otherwise terminated, to enable the Court to fully
ascertain or determine applicant's moral
character. It follows that one needs to lay down
before the SC his or her personal records—
whether he is criminaly indicted or a case is
pending; whether the crime involves moral
turpitude.
 ETHICS MIDTERMS REVIEWER
8) Diao v Martinez: Martinez did not comply with the  Determining whether the crime involves based
academic requirements but he passed the bar solely on the elements of the crime
exam; he was disbarred for falsifying his Third approach: Subjective Approach
qualification.  Takes the offender and his acts into account in
9) Leda v. Tabang: He declared that he was single light of the attendant circumstances of the crime
in his application—this was a gross  Was he motivated by ill-will indicating depravity?
misrepresentation of a material fact made in utter
bad faith, for which he should be made  Falsification is a crime involving moral turpitude for it
answerable. SC suspended Tabang and ruled that is an act contrary to justice, honesty and good morals
he is grossly unfit and unworthy to continue to be (In Re Pactolin)
entrusted with the duties and responsibilities  WON Pardon in an affidavit extended by the plaintiff
belonging to the office of an attorney. warrants a dismissal of the disbarment case for gross
10) In Re Argosino: The practice of law is not a immoral conduct? NO, the respondent’s act of having
natural, absolute or constitutional right to be an affair with his client’s wife manifested his
granted to everyone who demands it. Rather, it disrespect for the laws on the sanctity of marriage
is a high personal privilege limited to citizens of and his own marital vow of fidelity. It showed his
good moral character, with special educational utmost moral depravity and low regard for the ethics
qualifications, duly ascertained and certified. The of his profession. (Tiong v. Florendo)
Court stresses that good moral character is a  As an officer of the court, it is a lawyer’s duty to
requirement possession of which must be uphold the dignity and authority of the court. The
demonstrated not only at the time of application highest form of respect for judicial authority is shown
for permission to take the bar but also at the time by a lawyer’s obedience to court orders and
of taking the lawyer’s oath. processes. Failure to comply with Court directives
11) Zari v. Flores: Conviction for libel is a crime constitutes gross misconduct, insubordination or
involving moral turpitude. disrespect which merits a lawyer’s suspension or even
disbarment. (Santeco v. Avance)
CANON 1—A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution,  Some cirmes involving moral turpitude: (In Re Basa)
obey the laws of the land and promote respect for
law and legal processes. 1. Abduction with consent
2. Bigamy
Rule 1.01. a lawyer shall not engage in: 3. Concubinage
(1) Unlawful; 4. Smuggling
(2) Immoral; or 5. Rape
(3) Deceitful conduct 6. Estafa through falsification of a
document
MORAL TURPITUDE 7. Attempted Bribery
Black’s law dictionary: [An] act of baseness, vileness, or 8. Profiteering
the depravity in private and social duties which man owes 9. Robbery
to his fellow man, or to society in general, contrary to the 10. Murder, whether consummated or
accepted and customary rule of right and duty between attempted
man and man. xxx Act or behavior that gravely violates 11. Estafa
moral sentiment or accepted moral standards of 12. Theft
community and is a morally culpable quality held to be 13. Illicit Sexual Relations with a Fellow
present in some criminal offenses as distinguished from Worker
others. xxx The quality of a crime involving grave 14. Violation of BP Bldg. 22
infringement of the moral sentiment of the community as 15. Falsification of Document
distinguished from statutory mala prohibita. (Teves v. 16. Intriguing against Honor
Comelec) 17. Violation of the Anti-Fencing Law
18. Violation of Dangerous Drugs Act of
Approaches in determining moral turpitude: (Teves v. 1972 (Drug-pushing)
Comelec) 19. Perjury
First approach: The Objective Approach 20. Forgery
 Determining whether or not an act is intrinsically 21. Direct Bribery
immoral; the act itself must be inherently immoral 22. Frustrated Homicide
(Zari v. Flores)
Second approach: From the Perspective of the
Elements of the Crime

THE LAWYER’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 wittingly nor willingly promote or sue any
groundless, false or unlawful suit, or give aid nor consent
to the doing of the same; I will delay no man for money
or malice, and will conduct myself as a lawyer 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 obligation without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God.
 The lawyer’s oath 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 makes when taking the
lawyer’s oath. (In Re Argosino)
 It is a source of all the ethical obligations of a
lawyer; and its violation is a ground for his
suspension, disbarment or other disciplinary
action.
FOUR-FOLD DUTIES OF A LAWYER (4Cs)
Obligation or duty to the:
1) Court—respect or defend it againsy criticisms,
uphold authority and dignity, obey its orders and
processes, assist in the administration of justice.
2) Client—entire devotion to client’s interest
3) Colleagues (the Bar)—candor, fairness, courtesy,
criticism, avoid encroachment in the business of
other lawyers, uphold the honor of profession.
4) Community (Public)—should not violate his
responsibility to society, exemplar
uprighteousness, ready to render legal aid, foster
social reforms, guardian of due process, aware of
special role in the solution of special problems
and be always ready to lend assistance in the
study and solution of social problems.
COMMON TERMS
 Trial Lawyer-a lawyer who personally handles
cases in court, administrative agencies or boards;
one who engages in actual trial work
 Practicing Lawyer-one engaged in the practice of
law.
 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 characteristic of the profession.
Generally, to practice law is to give notice or
render any kind of service which require the use
ETHICS MIDTERMS REVIEWER
in any degree of legal knowledge or skill.
(Cayetano vs. Monsod, 201 SCRA 210)
 Quantum meruit- “as much as he has deserved”;
authorized when:
(i) there is no express contract (Pineda
vs . de Jesus, 499 SCRA 608);
(ii) although there is a contract, the fees
stipulated are found unreasonable or
unconscionable (Mambulao Lumber
vs.PNB, 22 SCRA 355);
(iii) when the contract for attorney’s fees
is void due to purely formal matters or
defect in the execution;
(iv) when the lawyer is unable to finish the
case; and
(v) when both lawyer and client disregard
the contract
 Barratry - fomenting suits among individuals and
offering his services to one of them
 Ambulance chasing -Figuratively chasing an
ambulance carrying the victim and offering his
services on contingent basis
 Amicus curiae - Friend of the court
 Assumpsit-an agreement or promise made orally
or in writing, not under seal, a legal action to
recover damages for a breach of such an
agreement
 Champertous contract- the lawyer stipulates
with his client that in the prosecution of the case,
he will bear all the expenses for the recovery of
things being claimed by the client and the latter
agrees to pay a portion of the things or property
recovered as compensation. (Bautista vs.
Gonzales)
Void contract. Exception: lawyer may advance
some expenses in good faith as a matter of
convenience but subject to reimbursement.
 Contingent fee arrangement - counsel
does not undertake to bear all the expenses of
litigation; fees dependent on the success of the
case (Rayos vs. Hernandez, 515 SCRA 517)
CANONS 1 TO 6 CASES:
Lee v. Tambago: Notaries public must observe with
utmost care and utmost fidelity the basic requirements in
the performance of their duties, otherwise the confidence
of the public in the integrity of notarized deeds will be
undermined.
Defects in the observance of the solemnities prescribed
by law render the entire will invalid. This carelessness
cannot be taken lightly in view of the importance and

delicate nature of a will, considering that the testator and
the witnesses, as in this case, are no longer alive to
identify the instrument and to confirm its contents.
Moreno v. Araneta: Estafa thru falsification of a
commercial document constitutes a crime involving moral
turpitude for which he was indefinitely suspended.
Agno v. Cagatan: The issuance of check knowingly that
said account was already closed constitutes gross
misconduct which should be penalized.
Cham v. Paita-Moya: Having debts, respondent had the
moral duty and legal responsibility to settle then when
they became due. Respondent should have complied with
just contractual obligations and acted fairly and adhered
to the high ethical standards to preserve the courts
integrity. However, the respondent acted the opposite,
leaving the apartment without settling her obligations.
This conduct is violative of the CPR Canon 1 Rule 1.01.
Catu v. Rellosa: Rule 6.03 prohibits former gov’t lawyers
from accepting engagement/employment in connection
w/ any matter which they had intervened while in said
service. Respondent was an incumbent punong barangay
at the time he committed the act complained of.
Therefore, he was not covered by the provision.
Pimentel v. Llorente: A lawyer who holds a government
position 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 misconduct also
constitutes a violation of the CRP of the lawyers oath or
is of such character as to affect his qualification as a
lawyer or shows moral delinquency on his part, such
individual may be disciplined as a member of the bar for
such misconduct.
CANONS 7 to 9:
MORAL FITNESS
Co v. Bernardino: The general rule is that a lawyer may
not be suspended or disbarred, and the court may not
ordinarily assume jurisdiction to discipline him for
misconduct in his non-professional or private capacity.
Where, however, the misconduct outside of the lawyer's
professional dealings is so gross a character as to show
him morally unfit for the office and unworthy of the
privilege which his licenses and the law confer on him, the
court may be justified in suspending or removing him
from the office of attorney.
Barrientos v. Meteoro: The issuance of checks, which
were later dishonored for having been drawn against a
closed account, indicates a lawyer’s unfitness for the trust
and confidence reposed on her. It shows a lack of
personal honesty and good moral character as to render
her unworthy of public confidence. The issuance of a
ETHICS MIDTERMS REVIEWER
series of worthless checks also shows the remorseless
attitude of respondent, unmindful to the deleterious
effects of such act to the public interest and public order.
It also manifests a lawyer’s low regard to her commitment
to the oath she has taken when she joined her peers,
seriously and irreparably tarnishing the image of the
profession she should hold in high esteem.
Tolentino v. Mendoza: This Court has been exacting in its
demand for integrity and good moral character of
members of the Bar. They are expected at all times to
uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession and
refrain from any act or omission which might lessen the
trust and confidence reposed by the public in the fidelity,
honesty, and integrity of the legal profession. Membership
in the legal profession is a privilege. And whenever it is
made to appear that an attorney is no longer worthy of
the trust and confidence of the public, it becomes not only
the right but also the duty of this Court, which made him
one of its officers and gave him the privilege of
ministering within its Bar, to withdraw the privilege.
Arnobit v. Arnobit: A lawyer may be suspended or
disbarred for any misconduct which, albeit unrelated to
the actual practice of his profession, would show him to
be unfit for the office and unworthy of the privileges with
which his license and the law invest him. A member of the
bar and an officer of the court is not only required to
refrain from adulterous relationships or keeping a
mistress but must also so behave himself as to avoid
scandalizing the public by creating the impression that he
is flouting those moral standards.
Rangwhani v. Dino: The ultimate goal is to protect the
profession and the public from an erring lawyer. It found
in Rule 138 that No investigation for administrative cases
shall be interrupted by desistance of complainant.
Cruz v. Cabrera: “Appear ka ng appear, pumasa ka muna”
does not amount to a violation of Rule 8.01 of the CPR.
Such single outburst, though uncalled for, is not of such
magnitude as to warrant respondents suspension or
reproof. It is but a product of impulsiveness or the heat
of the moment in the course of an argument between
them. It has been said that lawyers should not be held to
too strict an account for words said in the heat of the
moment, because of chagrin at losing cases, and that the
big way is for the court to condone even contemptuous
language.
Rule 8.01 doctrine: Membership in the bar imposes upon
them certain obligations. Mandated to maintain the
dignity of the legal profession, they must conduct
themselves honorably and fairly. Though a lawyers
language may be forceful and emphatic, it should always
be dignified and respectful, befitting the dignity of the
legal profession. The use of intemperate language and
 ETHICS MIDTERMS REVIEWER
unkind ascriptions has no place in the dignity of judicial
forum.

Cruz v. Mijares: It was subsequently clarified in Bar

Matter 730, that by virtue of Section 34, Rule 138, a law
student may appear as an agent or a friend of a party
litigant, without need of the supervision of a lawyer,
before inferior courts.

CANON 10 Cases:
Olbes v Deciembre: A high standard of excellence and
ethics is expected and required of members of the Bar.
Such conduct of nobility and uprightness should remain
with them, whether in their public or in their private lives.
As officers of the courts and keepers of the public faith,
they are burdened with the highest degree of social
responsibility and are thus mandated to behave at all
times in a manner consistent with truth and honor.

Munoz v. CA & Sutton: Delia T. Sutton committed errors

in preparing petitions for certiorari which may have
caused inaccurate statements in the said petition. The
conduct of the lawyer before the court and with other
lawyers should be characterized by candor and fairness.
It is not candid or fair for the lawyer to misquote the
contents of a paper, the testimony of a witness, the
language or the argument of opposing counsel; or the
language of a decision or a textbook or; with knowledge
of its invalidity, to cite as authority a decision that has
been overruled, or a statute that has been repealed; or in
argument to assert as fact that which has not been
proved, or in those jurisdictions where a side has the
opening and closing arguments to mislead his opponent
by concealing or withholding positions in his opening
argument upon which his side then intends to rely. The
obligation to the bench, especially to the Court, for candor
and honesty takes precedence.

Serana v. Sandiganbayan: There was a misquotation of

reference. A review of motion to quah in the petition for
certiorari, unveiled the misquotation. Court held that it is
violative of Canon 10 of the CPR, specifically Rule 10.02.
a lawyer’s conduct before the court should be
characterized by candor and fairness. The administration
of justie would gravely suffer if lawyers do not act with
complete candor and honesty before the courts.