Research Leg Prof
Research Leg Prof
Legal Profession
1-A
Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the
application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience1. To engage in the
practice of law is to perform acts which are usually performed by members of the legal
profession2 and rendering any kind of service which requires the use of legal knowledge
or skills. Generally a non lawyer cannot represent or appear himself as lawyer in court for
his client.
In view of this, what is the consequence if non lawyers misrepresented himself in
the court and secure a favorable decision to his client?
A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, assist in the unauthorized practice of law.3
The Court ruled that the term practice of law implies customarily or habitually holding
oneself out to the public as a lawyer for compensation as a source of livelihood or in
consideration of his services.4 The Court further ruled that holding ones self out as a
lawyer may be shown by acts indicative of that purpose, such as identifying oneself as
attorney, appearing in court in representation of a client, or associating oneself as a
partner of a law office for the general practice of law. In the case of Lacsamana vs.
Busmente, The lawyers duty to prevent, or at the very least not to assist in, the
unauthorized practice of law is founded on public interest and policy. Public policy
requires that the practice of law be limited to those individuals found duly qualified in
education and character. The permissive right conferred on the lawyer is an individual
and limited privilege subject to withdrawal if he fails to maintain proper standards of
moral and professional conduct. The purpose is to protect the public, the court, the
client, and the bar from the incompetence or dishonesty of those unlicensed to practice
law and not subject to the disciplinary control of the Court. It devolves upon a lawyer to
see that this purpose is attained. Thus, the canons and ethics of the profession enjoin him
not to permit his professional services or his name to be used in aid of, or to make
possible the unauthorized practice of law by, any agency, personal or corporate. And, the
law makes it a misbehavior on his part, subject to disciplinary action, to aid a layman in
the unauthorized practice of law. In this case, it has been established that Dela Rosa, who
is not a member of the Bar, misrepresented herself as Busmentes collaborating counsel
thus the findings of the IBP-CBD that there was sufficient evidence to prove
that Busmente was guilty of violation of Canon 9 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
Under Section 3(e), Rule 71 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, a person
“[a]assuming to be an attorney or an officer of a court, and acting as such without
authority,” is liable for indirect contempt of court.
In the case of CIOCON-REER vs LUBAO, here, the Office of the Court
Administrator was able to establish the pattern in Karaans unauthorized practice of law.
He would require the parties to execute a special power of attorney in his favor to allow
1 Cayetano v. Monsod
2 CIOCON-REER vs LUBAO A.M. OCA IPI No. 09-3210-RTJ
3 Canon 9 of Code of Professional Responsibility
4
Cambaliza v. Atty. Cristal-Tenorio, 478 Phil. 378 (2004)
Corazon G Nuque
Legal Profession
1-A
him to join them as one of the plaintiffs as their attorney-in-fact. Then, he would file the
necessary complaint and other pleadings acting for and in his own behalf and as attorney-
in-fact, agent or representative of the parties. The fact that Karaan did not indicate in the
pleadings that he was a member of the Bar, or any PTR, Attorneys Roll, or MCLE
Compliance Number does not detract from the fact that, by his actions, he was actually
engaged in the practice of law. under Section 7 of the same rules, a respondent adjudged
guilty of indirect contempt committed against a Regional Trial Court or a court of
equivalent or higher rank “may be punished by a fine not exceeding thirty thousand pesos
or imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months, or both.” If a respondent is adjudged
guilty of contempt committed against a lower court, he “may be punished by a fine not
exceeding five thousand pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one (1) month, or both.”
Exceptions: Non-lawyers who may be authorized to appear in court:
1. Cases before the MTC: Party to the litigation, in person OR through an agent or
friend or appointed by him for that purpose5
2. Before any other court: Party to the litigation, in person6
3. Criminal case before the MTC in a locality where a duly licensed member of the Bar
is not available: the judge may appoint a non-lawyer who is:7
a. resident of the province
b. of good repute for probity and ability to aid the accused in his defense
4. Legal Aid Program – A senior law student, who is enrolled in a recognized law
school’s clinical education program approved by the supreme Court may appear
before any court without compensation, to represent indigent clients, accepted by
the Legal Clinic of the law school. The student shall be under the direct supervision
and control of an IBP member duly accredited by the law school.8
5. Under the Labor code, non-lawyers may appear before the NLRC or any Labor
Arbiter, if
a. they represent themselves, or if
b. they represent their organization or members thereof9
6. Under the Cadastral Act, a non-lawyer can represent a claimant before the
Cadastral Court.10
Based on the above foregoing, I will stand to choose our own Judicial System
because it is based on what the Constitution mandates. The government should be
governed by law and not of men. The introduction of jury system for me is not quite
practicable. Our Judges and Justices based their decisions on the law and not by mere
personal attributions and experiences unlike jurist they may or may not have knowledge
in the law but it would not be always enough and that’s why it would require a lot of
money for their trainings and education for them to handle and decide the case. Lastly,
the introduction of jury system would delay the adjudication process. Hence,
constitutional right to speedy trial may likewise impaired.
Therefore, for me, Philippine judicial system are better than the US.