1

FIRST DIVISION that their signatures had likewise been forged and Philippines (IBP) for investigation, report and
merely copied from their respective voters’ recommendation.10
A.C. No. 5281             February 12, 2008 affidavits.
In his report, the investigating commissioner found
MANUEL L. LEE, petitioner, Complainant further asserted that no copy of such respondent guilty of violation of pertinent
vs. purported will was on file in the archives division of provisions of the old Notarial Law as found in the
ATTY. REGINO B. TAMBAGO, respondent. the Records Management and Archives Office of Revised Administrative Code. The violation
the National Commission for Culture and the Arts constituted an infringement of legal ethics,
(NCCA). In this connection, the certification of the particularly Canon 111 and Rule 1.0112 of the Code
RESOLUTION chief of the archives division dated September 19, of Professional Responsibility (CPR).13 Thus, the
1999 stated: investigating commissioner of the IBP Commission
CORONA, J.: on Bar Discipline recommended the suspension of
Doc. 14, Page No. 4, Book No. 1, Series of respondent for a period of three months.
In a letter-complaint dated April 10, 2000, 1965 refers to an AFFIDAVIT executed by
complainant Manuel L. Lee charged respondent BARTOLOME RAMIREZ on June 30, 1965 The IBP Board of Governors, in its Resolution No.
Atty. Regino B. Tambago with violation of the and is available in this Office[’s] files.6 XVII-2006-285 dated May 26, 2006, resolved:
Notarial Law and the ethics of the legal profession
for notarizing a spurious last will and testament. Respondent in his comment dated July 6, 2001 [T]o ADOPT and APPROVE, as it is hereby
claimed that the complaint against him contained ADOPTED and APPROVED, with
In his complaint, complainant averred that his false allegations: (1) that complainant was a son of modification, the Report and
father, the decedent Vicente Lee, Sr., never the decedent Vicente Lee, Sr. and (2) that the will Recommendation of the Investigating
executed the contested will. Furthermore, the in question was fake and spurious. He alleged that Commissioner of the above-entitled case,
spurious will contained the forged signatures of complainant was "not a legitimate son of Vicente herein made part of this Resolution as
Cayetano Noynay and Loreto Grajo, the purported Lee, Sr. and the last will and testament was validly Annex "A"; and, finding the
witnesses to its execution. executed and actually notarized by respondent per recommendation fully supported by the
affidavit7 of Gloria Nebato, common-law wife of evidence on record and the applicable laws
In the said will, the decedent supposedly Vicente Lee, Sr. and corroborated by the joint and rules, and considering Respondent’s
bequeathed his entire estate to his wife Lim Hock affidavit8 of the children of Vicente Lee, Sr., namely failure to comply with the laws in the
Lee, save for a parcel of land which he devised to Elena N. Lee and Vicente N. Lee, Jr. xxx."9 discharge of his function as a notary public,
Vicente Lee, Jr. and Elena Lee, half-siblings of Atty. Regino B. Tambago is hereby
complainant. Respondent further stated that the complaint was suspended from the practice of law for one
filed simply to harass him because the criminal year and Respondent’s notarial commission
case filed by complainant against him in the Office is Revoked and
The will was purportedly executed and Disqualified from reappointment as
acknowledged before respondent on June 30, of the Ombudsman "did not prosper."
Notary Public for two (2) years.14
1965.1 Complainant, however, pointed out that the
residence certificate2 of the testator noted in the Respondent did not dispute complainant’s
acknowledgment of the will was dated January 5, contention that no copy of the will was on file in We affirm with modification.
1962.3 Furthermore, the signature of the testator the archives division of the NCCA. He claimed that
was not the same as his signature as donor in a no copy of the contested will could be found there A will is an act whereby a person is permitted, with
deed of donation4 (containing his purported because none was filed. the formalities prescribed by law, to control to a
genuine signature). Complainant averred that the certain degree the disposition of his estate, to take
signatures of his deceased father in the will and in Lastly, respondent pointed out that complainant effect after his death.15 A will may either be
the deed of donation were "in any way (sic) had no valid cause of action against him as he notarial or holographic.
entirely and diametrically opposed from (sic) one (complainant) did not first file an action for the
another in all angle[s]."5 declaration of nullity of the will and demand his The law provides for certain formalities that must
share in the inheritance. be followed in the execution of wills. The object of
Complainant also questioned the absence of solemnities surrounding the execution of wills is to
notation of the residence certificates of the In a resolution dated October 17, 2001, the Court close the door on bad faith and fraud, to avoid
purported witnesses Noynay and Grajo. He alleged referred the case to the Integrated Bar of the
 2

substitution of wills and testaments and to As the acknowledging officer of the contested will, done, to require the exhibition of the
guarantee their truth and authenticity.16 respondent was required to faithfully observe the residence certificate showing payment of
formalities of a will and those of notarization. As we the residence taxes by such person xxx.
A notarial will, as the contested will in this case, is held in Santiago v. Rafanan:22
required by law to be subscribed at the end thereof In the issuance of a residence certificate, the law
by the testator himself. In addition, it should be The Notarial Law is explicit on the seeks to establish the true and correct identity of
attested and subscribed by three or more credible obligations and duties of notaries public. the person to whom it is issued, as well as the
witnesses in the presence of the testator and of They are required to certify that the party payment of residence taxes for the current year.
one another.17 to every document acknowledged before By having allowed decedent to exhibit an expired
him had presented the proper residence residence certificate, respondent failed to comply
The will in question was attested by only two certificate (or exemption from the with the requirements of both the old Notarial Law
witnesses, Noynay and Grajo. On this circumstance residence tax); and to enter its number, and the Residence Tax Act. As much could be said
alone, the will must be considered void.18 This is in place of issue and date as part of such of his failure to demand the exhibition of the
consonance with the rule that acts executed certification. residence certificates of Noynay and Grajo.
against the provisions of mandatory or prohibitory
laws shall be void, except when the law itself These formalities are mandatory and cannot be On the issue of whether respondent was under the
authorizes their validity. disregarded, considering the degree of importance legal obligation to furnish a copy of the notarized
and evidentiary weight attached to notarized will to the archives division, Article 806 provides:
The Civil Code likewise requires that a will must be documents.23 A notary public, especially a
acknowledged before a notary public by the lawyer,24 is bound to strictly observe these Art. 806. Every will must be acknowledged
testator and the witnesses.19 The importance of elementary requirements. before a notary public by the testator and
this requirement is highlighted by the fact that it the witness. The notary public shall not
was segregated from the other requirements under The Notarial Law then in force required the be required to retain a copy of the
Article 805 and embodied in a distinct and exhibition of the residence certificate upon will, or file another with the office of
separate provision.20 notarization of a document or instrument: the Clerk of Court. (emphasis supplied)

An acknowledgment is the act of one who has Section 251. Requirement as to notation of Respondent’s failure, inadvertent or not, to file in
executed a deed in going before some competent payment of [cedula] residence tax. – Every the archives division a copy of the notarized will
officer or court and declaring it to be his act or contract, deed, or other document was therefore not a cause for disciplinary action.
deed. It involves an extra step undertaken whereby acknowledged before a notary public shall
the signatory actually declares to the notary public have certified thereon that the parties Nevertheless, respondent should be faulted for
that the same is his or her own free act and thereto have presented their proper having failed to make the necessary entries
deed.21 The acknowledgment in a notarial will has a [cedula] residence certificate or are pertaining to the will in his notarial register. The
two-fold purpose: (1) to safeguard the testator’s exempt from the [cedula] residence tax, old Notarial Law required the entry of the following
wishes long after his demise and (2) to assure that and there shall be entered by the notary matters in the notarial register, in chronological
his estate is administered in the manner that he public as a part of such certificate the order:
intends it to be done. number, place of issue, and date of each
[cedula] residence certificate as
aforesaid.25 1. nature of each instrument executed,
A cursory examination of the acknowledgment of sworn to, or acknowledged before him;
the will in question shows that this particular
requirement was neither strictly nor substantially The importance of such act was further reiterated
complied with. For one, there was the conspicuous by Section 6 of the Residence Tax Act26 which 2. person executing, swearing to, or
absence of a notation of the residence certificates stated: acknowledging the instrument;
of the notarial witnesses Noynay and Grajo in the
acknowledgment. Similarly, the notation of the When a person liable to the taxes 3. witnesses, if any, to the signature;
testator’s old residence certificate in the same prescribed in this Act acknowledges any
acknowledgment was a clear breach of the law. document before a notary public xxx it 4. date of execution, oath, or
These omissions by respondent invalidated the will. shall be the duty of such person xxx with acknowledgment of the instrument;
whom such transaction is had or business
 3

5. fees collected by him for his services as in this case, are no longer alive to identify the servant of the law, a lawyer should moreover make
notary; instrument and to confirm its himself an example for others to emulate.42 Being a
contents.34 Accordingly, respondent must be held lawyer, he is supposed to be a model in the
6. give each entry a consecutive number; accountable for his acts. The validity of the will was community in so far as respect for the law is
and seriously compromised as a consequence of his concerned.43
breach of duty.35
7. if the instrument is a contract, a brief The practice of law is a privilege burdened with
description of the substance of the In this connection, Section 249 of the old Notarial conditions.44 A breach of these conditions justifies
instrument.27 Law provided: disciplinary action against the erring lawyer. A
disciplinary sanction is imposed on a lawyer upon a
Grounds for revocation of commission. — finding or acknowledgment that he has engaged in
In an effort to prove that he had complied with the professional misconduct.45 These sanctions meted
abovementioned rule, respondent contended that The following derelictions of duty on the
part of a notary public shall, in the out to errant lawyers include disbarment,
he had crossed out a prior entry and entered suspension and reprimand.
instead the will of the decedent. As proof, he discretion of the proper judge of first
presented a photocopy of his notarial register. To instance, be sufficient ground for the
reinforce his claim, he presented a photocopy of a revocation of his commission: Disbarment is the most severe form of disciplinary
certification28 stating that the archives division had sanction.46 We have held in a number of cases that
no copy of the affidavit of Bartolome Ramirez. xxx       xxx       xxx the power to disbar must be exercised with great
caution47 and should not be decreed if any
punishment less severe – such as reprimand,
A photocopy is a mere secondary evidence. It is not (b) The failure of the notary to make the suspension, or fine – will accomplish the end
admissible unless it is shown that the original is proper entry or entries in his notarial desired.48 The rule then is that disbarment is meted
unavailable. The proponent must first prove the register touching his notarial acts in the out only in clear cases of misconduct that seriously
existence and cause of the unavailability of the manner required by law. affect the standing and character of the lawyer as
original,29 otherwise, the evidence presented will an officer of the court.49
not be admitted. Thus, the photocopy of xxx       xxx       xxx
respondent’s notarial register was not admissible
as evidence of the entry of the execution of the will Respondent, as notary public, evidently failed in
because it failed to comply with the requirements (f) The failure of the notary to make the the performance of the elementary duties of his
for the admissibility of secondary evidence. proper notation regarding cedula office. Contrary to his claims that he "exercised his
certificates.36 duties as Notary Public with due care and with due
regard to the provision of existing law and had
In the same vein, respondent’s attempt to complied with the elementary formalities in the
controvert the certification dated September 21, These gross violations of the law also made
respondent liable for violation of his oath as a performance of his duties xxx," we find that he
199930 must fail. Not only did he present a mere acted very irresponsibly in notarizing the will in
photocopy of the certification dated March 15, lawyer and constituted transgressions of Section
20 (a), Rule 138 of the Rules of Court37 and Canon question. Such recklessness warrants the less
2000;31 its contents did not squarely prove the fact severe punishment of suspension from the practice
of entry of the contested will in his notarial 138 and Rule 1.0139 of the CPR.
of law. It is, as well, a sufficient basis for the
register. revocation of his commission50 and his perpetual
The first and foremost duty of a lawyer is to disqualification to be commissioned as a notary
Notaries public must observe with utmost maintain allegiance to the Republic of the public.51
care32 and utmost fidelity the basic requirements in Philippines, uphold the Constitution and obey the
the performance of their duties, otherwise, the laws of the land.40 For a lawyer is the servant of the
law and belongs to a profession to which society WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Regino B.
confidence of the public in the integrity of Tambago is hereby found guilty of professional
notarized deeds will be undermined.33 has entrusted the administration of law and the
dispensation of justice.41 misconduct. He violated (1) the Lawyer’s Oath; (2)
Rule 138 of the Rules of Court; (3) Canon 1 and
Defects in the observance of the solemnities Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional
prescribed by law render the entire will invalid. While the duty to uphold the Constitution and obey Responsibility; (4) Art. 806 of the Civil Code and (5)
This carelessness cannot be taken lightly in view of the law is an obligation imposed on every citizen, a the provisions of the old Notarial Law.
the importance and delicate nature of a will, lawyer assumes responsibilities well beyond the
considering that the testator and the witnesses, as basic requirements of good citizenship. As a
 4

Atty. Regino B. Tambago is In A.C. No. 10583, complainant Roberto C. Q : In your Judicial Affidavit[,] you mentioned that
hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for Bernardino (Bernardino) filed a Letter- you know Marilu C. Turla[,] the plaintiff[,] since she
one year and his notarial Complaint4 against Atty. Victor Rey Santos (Atty. was about four years old.
commission REVOKED. Because he has not lived Santos) before the Integrated Bar of the
up to the trustworthiness expected of him as a Philippines, praying that Atty. Santos be A : Yes, sir.
notary public and as an officer of the court, he investigated and subjected to disciplinary action. 5
is PERPETUALLY DISQUALIFIED from
reappointment as a notary public. Q : As a matter of fact[,] you know her very well[,]
Bernardino alleged that the death certificate of his considering that you are a Ninong of the plaintiff,
aunt, Rufina de Castro Turla, was falsified by Atty. isn’t it?
Let copies of this Resolution be furnished to all the Santos. Atty. Santos made it appear that Rufina
courts of the land, the Integrated Bar of the Turla died in 1992, when in fact, she died in 1990. 6
Philippines and the Office of the Bar Confidant, as A : I was not a Ninong when I first knew Marilu
well as made part of the personal records of Turla, I was just recently married to one of her
Atty. Santos used the falsified death certificate to cousins.
respondent. -support the Affidavit of Self-
Adjudication7 executed by Mariano Turla, husband
SO ORDERED. of Rufina Turla.8 Paragraph 6 of the Affidavit of ....
Self-Adjudication prepared by Atty. Santos states:
SECOND DIVISION Q : Now, the parents of Marilu Turla are Mariano C.
Being her surviving spouse, I am. the sole legal Turla and Rufina C. Turla?
A.C. No. 10583               February 18, 2015 heir entitled to succeed to and inherit the estate of
[Formerly CBD 09-2555] said deceased who did not leave any descendant THE WITNESS
or any other heir entitled to her estate. 9 (Emphasis
in the original underscoring supplied) : Yes, sir. As per my study and as per my
ROBERTO BERNARDINO, Complainant,
vs. knowledge of her relationship[s].
ATTY. VICTOR REY SANTOS, Respondent. Years later, Atty. Santos, on behalf of Marilu Turla,
daughter of Rufina and Mariano Turla,10 filed a THE COURT
Complaint11 for sum of money with prayer for Writ
x-----------------------x of Preliminary Injunction and temporary restraining
order against Bernardino, docketed as Civil Case : What’s the name of the mother?
A.C. No. 10584 No. 09-269.12
[Formerly CBD 10-2827] ATTY. CARINGAL
The Complaint in Civil Case No. 09-269 alleged that
ATTY. JOSE MANGASER Marilu Turla is an heir of Mariano Turla,13 which : Rufina, your Honor. Rufina Turla.
CARINGAL, Complainant, allegedly contradicts the Affidavit of Self-
vs. Adjudication that Atty. Santos drafted.14 Hence, Q : And wife died ahead of Mariano, isn’t it?
ATTY. VICTOR REY SANTOS, Respondent. Atty. Santos represented clients with conflicting
interests.15
THE WITNESS
RESOLUTION
In Civil Case No. 09-269, Atty. Santos testified
during cross-examination: : Yes, sir.
LEONEN, J.:

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY: Q : And of course, being the daughter of Rufina

These cases involve administrative Turla, Marilu is also an heir of Rufina Turla, isn’t it?
Complaints1 against Atty. Victor Rey Santos for
violation of Canon 10, Rule 10.012 and Canon 15, ATTY. CARINGAL
Rule 15 .033 of the Code of Professional A : Of course.
Responsibility. ....
Q : Now, we go by the ethics of the profession, Mr.
Witness.
 5

You recall[,] of course[,] and admitted [sic] in court number 23, series of 1994 before Notary Public ATTY. CARINGAL
that you drafted this document which you Hernando P. Angara. I call your attention to the
requested to be marked as Exhibit B. document[,] more particularly[,] paragraph 6 : What is the answer, is it true or false, your
thereof and marked as Exhibit 7-A for the Honor[?]
THE COURT defendants[.] I read into the record and I quote,
"Being her surviving spouse, I am the sole legal
heir entitled to succeed to and inherit the estate of ATTY. REY SANTOS
: Exhibit? the said deceased who did not leave any
descendant, ascendant or any other heir entitled to : My answer regarding the same would be subject
ATTY. CARINGAL her estate."16 Mr. Witness, is this particular to my objection on the materiality and
provision that you have drafted into this impertinency and relevancy of this question, your
: "B", your Honor, in particular reference to the document . . . true or false? Honor[,] to this case.
Affidavit of Adjudication for the extra judicial
settlement of the intestate estate of the late Rufina ATTY. REY SANTOS THE COURT
De Castro Turla[,] and I have just learned from you
as you just testified. Rufina is the mother of the : Your Honor, I would like to reiterate that any : So anyway, the court has observed the continuing
plaintiff here[,] Marilu Turla. question regarding the matter that would impugn objection before[,] and to be consistent with the
the legitimacy of the plaintiff, Marilu Turla[,]is ruling of the court[,] I will allow you to answer the
THE WITNESS impertinent and immaterial in this case[.] [I]t was question[.] [I]s it true or false?
only the wife Rufina Turla [who] ha[s] the right to
: Yes, sir. impugn the legitimacy of the plaintiff[,] and that THE WITNESS
has been the subject of my continuing objection
from the very beginning.
Q : And as you admitted, you prepared you drafted : No, that is not true.
[sic] this Extra Judicial.
THE COURT
ATTY. CARINGAL
A : Yes, sir.
: But then again[,] you have presented this
document as your Exhibit B[.] [Y]ou have : That is not true. Mr. Witness, being a lawyer[,]
Q : Or this Affidavit of Adjudication. practically opened the floodgate to . . . questions you admit before this court that you have drafted a
on this document. document that caused the transfer of the estate of
ATTY. REY SANTOS the decease[d] Rufina Turla.
ATTY. REY SANTOS
: At this point in time, your Honor, I would object to THE WITNESS
the question regarding my legal ethics because it is : Only for the purposes [sic] of showing one or two .
not the issue in this case. . . properties owned by the late Mariano Turla, your : Yes, sir.
Honor. That is why that’s only [sic] portion I have
.... referred to in marking the said documents, your ....
Honor.
ATTY. CARINGAL ATTY. CARINGAL
THE COURT
.... Q : This document, this particular provision that
: So, you now refused [sic] to answer the question? you said was false, you did not tell anybody[,] ten
Q : . . . In this document consisting of one, two, or five years later[,] that this is false, is it not?
three, four and appearing to have been duly ATTY. REY SANTOS
notarized on or about 29th [of] June 1994 with THE WITNESS
document number 28, page number 7, book : No, I am not refusing to answer, I am just making
a manifestation. : I called the attention of Mr. Mariano Turla[.] I . . .
asked him what about Lulu17 she is entitled [sic] to
 6

a share of properties and he . . . told me, "Ako na husband and wife team where the lawyer makes As to the conversion of funds, Atty. Santos
ang bahala kay Lulu[,] hindi ko pababayaan yan". the document while the wife who is a BIIR [sic] explained that the funds used were being held by
So, he asked me to proceed with the Affidavit of employee arranges for the payment of the taxes his client as the special administratrix of the estate
Adjudication wherein he claimed the whole due the government; of Mariano Turla.43 According to Atty. Santos,
[sic]properties for himself.18 (Emphasis supplied) payment of attorney’s fees out of the estate’s
14.5 Respondent attorney could not have been funds could be considered as "expenses of
Another Complaint19 was filed against Atty. Santos mistaken about the fact recited in the Affidavit of administration."44 Also, payment of Atty. Santos’
by Atty. Jose Mangaser Caringal (Atty. Caringal). Adjudication, etc. that said deceased (Rufina de legal services was a matter which Atty. Caringal
This was docketed as A.C. No. 10584. 20 Similar to Castro Turla) "did not leave any descendant, xxx, had no standing to question.45
Bernardino’s Complaint, Atty. Caringal alleged that or any other heir entitled to her estate’ [sic] . . .
Atty. Santos represented clients with conflicting [.]32 (Emphasis in the original) On the allegation that Atty. Santos cited a repealed
interests.21 He also alleged that in representing provision of law, he discussed that Article 262 of
Marilu Turla, Atty. Santos would necessarily go Atty. Caringal argued that Atty. Santos was bound the Civil Code is applicable because it was in force
against the claims of Mariano Turla.22 by the statement in Mariano Turla’s affidavit that when Marilu Turla’s birth certificate was
Rufina Turla had no other heir.33 registered.46
Also, in representing Marilu Turla, Atty. Santos was
allegedly violating the so-called "Dead Man’s Moreover, Atty. Santos allegedly converted funds The Commission on Bar Discipline of the Integrated
Statute"23 because "he [would] be utilizing belonging to the heirs of Mariano Turla for his own Bar of the Philippines recommended that Atty.
information or matters of fact occurring before the benefit. The funds involved were rental income Santos be suspended for three (3) months.47
death of his deceased client. Similarly, he . . . from Mariano Turla’s properties that were
[would] be unscrupulously utilizing information supposed to be distributed to the heirs. Instead, It found that Bernardino failed to prove his
acquired during his professional relation with his Atty. Santos received the rental income.34 Lastly, allegation that Atty. Santos knew that the death
said client . . . that [would] constitute a breach of Atty. Caringal alleged that Atty. Santos cited the certificate was falsified and used it to support
trust . . . or of privileged communication[.]"24 repealed Article 262 of the Civil Code in his Mariano Turla’s Affidavit of Self-
arguments.35 Adjudication.48 Likewise, Atty. Caringal failed to
Atty. Caringal further alleged that Atty. Santos prove that Atty. Santos converted funds from
violated Canon 1225 of the Code of Professional In his Answer,36 Atty. Santos denied having falsified Mariano Turla’s estate.49
Responsibility when he filed several cases against the death certificate. 37 He explained that the death
the other claimants of Mariano Turla’s estate. 26 In certificate and the Affidavit of Self-Adjudication With regard to the citation of a repealed provision,
other words, he engaged in forum shopping.27 were given to him by Mariano Turla and that he the Commission on Bar Discipline stated that the
was not aware that there was a falsified entry in evidence presented did not prove that Atty. Santos
In addition, Atty. Santos allegedly violated Canon the death certificate. 38 "knowingly cited a repealed law."50 Further, Atty.
10, Rule 10.0128 of the Code of Professional Santos did not engage in forum shopping. The
Responsibility when he drafted Mariano Turla’s As regards the issue on conflict of interest, Atty. various cases filed involved different parties and
Affidavit of Self-Adjudication. The Affidavit states Santos argued that he did not represent and was prayed for different reliefs.51
that Mariano Turla is the sole heir of Rufina Turla, not representing conflicting interests since Mariano
but Atty. Santos knew this to be false.29 Atty. Turla was already dead.39 Further, "he [was] However, the Commission on Bar Discipline agreed
Santos’ wife, Lynn Batac, is Mariano Turla’s representing Marilu Turla against those who ha[d] with Bernardino and Atty. Caringal that Atty.
niece.30 As part of the family, Atty. Santos knew an interest in her father’s estate."40 Mariano Turla’s Santos represented clients with conflicting
that Rufina Turla had other heirs.31 Atty. Caringal Affidavit of Self-Adjudication never stated that interests.52 The Report and Recommendation53 of
further alleged: there was no other legal heir but only "that the Commission on Bar Discipline stated:
Mariano Turla was the sole heir of Rufina Turla."41
14.4 Being the lawyer of Mariano Turla in the . . . Canon 15 of the Code of Professional
drafting of the document some fifteen years ago, Regarding the allegations of Atty. Caringal, Atty. Responsibility particularly Rule 15.03 specifically
he is fully aware of all the circumstances therein Santos insisted that he did not commit forum proscribes members of the bar from representing
recited. Moreover at that time, the [sic] Lynn Batac shopping because the various cases filed had conflicting interests. The Supreme Court has
Santos was then employed at the BIR[sic] who different issues.42 explained that "the proscription against
arranged for the payment of the taxes due. There representation of conflicting interest finds
is some peculiarity in the neat set up [sic] of a application where the conflicting interests arise
 7

with respect to the same general matter and is This administrative case was forwarded to this The rule on conflict of interest is based on the
applicable however slight such adverse interest court through a letter of transmittal dated July 15, fiduciary obligation in a lawyer-client relationship.
may be; the fact that the conflict of interests is 2014,58 pursuant to Rule 139-B, Section 12(b) of Lawyers must treat all information received from
remote or merely probable does not make the the Rules of Court which provides: their clients with utmost confidentiality in order to
prohibition inoperative." encourage clients to fully inform their counsels of
RULE 139-B the facts of their case.59 In Hornilla v. Atty.
.... DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF ATTORNEYS Salunat,60 this court explained what conflict of
interest means:
. . . In the case at bar, the fact that the respondent SEC. 12. Review and decision by the Board of
represented Mariano Turla is no secret. The Governors.— There is conflict of interest when a lawyer
respondent has in a number of represents inconsistent interests of two or more
pleadings/motions/documents and evenon the opposing parties. The test is "whether or not in
.... behalf of one client, it is the lawyer’s duty to fight
witness stand admitted that he drafted Mariano
Turla’s Affidavit of Adjudication which expressly for an issue or claim, but it is his duty to oppose it
states that he was the sole heir of Rufina Turla. (b) If the Board, by the vote of a majority of its for the other client. In brief, if he argues for one
total membership, determines that the respondent client, this argument will be opposed by him when
should be suspended from the practice of law or he argues for the other client." This rule covers not
And then he afterwards agreed to represent Marilu disbarred, it shall issue a resolution setting forth its only cases in which confidential communications
Turla who claimed to be Mariano Turla’s daughter. findings and recommendations which, together have been confided, but also those in which no
To substantiate her claim that she is Mariano with the whole record of the case, shall forthwith confidence has been bestowed or will be used.
Turla’s daughter, the respondent admitted that he be transmitted to the Supreme Court for final Also, there is conflict of interests if the acceptance
relied on the birth certificate presented by Marilu action. of the new retainer will require the attorney to
Turla[,] which indicates that she is not only the perform an act which will injuriously affect his first
daughter of Mariano Turla but also of Rufina Turla client in any matter in which he represents him and
as evidenced by the Birth Certificate presented The issues in this case are: (1) whether respondent
Atty. Santos violated the Code of Professional also whether he will be called upon in his new
stating that Rufina Turla is Marilu Turla’s mother. relation to use against his first client any
This means that Marilu Turla was also a rightful Responsibility; and (2) whether the penalty of
suspension of three (3) months from the practice of knowledge acquired through their connection.
heir to Rufina Turla’s inheritance and was deprived Another test of the inconsistency of interests is
of the same because of the Affidavit of Adjudication law is proper.
whether the acceptance of a new relation will
which he drafted for Mariano Turla[,] stating that prevent an attorney from the full discharge of his
he is his wife’s sole heir. This court accepts and adopts the findings of fact duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to his client or
of the IBP Board of Governors’ Resolution. invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or double dealing
. . . To further explain, the respondent[,] in However, this court modifies the recommended in the performance thereof.61 (Emphasis supplied,
agreeing to represent Marilu Turla[,] placed himself penalty of suspension from the practice of law from citations omitted)
in a position where he is to refute the claim in three (3) months to one (1) year.
Mariano Turla’s Affidavit of Adjudication that he is Applying the test to determine whether conflict of
the only heir of Rufina Turla.54 (Citations omitted) Canon 15, Rule 15.03 of the Code of Professional interest exists, respondent would necessarily
Responsibility states: refute Mariano Turla’s claim that he is Rufina
In the Resolution55 dated May 10, 2013, the Board Turla’s sole heir when he agreed to represent
of Governors of the Integrated Bar of the CANON 15 — A lawyer shall observe candor, Marilu Turla. Worse, he knew that Mariano Turla
Philippines (IBP Board of Governors) adopted and fairness and loyalty in all his dealings and was not the only heir. As stated in the Report of the
approved the findings and recommendations of the transactions with his client. Commission on Bar Discipline:
Commission on Bar Discipline.
.... Worse[,] the respondent himself on the witness
Atty. Santos filed a Motion for Partial stand during his April 14, 2009 testimony in the
Reconsideration,56 which was denied by the IBP Rule 15.03 — A lawyer shall not represent Civil Case for Sum of Money with Prayer of Writ of
Board of Governors in the Resolution57 dated March conflicting interests except by written consent of Preliminary Injunction and Temporary Restraining
22, 2014. all concerned given after a full disclosure of the Order docketed as Civil Case No. 09-269 filed with
facts. the RTC of Makati City admitted as follows: "I called
the attention of Mr. Mariano Turla[.] I . . . asked
 8

him what about Lulu she is entitled [sic] to a share Adjudication despite . . . his knowledge of the Zaldivar v. Sandiganbayan69 elucidated on this
of properties and he . . . told me, ‘Ako na ang existence of Marilu Turla as a possible heir to the court’s "plenary disciplinary authority over
bahala kay Lulu[,] hindi ko pababayaan yan.’ So he estate of Rufina Turla, the respondent failed to attorneys"70 and discussed:
asked me to proceed with the Affidavit of uphold his obligation as a member of the bar to be
Adjudication wherein he claimed the whole [sic] the stewards of justice and protectors of what is We begin by referring to the authority of the
properties for himself." This very admission proves just, legal and proper. Thus in failing to do his duty Supreme Court to discipline officers of the court
that the respondent was privy to Marilu Turla’s and acting dishonestly[,] not only was he in and members of the court and members of the Bar.
standing as a legal and rightful heir to Rufina contravention of the Lawyer’s Oath but was also in The Supreme Court, as regular and guardian of the
Turla’s estate.62 (Citation omitted) violation of Canon 10, Rule 10.01 of the Code of legal profession, has plenary disciplinary authority
Professional Responsibility.66 (Emphasis in the over attorneys. The authority to discipline lawyers
However, Rule 15.03 provides for an exception, original) stems from the Court’s constitutional mandate to
specifically, "by written consent of all concerned regulate admission to the practice of law, which
given after a full disclosure of the As officers of the court, lawyers have the duty to includes as well authority to regulate the practice
facts."63 Respondent had the duty to inform uphold the rule of law. In doing so, lawyers are itself of law. Quite apart from this constitutional
Mariano Turla and Marilu Turla that there is a expected to be honest in all their mandate, the disciplinary authority of the Supreme
conflict of interest and to obtain their written dealings.67 Unfortunately, respondent was far from Court over members of the Bar is an inherent
consent. being honest. With full knowledge that Rufina Turla power incidental to the proper administration of
had another heir, he acceded to Mariano Turla’s justice and essential to an orderly discharge of
Mariano Turla died on February 5, 2009, 64 while request to prepare the Affidavit of Self- judicial functions. . . .
respondent represented Marilu Turla in March Adjudication.68
2009.65 It is understandable why respondent was . . . The disciplinary authority of the Court over
unable to obtain Mariano Turla’s consent. Still, This court notes that the wording of the IBP Board members of the Bar is but corollary to the Court’s
respondent did not present evidence showing that of Governors’ Resolutions dated May 10, 2013 and exclusive power of admission to the Bar. A lawyers
he disclosed to Marilu Turla that he previously March 22, 2014 seems to imply that it is the [sic] is not merely a professional but also an officer
represented Mariano Turla and assisted him in Integrated Bar of the Philippines that has the of the court and as such, he is called upon to share
executing the Affidavit of Self-Adjudication. Thus, authority to impose sanctions on lawyers. This is in the task and responsibility of dispensing justice
the allegation of conflict of interest against wrong. and resolving disputes in society. 71 (Citations
respondent was sufficiently proven. omitted)
The authority to discipline members of the Bar is
Likewise, we accept and adopt the IBP Board of vested in this court under the 1987 Constitution: This court’s authority is restated under Rule 138 of
Governors’ finding that respondent violated Canon ARTICLE VIII the Rules of Court, specifically:
10, Rule10.01 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility, which states: JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT RULE 138
ATTORNEYS AND ADMISSION TO BAR
CANON 10 — A lawyer owes candor, fairness and ....
good faith to the court. ....
Section 5. The Supreme Court shall have the
Rule 10.01 — A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, following powers: SEC. 27. Disbarment or suspension of attorneys by
nor consent to the doing of any in court; nor shall Supreme Court, grounds therefor.—A member of
he mislead or allow the court to be mislead by any the bar may be disbarred or suspended from his
artifice. ....
office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any
deceit, malpractice, or other gross misconduct in
In the Report, the Commission on Bar Discipline (5) Promulgate rules concerning the protection and such office, grossly immoral conduct, or by reason
explained: enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading, of his conviction of a crime involving moral
practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he
to the practice of law, the integrated bar, and legal is required to take before admission to practice, or
Corollary to the foregoing, the Commission by assistance to the underprivileged. . . . (Emphasis
virtue of the doctrine res ipsa loquitor[sic] finds for a wilful disobedience appearing as an attorney
supplied) for a party to a case without authority so to do. The
that the respondent’s act of failing to thwart his
client Mariano Turla from filing the Affidavit of practice of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of
 9

gain, either personally or through paid agents or Only this court can impose sanctions on members
brokers, constitutes malpractice. (Emphasis of the Bar.1âwphi1 This disciplinary authority is The case originated from a disbarment
supplied) granted by the Constitution and cannot be complaint1 filed by Dolores Natanauan (Dolores)
relinquished by this court.77 The Resolutions of the accusing Atty. Tolentino of deceit, malpractice, and
In Ramirez v. Buhayang-Margallo,72 this court Integrated Bar of the Philippines are, at best, gross misconduct in violation of the Lawyer's Oath
emphasized the authority of this court to impose recommendatory, and its findings and and the Code of Professional Responsibility.
disciplinary action on those admitted to the recommendations should not be equated with
practice of law. Decisions and Resolutions rendered by this court. The Facts
WHEREFORE, we find respondent Atty. Victor Rey
Santos guilty of violating Canon 15, Rule 15.03 and Complainant Dolores alleged that she is a co-owner
Parenthetically, it is this court that has the Canon 10, Rule 10.01 of the Code of Professional (with her siblings Rafaela, Ernestina, and Romulo
constitutionally mandated duty to discipline Responsibility. The findings of fact and [Dolores, et al.]) of a parcel of land with an area of
lawyers.73 Under the current rules, the duty to recommendations of the Board of Governors of the about 50,000 square meters located in Tagaytay
assist fact finding can be delegated to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines dated May 10, City.2 On January 3, 1978, they sold this land to
Integrated Bar of the Philippines. The findings of 2013 and March 22, 2014 are ACCEPTED and Alejo Tolentino (Alejo) for P500,000.00. At the time,
the Integrated Bar, however, can only be ADOPTED with the MODIFICATION that the penalty the title to the property had not yet been issued by
recommendatory, consistent with the constitutional of suspension from the practice of law for one (1) the Land Registration Commission.3 The parties
powers of this court. year is imposed upon Atty. Victor Rey Santos. He is thus agreed that payment for the same shall be
warned that a repetition of the same or similar act made in installments, as follows: P80,000.00 upon
Its recommended penalties are also, by its nature, shall be dealt with more severely. the execution of the contract and the remaining
recommendatory.74 balance in two (2) installments, payable one (1)
Let a copy of this Resolution be furnished the year after the issuance of the title and then one (1)
The authority given to the Integrated Bar of the Office of the Bar Confidant, to be appended to year thereafter.4chanrobleslaw
Philippines is based on Rule 139-B, Section 1 of the respondent’s personal record as attorney, to the
Rules of Court, which provides that "[p]roceedings Integrated Bar of the Philippines, and to the Office On August 9, 1979, and after the execution of the
for the disbarment, suspension or discipline of of the Court Administrator for dissemination to all contract of sale between the parties, the Register
attorneys may be taken by the Supreme Court courts throughout the country for their of Deeds of Cavite issued Transfer Certificate of
motu proprio, or by the Integrated Bar of the Title (TCT) No. T-107593 5 in Alejo's favor. Despite
Philippines . . . upon the verified complaint of any several requests from Dolores, et al., Alejo,
information and guidance.
person." However, this authority is only to assist however, failed to settle the remaining obligation.
this court with the investigation of the case, to Thus, on May 14, 1991, Dolores, et al. filed a case
determine factual findings, and to recommend, at SO ORDERED against Alejo and his wife Filomena, docketed as
best, the penalty that may be imposed on the Civil Case No. TG-1188, for the recovery of
erring lawyer. EN BANC possession of immovable property, declaration of
nullity of the deed of sale, and
damages.6chanrobleslaw
We reiterate the discussion in Tenoso v. Atty. A.C. No. 4269, October 11, 2016
Echanez:75
DOLORES NATANAUAN, Complainant, v. ATTY. On March 30, 1993, the Regional Trial Court (RTC)
Time and again, this Court emphasizes that the ROBERTO P. TOLENTINO, Respondent. promulgated a Decision7 in Civil Case No. TG-1188
practice of law is imbued with public interest and declaring the rescission of the contract of sale.
that "a lawyer owes substantial duties not only to DECISION Consequently, it ordered: (1) the reconveyance of
his client, but also to his brethren in the profession, the land back to Dolores, et al.; (2) the cancellation
to the courts, and to the nation, and takes part in of TCT No. T-107593; (3) the issuance of a new title
one of the most important functions of the State— JARDELEZA, J.:
in favor of Dolores, et al.; and (4) the payment of
the administration of justice—as an officer of the damages by Alejo and Filomena.
court." Accordingly, "[l]awyers are bound to For the Court's consideration is Atty. Roberto P.
maintain not only a high standard of legal Tolentino's (Atty. Tolentino) motion to have his Sometime in June 1993, Dolores discovered that
proficiency, but also of morality, honesty, integrity disbarment case re-opened and reheard on the the TCT No. 107593 under Alejo's name was issued
and fair dealing."76 (Citations omitted) ground that he was denied his constitutional right not on the basis of the January 3, 1978 contract but
to due process. on a Deed of Sale dated August 3, 1979,
 10

purportedly executed by their father Jose Comment20 through his then-counsel Atty. scheduled hearings, Dolores was allowed to give
Natanauan (Jose), Salud Marqueses, Tranquilino M. Fuentes (Atty. Fuentes). testimony and present her evidence ex-
Melquides8 Parungao and Asuncion Fajardo parte.30chanrobleslaw
(Jose, et al.).9 She further discovered a Joint
Affidavit dated August 6, 1979, purportedly In his Comment, Atty. Tolentino specifically denied Findings of the Integrated Bar of the
executed by Jose, et al. attesting to the absence of having any participation in the falsification of the Philippines
tenants or lessees in the property10 and another Deed of Sale dated August 3, 1979, 21 and
Deed of Sale dated March 9, 1979, executed vehemently denied any participation in the In a Report and Recommendation31 dated January
between Dolores, et al. as vendors and Atty. transactions, deeds of sale and other documents 31, 2010, IBP Commissioner Edmund T. Espina
Tolentino as vendee covering purportedly the same covering the subject property.22 Atty. Tolentino (Commissioner Espina) found that Atty. Tolentino
property.11chanrobleslaw claimed that there was no specific or concrete violated the Lawyer's Oath as well as Canon 1, Rule
allegation of fact in the Complaint as to how he 1.01 of the Code of Professional
Dolores claims that the foregoing documents were colluded with Alejo and Filomena in the Responsibility.32chanrobleslaw
falsified as Jose, who died in Talisay, Batangas on commission of the alleged falsifications. He further
June 12, 1977, could not have signed the Deed of pointed out that: (1) he does not appear as party to Commissioner Espina gave credence to Dolores'
Sale dated August 3, 1979 and the Joint Affidavit any of the falsified documents; and (2) it was not testimony and found that this and other supporting
dated August 6, 1979.12 Furthermore, the Deeds of alleged that he benefited from the same.23 Atty. documentary evidence clearly illustrated the acts
Sale were all notarized by Notary Public Perfecto P. Tolentino also averred that Buck Estate, Inc. did of falsification committed by Atty. Tolentino in
Fernandez (Perfecto) who Dolores later on not acquire the property from Alejo and Filomena, connivance with his brother Alejo and associate
discovered was not commissioned as a notary but rather bought the same in a 1990 auction sale Perfecto.33 Specifically, Commissioner Espina
public for and in the City of Manila for the year after the property was foreclosed due to the inferred Atty. Tolentino's direct participation in the
1979.13chanrobleslaw latter's failure to pay their loan obligations. He falsifications from the fact that he was the one who
further alleged that he does not personally know personally entered into the subject contract with
It was also around the same time that Dolores his co-respondent Perfecto and has never dealt nor Dolores, et al., merely using his brother Alejo and
discovered that the title to the property has been met with him in any capacity.24chanrobleslaw the sister-in-law Filomena as dummies.34
subsequently registered, under TCT No. T-21993, in x x x Circumstances exist which point to
the name of Buck Estate, Inc., where Atty. In her Reply,25cralawred Dolores countered that respondent's complicity in the two (2) acts of
Tolentino is a stockholder,14 and mortgaged to Rizal Atty. Tolentino cannot disclaim knowledge or falsification- he is the brother of Alejo Tolentino,
Commercial Banking Corporation for Ten Million participation of the falsification as the latter, in the original vendee, and the parcel of land
Pesos (P10,000,000.00).15chanrobleslaw fact, also misrepresented before the Supreme consisting of fifty (sic) (50,000) square meters,
Court that he is the absolute owner of the subject more or less, was subsequently conveyed,
Thus, on June 1, 1994, Dolores filed the present parcel of land by virtue of the March 9, 1979 transferred and ceded to Buck Estate, Inc., of
disbarment complaint against Atty. Tolentino and Deed of Sale notarized by Fernandez. To support which he is one of the incorporators and
Perfecto for their alleged acts of falsification. In her this, Dolores cited this Court's decision in Banco De stockholders, and which mortgaged the parcel of
complaint, Dolores attached an Affidavit dated Oro v. Bayuga26 involving the same subject land with the bank. Another important document
December 2, 1980, where Alejo and Filomena property. which points to respondent's fraudulent act is the
attested that the subject property never belonged very Affidavit of Spouses Alejo and Filomena
to them in truth or in fact, the true and absolute In the meantime, and in the course of her efforts to Tolentino dated December 2, 1990 strongly stating,
owner of the same being Alejo's brother, Atty. locate respondent Perfecto, Dolores discovered among other things, that subject parcel of land had
Tolentino.16 Notably, this Affidavit bears Atty. that Perfecto was not a member of the Philippine never belonged to them, the true and absolute
Tolentino's conformity.17chanrobleslaw Bar as evidenced by a Certification27 dated March owner thereof being respondent, Atty. Roberto P.
18, 1996 issued by then Deputy Clerk of Court and Tolentino. More importantly, said Deed of Sale and
In a Resolution18 dated July 18, 1994, this Court Bar Confidant Erlinda C. Verzosa. Neither has he Joint-Affidavit were notarized by Perfecto P.
required respondents to file their Comment within been commissioned as notary public for and in the Fernandez, a close associate of respondent Atty.
ten (10) days from notice. City of Manila since 1979 to 1996. 28chanrobleslaw Roberto P. Tolentino, both of them being residents
and/or holding office in the same address, and
Despite several attempts, a copy of the Resolution On December 4, 1996, this Court referred the case worse, who is not a notary public or lawyer.
was not served on Perfecto due to lack of to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Commission
knowledge as to his whereabouts. 19 Atty. Tolentino, on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) for investigation, report Not content with the foregoing felonious, unlawful
on the other hand, was able to file the required and recommendation.29 Due to Atty. Tolentino's and malicious acts, respondent Atty. Roberto P.
repeated failure and refusal to appear on the Tolentino committed yet another falsification when
 11

he filed and submitted to the Supreme Court a claims that neither he nor his counsel received a witnesses in his own behalf, and to be heard by
Deed of Sale dated March 9, 1979 relative to that subpoena or notice of the order directing parties to himself or counsel. But if upon reasonable notice
case entitled ["Banco de Oro v. Bayuga"], docketed file their memorandum. He likewise challenges the he fails to appear and answer the accusation, the
as No. L-49568, 93 SCRA 443. Such Deed of Sale findings made by Commissioner Espina, on the court may proceed to determine the matter ex-
shows that complainant and her brother and sisters ground that the latter simply relied on Dolores' parte.
sold on installment basis the same parcel of land to Memorandum, there being no transcript of
Contrary to his claims, Atty. Tolentino was not
respondent.35chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary stenographic notes of the proceedings. 46 Atty.
denied due process or deprived of an opportunity
Tolentino further decries the IBP Board's decision
Lastly, Commissioner Espina found that Atty. to be heard. The records show that his then
to increase the recommended penalty from six (6)
Tolentino's failure to appear before the IBP-CBD counsel Atty. Fuentes filed a Comment on his
months to three (3) years suspension from the
was another ground for disciplinary action. As a behalf. He also filed a Motion for Reconsideration of
practice of law, as this was done without giving him
lawyer, he is required to submit himself to the the May 13, 2011 Resolution of the IBP Board, and
the opportunity to be notified and
disciplinary authority of the IBP.36 Commissioner a Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration. His
heard.47chanrobleslaw
Espina thus recommended that Atty. Tolentino be participation through pleadings and motions cured
suspended from the practice of law for a period of whatever defect that may have attended the
six (6) months. Issues issuance of notices regarding the proceedings held
before the IBP.
On May 13, 2011, the IBP Board of Governors (IBP The issues to be resolved in this case are as
Board) issued a Resolution37 adopting follows: (1) whether there was a violation of Atty. In Vivo v. Philippine Amusement and Gaming
Commissioner Espina's Report and Tolentino's constitutional right to due process; and Corporation,50 we held that any defect in the
Recommendation but increasing the recommended (2) whether Atty. Tolentino committed deceit, observance of due process is cured by the filing of
penalty of suspension from the practice of law for malpractice and gross misconduct through the a motion for reconsideration and that denial of due
six (6) months to three (3) years.38chanrobleslaw aforementioned falsifications in violation of the process cannot be successfully invoked by a party
Code of Professional Responsibility and the who was afforded the opportunity to be
Atty. Tolentino filed a Motion for Reconsideration Lawyer's Oath which would merit his disbarment heard.51 We likewise reiterated that defects in
with Motion to Re-Open Case39 and a Supplemental and removal from the legal profession. procedural due process may be cured when the
Motion for Reconsideration 40 dated July 29, 2011 party has been afforded the opportunity to appeal
and August 25, 2011, respectively. In his The Court's Ruling or to reconsideration of the action or ruling
Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration, Atty. complained of.52chanrobleslaw
Tolentino attached a Sinumpaang The Court resolves to deny Atty. Tolentino's motion
Salaysay41 signed by his brother Alejo and wife and affirm the IBP Resolution with modification. Knowing that there is a pending administrative
Filomena stating that they are, in fact, the true complaint against him, Atty. Tolentino should have
owners of the property subject of this case and that There was no denial of due process and actively and voluntarily participated in the case
Atty. Moises Samson (counsel for Dolores) made opportunity to be heard. especially so when he believes that his defense is
them sign an affidavit written in English under the meritorious. Instead, after filing his Comment
following pretext: "x x x para maisaayos ang Atty. Tolentino, like any respondent in a containing bare denials and facts unsupported by
bilihan namin ng lupa nina Romulo [Natanauan] at disbarment or administrative proceeding, is any proof, Atty. Tolentino deliberately failed to
mga kapatid nito x x x."42 They also denied entitled to due process. The most basic tenet of participate in the proceeding and now hides behind
attesting to such affidavit before anyone. due process is the right to be heard, hence, denial the flimsy excuse that no notices were received by
of due process means the total lack of opportunity him or his counsel.
In a Resolution43 dated December 15, 2012, the IBP to be heard or to have one's day in court.48 As a
Board unanimously denied Atty. Tolentino's rule, no denial of due process takes place where a As a lawyer, Atty. Tolentino is presumed to
motions. The IBP Board's resolutions were party has been given an opportunity to be heard understand the gravity of a disbarment
thereafter transmitted to this Court on April 4, and to present his case.49chanrobleslaw proceeding. His failure to present his side of the
2013.44chanrobleslaw controversy, despite opportunity for him to do so,
Rule 138, Section 30 of the Revised Rules of Court constitutes a waiver by him of such
On August 6, 2013, Atty. Tolentino filed a also provides:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary right.53chanrobleslaw
Manifestation and/or Motion45 claiming that he was Sec. 30. Attorney to be heard before removal or
denied his constitutional right to due process when suspension. - No attorney shall be removed or The right to practice law is a privilege accorded
the IBP Board failed to give him an opportunity to suspended from the practice of his profession, until only to those worthy of it.
be heard and present his side. Atty. Tolentino he has had full opportunity upon reasonable notice
to answer the charges against him, to produce
 12

The practice of law is neither a natural nor a to be wanting in character, honesty, probity and support the activities of the Integrated Bar.
constitutional right but a privilege bestowed by the good demeanor and thus unworthy to continue as
State only upon the deserving and worthy for an officer of the court.59 A lawyer may be disbarred Canon 10 - A lawyer owes candor, fairness, and
conferment of such privilege.54chanrobleslaw or suspended not only for acts and omissions of good faith to the court.
malpractice and dishonesty in his professional
Complainant sufficiently proved the charges of
No lawyer should ever lose sight of the verity that dealings. He may also be penalized for gross
falsification against Atty. Tolentino.
the practice of the legal profession is always a misconduct not directly connected with his
privilege that the Court extends only to the professional duties that reveal his unfitness for the
In disbarment proceedings, the burden of proof
deserving, and that the Court may withdraw or office and his unworthiness of the principles that,
rests upon the complainant; and the Court will
deny the privilege to him who fails to observe and the privilege to practice law confers upon
exercise its disciplinary power only if the
respect the Lawyer's Oath and the canons of him.60chanrobleslaw
complainant establishes the complaint with
ethical conduct in his professional and private
substantial evidence.67chanrobleslaw
capacities.55 It is a privilege granted only to those We, however, emphasize that the purpose of
who possess the strict intellectual and moral disbarment is not meant as a punishment to
In her Complaint, Dolores alleged that she (with
qualifications required of lawyers who are deprive a lawyer of a means of livelihood. Rather, it
her siblings) sold the property to Alejo and
instruments in the effective and efficient is intended to protect the courts and the public
Filomena, presenting as proof thereof the Deed of
administration of justice.56chanrobleslaw from members of the bar who have become unfit
Sale dated January 3, 1978. We note, however, that
and unworthy to be part of the esteemed and
Dolores would later on
As guardian of the legal profession, this Court has noble profession.61 Considering the serious
disclose68 the actual transaction which transpired
the ultimate disciplinary power over members of consequences of the disbarment or suspension of a
between them and Atty. Tolentino involving the
the Bar to ensure that the highest standards of member of the Bar, this Court has held that
subject property, viz:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
competence, honesty and fair dealing are substantial evidence is necessary to justify the
On ex-parte presentation of evidence, complainant
maintained.57chanrobleslaw imposition of the administrative
testified that she knew personally respondent
penalty.62chanrobleslaw
Atty. Roberto P. Tolentino as he was the one
Under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of
who actually purchased their parcel of
Court, a lawyer may be suspended or disbarred In this case, respondent Atty. Tolentino is charged
land located at Barangay Sunga, Tagaytay City
from the practice of law for any of the following with violating the Lawyer's Oath and Canons 1, 7,
consisting of FIFTY THOUSAND (50,000) square
grounds:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary and 10 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
meters; she and her brother, Romulo Natanauan
1) Deceit; and sisters, Rafaela Natanauan and Ernestina
The Lawyer's Oath is a covenant every lawyer
Natanauan, are co-owners of said parcel of land as
2) Malpractice; undertakes to become and remain part of the legal
evidenced by a Deed of Sale dated August 3, 1976
profession.63 It is not mere facile words, drift and
3) Gross misconduct in office; x x x executed in their favor by Jose Natanauan
hollow, but a sacred trust that must be upheld and
and Salud Marqueses.
keep inviolable.64 It is a source of obligation and
4) Grossly immoral conduct;
duty for every lawyer,65 which includes an
At the time of the said sale, Jose Natanauan and
5) Conviction of a crime involving moral undertaking to obey the laws and legal orders of
Salud Marqueses are the registered owners of said
turpitude; duly constituted authorities therein, and not to do
parcel of land by virtue of an Original Certificate of
falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court.
Title No. 0-1822 x x x issued by the Register of
6) Violation of the lawyer's oath; All lawyers are obligated to uphold their Oaths lest
Deeds for the Province of Cavite.
they be subjected to administrative cases and
7) Willful disobedience to the lawful order of the sanctions.66chanrobleslaw
court; Atty. Roberto P. Tolentino purchased said
parcel of land through the intervention of a
8) Willful appearance as an attorney for a party Canons 1, 7, and 10 of the Code of Professional
certain Juan Luna; on January 3, 1978, they were
without authority to do so; and Responsibility, on the other hand, read as
accompanied by Juan Luna to the Office of Atty.
follows:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Roberto P. Tolentino located at Roxas
9) Solicitation of cases at law for the purpose of Canon 1 - A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution,
Boulevard, Manila. Thereat, Atty. Roberto P.
gain either personally or through paid agents obey the laws of the land and promote respect for
Tolentino, paid them the amount EIGHTY
or brokers.58 law and legal processes.
THOUSAND (P80, 000.00) PESOS for and as
A lawyer may be disciplined or suspended from the downpayment for the purchase of said parcel
Canon 7 - A lawyer shall at all times uphold the
practice of law for any misconduct, whether in his of land. After receiving such amount, they
integrity and dignity of the legal profession and
professional or private capacity, which shows him
 13

were asked by him to sign a Deed of Sale During the oral argument, the Bank was required Sale shows a contract of sale executed between
dated August 3, 1979 x x x subject to the to submit copies of the Record on Appeal filed in Dolores, Romulo, Rafaela and Ernestina
condition that he will cause the transfer of CA-G.R. No. 64130-R of the Court of Appeals and a Natanauan, as vendors, and Atty. Tolentino, as
ownership of the said parcel of land from chronology of relevant incidents. Its Compliance vendee, and notarized by "Notary Public"
Jose Natanauan to them and thereafter, he was filed on June 8, 1979. TOLENTINO was also Perfecto.77 This clearly belies Atty. Tolentino's
will pay the unpaid balance of the purchase required to submit, not later than the close of office claim that he does not personally know Perfecto
price. hours of June 7, 1979, copy of the alleged deed nor dealt with him in any capacity. This, in turn,
showing the purchase by him of about eight further bolsters the conclusion that he had
Instead of transferring said ownership from Jose hectares of real estate in Tagaytay City on account knowledge of or participation in the alleged
Natanauan to them, she declared that Atty. of which he allegedly paid P350,000.00 out of the falsifications.
Roberto Tolentino caused the transfer of ownership P389,000.00 received by him from the loan
from Jose Natanauan to Spouses Alejo Tolentino proceeds. TOLENTINO complied by submitting In addition, we stress that while Atty. Tolentino
and Filomena Tolentino by executing a falsified on June 7, 1979, at 11:00 A.M., a Deed of Sale vehemently denies any participation in the alleged
Deed of Sale dated August 3, 1979 x x x and Joint dated March 9, 1979 of a parcel of land of 5 falsification of the August 3, 1979 Deed of Sale, he
Affidavit dated August 6, 1979 x x x; Atty. Roberto hectares in Tagaytay City for which he is kept silent (both in his Comment and the
P. Tolentino falsified and forged the signatures of shown to have made a down payment of subsequent motions he filed before the IBP and the
Jose Natanauan, Salud Marqueses, Melquiades P280,000.00. At 3:00 P.M. of the same day, he Supreme Court) as to the March 9, 1979 Deed of
[Parungao] and Asuncion Fajardo in such submitted another Deed of Sale dated April 2, 1979 Sale, a copy of which was attached as Annex I of
documents making it appear that they (Jose, Salud, over a piece of property of 2 hectares in Tagaytay the disbarment complaint. It also does not appear
Melquiades and Asuncion) sold the said parcel of City for which he obligated himself to make a down that Atty. Tolentino ever disputed his signature
land to Spouses Alejo Tolentino and Filomena payment of P70,000.00. Both sales, while duly appearing in conformity to the Spouses Tolentino's
Tolentino.69 (Emphasis supplied.) acknowledged before a Notary Public, do not Affidavit dated December 2, 1980 stating that the
disclose any evidence of registration.73 (Emphasis property never belonged to them and that he (Atty.
We agree with Commissioner Espina's finding that
supplied.) Tolentino) was its true and absolute owner.
there is sufficient proof to hold that Atty. Tolentino
was involved in the falsification. The totality of The Court examined the rollo of the Banco De
To us, these clearly demonstrate Atty. Tolentino's
evidence (consisting of the falsified documents, Oro case and found that, indeed, the Deed of
lack of candor before the IBP and the Supreme
Dolores' testimony detailing the transactions Sale dated March 9, 1979 presented by Atty.
Court. In Silva Vda. de Fajardo v. Bugaring,78 we
surrounding the land, and the investigation Tolentino therein is the very same Deed of
held:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
conducted by this Court) leaves no doubt as to Sale dated March 9, 1979 which gave rise to
x x x Complete candor or honesty is expected from
Atty. Tolentino's involvement in, or at the very the present disbarment case.74chanrobleslaw
lawyers, particularly when they appear and plead
least, benefit from the acts of falsification imputed
before the courts for their own causes x x x. With
against him. The circumstances surrounding the transactions
his armada of legal knowledge and skills,
covered by the falsified documents, viewed against
respondent clearly enjoyed the upper hand. x x x
Both Commissioner Espina and the IBP Board found Atty. Tolentino's bare denials, constrain us to apply
that Atty. Tolentino's direct participation in the the rule that in the absence of satisfactory
Respondent is thus reminded that he is first and
falsification of the Deed of Sale and the Joint explanation, one who is found in possession of, and
foremost an officer of the court. His bounden duty
Affidavit could be inferred from the fact that he who has used, a forged document, is the forger
is to assist it in rendering justice to all. Lest he has
was the one who personally entered into the and, therefore, guilty of falsification. 75 The effect of
forgotten, lawyers must always be disciples of
subject contract with Dolores and her siblings, a presumption upon the burden of proof is to
truth. It is highly reprehensible when they
merely using his brother Alejo and his wife create the need of presenting evidence to
themselves make a travesty of the truth and
Filomena as dummies. overcome the prima facie case created, which, if
mangle the ends of justice. Such behavior runs
no contrary proof is offered, will thereby
counter to the standards of honesty and fair
We agree with the IBP. We find most telling of Atty. prevail.76 A prima facie case of falsification having
dealing expected from court
Tolentino's involvement is the Deed of Sale dated been established, Atty. Tolentino should have
officers.79chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
March 9, 197970 which, as found by the IBP, Atty. presented sufficient evidence to overcome such
Tolentino himself presented71 before this Court in burden. Through his own fault, this he failed to do. We reiterate that a lawyer is not merely a
the case of Banco De Oro v. Bayuga.72 We quote professional but also an officer of the court and as
the relevant portion of the Banco De Oro decision, Furthermore, we are convinced of Atty. Tolentino's such, he is called upon to share in the task and
to wit:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary dishonesty when he denied his association with responsibility of dispensing justice and resolving
Notary Public Perfecto. The March 9, 1979 Deed of disputes in society. Any act on the part of a lawyer,
 14

an officer of the court, which visibly tends to three (3) years.

obstruct, pervert, impede and degrade the A.M. No. MTJ-12-1815 (FORMERLY OCA IPI No.
administration of justice is contumacious, calling WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court 11-2401-MTJ)
for both an exercise of disciplinary action and finds respondent Atty. Roberto P.
application of the contempt power.80 For his acts of Tolentino GUILTY of violating the Lawyer's Oath, LEILANI A. TEJERO-
dishonesty, Atty. Tolentino not only violated the and Canons 1, 7, and 10 of the Code of LOPEZ, Complainant, v. JUDGE ELIZA B. YU,
Lawyer's Oath and Canon 10 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Accordingly, he is BRANCH 47, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT,
Professional Responsibility, he also failed to hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law PASAY CITY, Respondent.
observe his duty as an officer of the court. for THREE (3) YEARS EFFECTIVE FROM
NOTICE, with a STERN WARNING that any similar OCA IPI No. 11-2398-MTJ
Furthermore, Canons 1 and 7 of the Code of infraction in the future will be dealt with more
Professional Responsibility provide that a lawyer severely. JOSEFINA G. LABID, Complainant, v. JUDGE
shall, "uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of ELIZA B. YU,METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT,
the land and promote respect for law and legal Let copies of this Decision be furnished the Office BRANCH 47, PASAY CITY, Respondent.
processes" and "at all times, uphold the integrity of the Bar Confidant to be appended to respondent
and dignity of the legal profession and support the Roberto P. Tolentino's personal record as an OCA IPI No. 11-2399-MTJ
activities of the Integrated Bar." Atty. Tolentino's attorney, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and
deliberate non-participation in the disciplinary all courts in the country for their information and AMOR V. ABAD, FROILAN ROBERT L. TOMAS,
proceedings shows a lack of respect for the legal guidance. ROMER H. AVILES, EMELINA J. SAN MIGUEL,
(disciplinary) process and sullies the integrity and NORMAN D.S. GARCIA, MAXIMA SAYO AND
dignity of the legal profession. We agree with the SO ORDERED.c DENNIS ECHEGOYEN, Complainants, v. HON.
IBP that this constitutes another reason to suspend ELIZA B. YU, PRESIDING JUDGE,
Atty. Tolentino from the practice of METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 47,
law:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary EN BANC PASAY CITY, Respondent.
x x x We cannot ignore the fact that by virtue of
one's membership in the IBP, a lawyer thus OCA IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ
submits himself to the disciplinary authority of the A.M. No. MTJ-12-1813 (Formerly A.M. No. 12-
organization. x x x Respondent's cavalier attitude 5-42-METC), November 22, 2016 EXECUTIVE JUDGE BIBIANO G. COLASITO, VICE
in repeatedly ignoring the orders of the Supreme EXECUTIVE JUDGE BONIFACIO S. PASCUA,
Court constitutes utter disrespect to the judicial OFFICE OF THE COURT JUDGE RESTITUTO V. MANGALINDAN, JR.
institution, x x x It is necessary for respondent to ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. JUDGE ELIZA JUDGE CATHERINE P. MANODON, MIGUEL C.
acknowledge the orders of the Commission in B. YU, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, INFANTE (CLERK OF COURT IV, OCC-METC),
deference to its authority over him as a member of BRANCH47, PASAY CITY, Respondent. RACQUEL C. DIANO (CLERK OF COURT III,
the IBP. His wanton disregard of its lawful orders METC, BRANCH 45), EMMA ANNIE D.
subjects him to disciplinary sanction.81 (Citations A.M. No. 12-1-09-METC ARAFILES (ASSISTANT CLERK OF COURT, OCC-
omitted.) METC), PEDRO C. DOCTOLERO, JR. (CLERK OF
RE: LETTER DATED 21 JULY 2011 OF COURT III, METC, BRANCH 44), LYDIA T.
All lawyers must inculcate in themselves that the
EXECUTIVE JUDGE BIBIANO G. COLASITO AND CASAS (CLERK OF COURT III, METC, BRANCH
practice of law is not a right but a privilege granted
THREE (3) OTHER JUDGES OF THE 46), ELEANOR N. BAYOG (LEGAL
only to those of good moral character. The Bar
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, PASAY CITY, RESEARCHER, METC, BRANCH 45), LEILANIE
must maintain a high standard of honesty and fair
FOR THE SUSPENSION OR DETAIL TO A. TEJERO ( LEGAL RESEARCHER, METC,
dealing.82 Lawyers must conduct themselves
ANOTHER STATION OF JUDGE ELIZA B. YU, BRANCH 46), ANA MARIA V. FRANCISCO
beyond reproach at all times, whether they are
BRANCH 47, SAME COURT. (CASHIER I, OCC METC), SOLEDAD J. BASSIG
dealing with their clients or the public at large, and
(CLERK III, OCC-METC), MARISSA MASHHOOR
a violation of the high moral standards of the legal
A.M. No. MTJ-13-1836 (FORMERLY A.M. No. RASTGOOY (RECORDS OFFICER, OCC-METC),
profession justifies the imposition of the
11-11-115-METC) MARIE LUZ M. OBIDA (ADMINISTRATIVE
appropriate penalty, including suspension and
OFFICER, OCC-METC), VIRGINIA D. GALANG
disbarment.83chanrobleslaw
RE: LETTER DATED MAY 2, 2011 OF HON. (RECORDS OFFICER I, OCC-METC), AUXENCIO
ELIZA B. YU, PRESIDING JUDGE, JOSEPH CLEMENTE (CLERK OF COURT III,
We thus affirm the IBP Board's recommended
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 47, METC, BRANCH 48), EVELYN P. DEPALOBOS
action to suspend him from the practice of law for
PASAY CITY. (LEGAL RESEARCHER, METC, BRANCH 44),
 15

MA. CECILIA GERTRUDES R. SALVADOR (COURT STENOGRAPHER II, METC, BRANCH PER CURIAM:
(LEGAL RESEARCHER, METC, BRANCH 48), 48), CRISTINA E. LAMPITOC (COURT
JOSEPH B. PAMATMAT (CLERK III, OCC-METC), STENOGRAPHER II, METC, BRANCH 46), A judge embodies the law; she cannot be above it.
ZENAIDA N. GERONIMO (COURT MELANIE DC BEGASA (CLERK III, METC, She should not use it to advance her personal
STENOGRAPHER, OCC-METC), BENJIE V. ORE BRANCH 46), EVANGELINE M. CHING (CLERK convenience, or to oppress others. She should be
(PROCESS SERVER, OCC-METC), FORTUNATO III, METC, BRANCH 46), LAWRENCE D. PEREZ obedient to the rules and directives enunciated by
E. DIEZMO (PROCESS SERVER, OCC-METC), (PROCESS SERVER, METC, BRANCH 46), the Supreme Court for the effective administration
NOMER B. VILLANUEVA (UTILITY WORKER, EDMUNDO VERGARA (UTILITY WORKER, of justice; otherwise, she becomes an arrogant
OCC-METC), ELSA D. GARNET (CLERK III, OCC METC, BRANCH 46), AMOR V. ABAD (COURT tyrant. Being a magistrate of the law, she must
METC), FATIMA V. ROJAS (CLERK III, OCC- INTERPRETER, METC, BRANCH 47), ROMER H. comport herself in a manner consistent with the
METC), EDUARDO E. EBREO (SHERIFF III, AVILES (COURT STENOGRAPHER II, METC, dignity of her judicial office, and must not commit
METC, BRANCH 45), RONALYN T. ALMARVEZ BRANCH 47), FROILAN ROBERT L. TOMAS any act that erodes public confidence in the
(COURT STENOGRAPHER II, METC, BRANCH (COURT STENOGRAPHER II, METC, BRANCH Judiciary.
45), MA. VICTORIA C. OCAMPO (COURT 47), MAXIMA C. SAYO (PROCESS SERVER,
STENOGRAPHER II, METC, BRANCH 45), BRANCH 47), SEVILLA B. DEL CASTILLO In these consolidated administrative proceedings,
ELIZABETH LIPURA (CLERK III METC, BRANCH (COURT INTERPRETER, METC, BRANCH 48), we resolve the several charges of gross
45), MARY ANN J. CAYANAN (CLERK III, METC, AIDA JOSEFINA IGNACIO (CLERK III, METC, misconduct, gross ignorance of the law, gross
BRANCH 45), MANOLO MANUEL E. GARCIA BRANCH 48), BENIGNO A. MARZAN (CLERK III, insubordination, oppression, and conduct
(PROCESS SERVER, METC, BRANCH 45), METC, BRANCH 48), KARLA MAE R. unbecoming of a judge leveled by various
EDWINA A. JUROK (UTILITY WORKER, OCC- PACUNAYEN (CLERK III, METC, BRANCH 48), complainants, some of.them her fellow Judges,
METC), ARMINA B. ALMONTE (CLERK III, OCC- IGNACIO M. GONZALES (PROCESS SERVER, against respondent Judge Eliza B. Yu, the Presiding
METC), ELIZABETH G. VILLANUEVA (RECORDS METC, BRANCH 48), EMELINA J. SAN MIGUEL Judge of Branch 47, Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC)
OFFICER, METC, BRANCH 44), ERWIN RUSS B. (RECORDS OFFICER, OCC, DETAILED AT in Pasay City.
RAGASA (SHERIFF III, METC, BRANCH 44), BRANCH 47), DENNIS M. ECHEGOYEN
BIEN T. CAMBA (COURT STENOGRAPHER II, (SHERIFF III, OCC-METC), NORMAN GARCIA On June 4, 2013, A.M. No. MTJ-12-1813 was
METC, BRANCH 44), MARLON M. SULIGAN (SHERIFF III, METC, BRANCH 47), NOEL G. consolidated with A.M. No. MTJ-12-1-09-
(COURT STENOGRAPHER II, METC, BRANCH LABID (UTILITY WORKER I, BRANCH MeTC.1 Other closely-related administrative
44), CHANDA B. TOLENTINO (COURT 47), Complainant, v. HON. ELIZA B. YU, complaints involving the respondent, specifically:
STENOGRAPHER II, METC, BRANCH 44), PRESIDING JUDGE, METROPOLITAN TRIAL A.M. No. MTJ-13-1863, A.M. No. MTJ-12-1815, OCA
FERDINAND R. MOLINA (COURT INTERPRETER, COURT, BRANCH 47, PASAY CITY, Respondent. IPI No. 11-2398-MTJ, OCA IPI No. 11-2399-MTJ, OCA
METC, BRANCH 44), PETRONILO C. PRIMACIO, IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ, and OCA IPI No. 12-2456-MTJ,
JR. (PROCESS SERVER, METC, BRANCH 45), OCA IPI No. 12-2456-MTJ were similarly consolidated. 2
EDWARD ERIC SANTOS (UTILITY WORKER,
METC, BRANCH 45), EMILIO P. DOMINE JUDGE BIBIANO G. COLASITO, JUDGE
Antecedents
(UTILITY WORKER, METC, BRANCH 45), BONIFACIO S. PASCUA, JUDGE RESTITUTO V.
ARNOLD P. OBIAL (UTILITY WORKER, METC, MANGALINDAN, JR. AND CLERK OF COURT
A.M. No. MTJ-12-1813
BRANCH 44), RICARDO E. LAMPITOC (SHERIFF MIGUEL C. INFANTE, Complainants, v. HON.
(Office of the Court Administrator v. Judge
III, METC, BRANCH 46), JEROME H. AVILES ELIZA B. YU, PRESIDING JUDGE,
Eliza B. Yu)
(COURT STENOGRAPHER II, METC, BRANCH METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 47,
46), ANA LEA M. ESTACIO (COURT PASAY CITY, Respondent.
On January 27, 2011, the Court, through Chief
STENOGRAPHER II, METC, BRANCH 46), LANIE
Justice Renata C. Corona, issued Administrative
F. AGUINALDO (CLERK III, METC, BRANCH 44), A.M. No. MTJ-13-1821
Order No. 19-20113 in response to the specific
JASMINE L. LINDAIN (CLERK III, METC,
request of Secretary Alberto A. Lim of the
BRANCH 44), RONALDO S. QUIJANO (PROCESS JUDGE EMILY L. SAN GASPAR-GITO,
Department of Tourism (DOT) to establish night
SERVER, METC, BRANCH 44), DOMINGO H. METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 20,
courts in Pasay City and Makati City. A.O. No. 19-
HOCOSOL (UTILITY WORKER, METC, BRANCH MANILA, Complainant, v. JUDGE ELIZA B. YU,
2011 designated the branches of the MeTC in
48), EDWIN P. UBANA (SHERIFF III, METC, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 47,
Pasay City and Makati City as night courts to
BRANCH 48), MARVIN O. BALICUATRO (COURT PASAY CITY, Respondent.
expeditiously hear and try cases involving
STENOGRAPHER II, METC, BRANCH 48), MA.
nighttime apprehensions, special cases under
LUZ D. DIONISIO (COURT STENOGRAPHER II, DECISION the Rule on Summary Procedure, and criminal
METC, BRANCH 48), MARIBEL A. MOLINA
 16

cases involving WHEREFORE, it is hereby directed assigned night court duties every Friday. But Judge
tourists, viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary that:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary Yu did not desire to comply, and so inscribed the
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 19-2011 1. Night courts similar to those designated in the following marginal note on the February 9, 2011
Metropolitan Trial Courts of Manila City and Quezon Memorandum of Judge Colasito, to wit:   
ESTABLISHING NIGHT COURTS IN THE City be established in the Metropolitan Trial Courts February 11, 2011
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS OF PASAY of Pasay City and Makati
CITY AND MAKATI CITY City;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary Pls. I dissent with the night court assignment. I
have pending legal question before the Office of
WHEREAS, the Constitution mandates the speedy 2. The operational guidelines for the assignment of Court Administrator.5
disposition of cases of all persons before judicial judges and the holding of night court sessions in
The pending legal question Judge Yu adverted to
bodies;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary the Metropolitan Trial Courts of Manila be
had been posed in her letter dated February 2,
applicable to the night courts in the Metropolitan
2011 to the Court Administrator Jose Midas P.
WHEREAS, "the Executive Judges of the Trial Courts of Pasay City and Makati City,
Marquez,6 as follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Metropolitan Trial Courts and Municipal Trial Courts respectively, except operating hours, which shall
Sir:cralawlawlibrary
in Cities of the cities and municipalities comprising be from four-thirty in the afternoon (4:30 p.m.)
Metro Manila x x x may assign all judges to hold until eleven o'clock in the evening (11:00
Our Court is in receipt of Administrative Order No.
night court sessions daily from Monday to Friday p.m.);ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
19-2011 (Establishing Night Courts in the
and on official holidays and special days."
Metropolitan Trial Courts of Pasay City and Makati
3. The night courts of Pasay City and Makati City be
City) today.
WHEREAS, in line with the constitutional mandate authorized to try and decide cases involving
on the speedy disposition of cases and in the nighttime apprehensions and all special cases
Among others, it is provided that: "3. The night
exercise of its power of administrative supervision enumerated in the Rule on Summary
Courts of Pasay City and Makati City be authorized
over all courts, the Supreme Court has ordered (a) Procedure;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
to try and decide cases involving night time
the establishment of night courts in the
apprehensions and all special cases enumerated in
Metropolitan Trial Courts of Manila "to try and 4. The provisions of Administrative Circular No. 58-
the Rule on Summary Procedure."
decide all special cases enumerated in the Rule on 2002, dated 14 November 2002, requiring an
Summary Procedure," and (b) the opening of two expeditious disposition of criminal cases involving
With due respect, the police officers cannot
branches in the Metropolitan Trial Courts of Quezon tourists be complied with; and
apprehend, detain and bring the arrested
City as night courts to hear "cases involving
persons charged with cases covered by the
nighttime apprehensions" and special cases 5. The Executive Judges of the Metropolitan Trial
Rule on Summary Procedure at night without
enumerated in the Rule on Summary Courts of Pasay City and Makati City (a) to inform
being liable for Arbitrary Detention. The
Procedure;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary the Philippine National Police (PNP) and the
arrested persons need not post bail under
Prosecutor's Office within their respective
the Rule on Summary Procedure. Thus, there
WHEREAS, the Court held that the operational jurisdictions of the schedule of the branches of the
is no legal basis for the police officers to
guidelines for the assignment of judges and the metropolitan trial courts assigned to hold night
detain them prior to the hearing of their
holding of night court sessions in Manila shall also sessions; and (b) make representations with the
cases at night by the court. Moreover, the
be applicable to the night courts established in PNP and the local government units to ensure that
public prosecutors cannot conduct inquest on
Quezon City;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary appropriate security measures are adopted to
the night arrests of the suspected criminals
protect the judges and their staff during night
because the penalty involved in cases
WHEREAS, the Court requires the expeditious sessions.
covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure
disposition of criminal cases involving
Immediate compliance with this order is enjoined. is not more than six (6) months. Inquest can
tourists;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
be conducted only where the penalty is four
27 January 2011. (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day
WHEREAS, the Honorable Secretary Alberto A. Lim
and above. The night inquest without the
of the Department of Tourism has requested the To comply with A.O. No. 19-2011, then Pasay City
release of the arrested suspects is
designation of night courts also in Pasay City and MeTC Executive Judge Bibiano G. Colasito issued a
questionable. It can make the public
Makati City, in addition to those already existing in Memorandum dated February 9, 20114 prescribing
prosecutors criminally and administratively
Manila and Quezon the schedules for night court service of all Pasay
liable.
City;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary City MeTC Judges and employees effective
February 14, 2011. Under the Memorandum, MeTC
It is tedious for the public prosecutor and the
Branch 47, presided by respondent Judge Yu, was
 17

public attorney to attend the night court establishment of the night courts was supported ineffective and non-functional. In Manila City,
from 4:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. after attending neither by statistical data nor by any study. After when I was a public prosecutor, I questioned as to
an exhaustive hearing in the morning then rendering a lengthy discourse on the flaws of the legality of the detention of the accused being
attend the hearing on the following day, establishing night courts, she ended her letter with arraigned at night for violation of ordinances. When
without additional pay. a request for additional compensation and security I was not given any legal justification, I requested
in case she would undertake night court duties. to be relieved from night court. My experience
Unlike in Manila Metropolitan Trial Courts The pertinent portions of her letter ran as showed that night court is a waste of time for all.
where the cases tried by night courts are follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary The cases tried at night court can be tried during
mostly violation of ordinances, in Pasay Dear Sir:cralawlawlibrary day time without burdening the three (3) pillars of
Metropolitan Trial Courts, most of the cases our criminal justice system. xxx. The cases tried
filed are Theft, B.P. Blg. 6 and P.D. No. 1602 This Court learned that you requested for the are violation of city ordinances, mostly on illegal
that entail full blown trial because the designation of night courts in Pasay City that vending in the night courts. I heard that these
accused refuses to enter into a plea resulted to the issuance of Administrative Order cases were filed for money making scheme by the
bargaining. In this sense, the establishment No. 19-2011 (Establishing Night Courts in the police officers. From the information gathered, only
of night courts in Pasay City cannot unclog a Metropolitan Trial Courts of Pasay City and Makati those accused who did not give them money were
court's criminal docket. (Bold emphases City) dated January 27, 2011. arrested, detained and brought to the night courts.
supplied)
With due respect, there is insufficient basis Third, there is a grave violation of the right
Please enlighten us on this concern. for your request. There was no statistical of government employees against long and
data present or there was no study extended period of work with no additional
Thank you. conducted by your department pay at night. This is a form of exploitation of
recommending the necessity of establishing workers whose rights are enshrined under the
It appears that the Station Investigation and
night courts in Pasay City. For the record, this Constitution. It bears pointing out that additional
Detective Management Section (SIDMS) of the
Court is yet to hear a case involving any compensation for night time work is founded on
Pasay City Police Station received a copy of Judge
tourist. Moreover, the tourists should be public policy.
Yu's letter to Court Administrator Marquez. Wary of
advised not to roam around the city at night x x x x.
the potential criminal liability of apprehending
so as not to be victims of various crimes.
officers adverted to in the letter, Police Chief
Usually, the perception of the tourists who Fourth, it is very burdensome to attend the
Inspector Raymund A. Liguden of the SIDMS sought
are going around the city at night is court at night.
clarification from the Office of the Pasay City
negative, for they are likely to be engaging in
Prosecutor.7 In response, the Office of the Pasay
unlawful nocturnal activities. They are at x x x x.
City Prosecutor explained through Prosecutor
their own risk at night.
Dolores P. Rillera that the apprehending officers
Fifth, it is risky to work at night because of
could become liable for arbitrary detention only
There was no prior consultation with the lack of security.
when they failed to refer the arrested persons for
police officers, public attorneys, public
inquest proceedings within the periods specified
prosecutors, judges and their staff before x x x x.
under Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code.8
your department requested for the creation
Lastly, the establishment of night courts in
of night courts in Pasay City.
Apprised of the explanation from the Office of the Pasay City will not unclog a court's criminal
Pasay City Prosecutor, Judge Yu requested docket. The situation in Manila City and Quezon
There are many concerns which your
Prosecutor Rillera to refer the matter to the City are not similar with Pasay City. x x x. In Manila
department did not consider.
Department of Justice (DOJ) and request a legal Metropolitan Trial Courts, majority of the accused
opinion thereon,9 even as she requested Court pay the fine for the violation of ordinances not
First, some of the rights of the accused who
Administrator Marquez to have her letter to involving any tourist crime during the night court
were charged with cases covered by the
Prosecutor Rillera docketed as an administrative hearing. Also, a study must be conducted by your
Summary Procedure are impaired by the
matter.10 department, if necessary, about the effectiveness
operation of night courts. x x x
of night courts in Manila City and Quezon City, and
if these night courts are attaining the purposes
xxxx
Judge Yu communicated her reservations about the they were created. If not, there is no reason for the
night court by letter directly to DOT Secretary establishment of a night court or tourism court
Second, night courts in Manila City and
Lim,11 pointing out that the DOT's request for the here in Pasay City. Another thing, there is uneven
Quezon City are criticized for being
 18

assignment of judges alone to the night court. x x Priority is also given to those criminal cases where asserted that she did not commit
x. the offended party or the complainant is a tourist insubordination;18 that her protest against night
or transient in the country as already explained in courts was a mere expression of her opinion; that
I hope you find merit with this letter. May your Administrative Circular No. 58-2002 dated she would render night duty upon receiving a
department reconsider your request for the November 14, 2002. resolution on her protest from the Court; that the
establishment of night courts in Pasay City. With OCAD should have submitted a complete study and
due respect, it will be appreciated if your Be reminded that judges, prosecutors and public report about the effectiveness of night courts in the
department will give additional compensation attorneys are public officers who are duty bound to National Capital Judicial Region, particularly in
and provide police security to the judges, serve with the highest degree of responsibility, Pasay City;19 and that her protest was covered by
public prosecutors, public attorneys and the integrity, loyalty and efficiency and whose main her constitutional right to freedom of speech 20 and
entire court staff, if it insist concern in the performance of their duties is public other legal principles.21
of [sic] establishing night courts here without welfare and interest.
conducting any study. Judge Yu also asserted that based on her
Please be guided accordingly.13 experience, holding night courts unduly burdened
x x x x. (Bold emphases supplied) the Judges and their court personnel, as well as
Ostensibly not satisfied, Judge Yu
other court employees;22 that A.O. No. 19-2011
On May 5, 2011, the Office of the Court replied,14 pertinently
merely reiterated Administrative Order No. 72
Administrator (OCA), through Assistant Court stating:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
dated June 30, 1988 that had been based on
Administrator (ACA) Thelma C. Bahia, responded to xxxx
the 1983 Rule on Summary Procedure in Special
the concerns raised by the Judge Yu in the
Cases but the latter issuance had already been
following manner:12chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary With due respect, your letter did not address the
superseded by the 1991 Revised Rules on
This refers to your letter dated February 2, 2011 issues raised in my letter dated February 11, 2011
Summary Procedure;23 that A.O. No. 19-2011 did
apprising us of certain concerns relative to the to Hon. Alberto A. Lim, Secretary of Tourism who
not make any reference to the 1991 Rules of
establishment of night courts in Pasay City. did not reply said letter to date [sic]. Attached is
Summary Procedure which was a "huge legal
my letter dated March 22, 2011 address[ed] to
blunder;"24 that the drafters of A.O. No. 19-2011
xxxx Hon. Jose Midas P. Marquez together with the
merely reiterated Administrative Circular No. 58-
attachments.
2002 dated November 14, 2002, and overlooked
The first concern has been ably explained in the
R.A. No. 4908 (An Act Requiring Judges Of Courts
attached letter dated February 25, 2011 of As per information from this Courts' Officer-in-
To Speedily Try Criminal Cases Wherein The
Prosecutor Dolores P. Rillera, Chief, Inquest Charge Emelina J. San Miguel who heard from other
Offended Party Is A Person About To Depart From
Division, Office of the City Prosecutor, Pasay City, staff of the Office of the Clerk of Court, there is
The Philippines With No Definite Date Of
addressed to Police Chief Inspector Raymond A. (sic) no criminal case filed at night since the start
Return);25 that night court duty violated the 8-hour
Liguden, Chief SIDMS, Pasay City, who, having of the night courts here in Pasay until now showing
work period;26 that the Court should exercise
been furnished a copy of your letter dated the need to review, if not abolish the
judicial restraint;27 the A.O. No. 19-2011 was invalid
February 2, 2011, subsequently sought the administrative order creating it.
for non-compliance with the requirements of
guidance of Prosecutor Rillera on the matter.
Back at the Pasay City MeTC, the continued refusal issuing a valid administrative order;28 that A.O. No.
by Judge Yu to render night court service prompted 19-2011 did not provide any penalty in case of its
With respect to the second point you raised,
Executive Judge Colasito to assign additional night non-compliance;29 and that A.O. No. 19-2011 was
prosecutors and public attorneys of Pasay City had
court duties to the other MeTC Judges and their an invalid order addressed solely to the Executive
long been assigned their respective schedules to
personnel.15 Judges of the MeTC of Makati City and Pasay City.30
handle inquest proceedings until 10 p.m. prior to
the designation of night courts in Pasay City.
In view of Judge Yu's refusal to follow A.O. No. 19- A.M. No. MTJ-13-1836
Attending night courts would not be as tedious as
2011, the OCA submitted a memorandum to the (Re: Letter dated May 2, 2011 of Hon. Eliza B.
you surmise. Besides, prosecutors and public
Court,16 recommending that her insubordination, Yu, Branch 47, MeTC, Pasay City); and
attorneys already receive allowances for staying
gross misconduct and violation of The New Code of
beyond office hours.
Judicial Conduct be docketed as an administrative A.M. No. MTJ-12-1815
complaint against her. In due course, the Court (Leilani A. Tejero-Lopez v. Judge Eliza B. Yu)
As to the third issue, the main consideration for the
required Judge Yu to comment.17
designation of night courts is to address the matter
of nighttime apprehension which include offenses These administrative matters refer to the
enumerated in the Rule of Summary Procedure. appointments of Ms. Leilani A. Tejero-Lopez as the
In her comment, Judge Yu denied the charges, and Branch Clerk of Court of MeTC Branch 47, and Ms.
 19

Mariejoy P. Lagman as Clerk III of the Regional Trial pursuant to Section 2(b), Rule III of the Omnibus and trespassing, and contempt of court if she
Court (RTC) Branch 108, in Pasay City. Rules on Appointments and Other Personnel persisted on taking her oath of office. Judge Yu
Actions in view of the availability of a qualified further vowed to assail the appointment before the
Respondent Judge Yu challenged the applicant.40 Court and the Civil Service Commission (CSC).46
appointments.
On April 14, 2011, Ms. Tejero-Lopez learned from
I. Appointment of Ms. Tejero-Lopez as Clerk Ms. Emmie San Miguel, the then OIC of Branch 47, On the same day, Judge Yu wrote to Atty. Caridad
of Court III, MeTC Branch 47, Pasay City that Judge Yu had wanted her to execute a waiver A. Pabello, Chief of Office, OCA-Office of
or withdrawal of her application. Administrative Services (OCA-OAS),47 to protest the
On July 9, 2010, Judge Yu requested to fill the appointment, to wit:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
position of Clerk of Court III in her sala.31 Upon Madam:cralawlawlibrary
approval of her request32 and consequent posting Wishing to settle the issue of the appointment
of the notice of vacancy,33 three applicants vied for amicably, Ms. Tejero-Lopez paid Judge Yu a visit in Thank you for your telegram today. Please be
the position, namely: Ms. Ellen D.L.S. Serrano, Ms. her chambers. The meeting between them was informed that Leilani Lopez has withdrawn her
Leilani A. Tejero-Lopez and Ms. Eloisa A. hostile. In describing the meeting, Ms. Tejero-Lopez application as Clerk of Court III in this court [a] long
Bernardo.34 From the outset, Judge Yu favored Ms. pointed out that Judge Yu had shouted and time ago. She failed to comply (sic) all the
Bernardo for the vacancy.35 exclaimed at her: "Nanggugulo ka[!] Ikaw ang requirements for the consideration of her
nanggugulo[!] katatawag ko lang sa Supreme application for such position because, among
Court, Sabi ng Supreme Court, ikaw ang others, she has no personal endorsement
After evaluating the applicants' qualifications, the nanggugulo[!]." Ms. Tejero-Lopez recalled that from this court despite her last ditch attempt
Selection and Promotion Board for the Lower Judge Yu then demanded her withdrawal with a to get it on March 7, 2011. This court did not
Courts under the OCA (OCA-SPBLC) recommended threat to revoke her appointment later on. Faced sign an important document for her relative to the
the appointment of Ms. Tejero-Lopez, then a Legal with the prospect of eventually losing her job, Ms. position thus her application cannot be considered
Researcher assigned at MeTC Branch 46, in its Tejero-Lopez decided to withdraw her by the Selection and Promotion Board for the
Board Resolution No. 12B-2011(A) dated April 4, application.41cralawred Lower Courts at all. Moreover, this court has
2011.36 The OCA-SPBLC had found Ms. Bernardo to continuing protest against her appointment
have lacked the required training.37 On April 26, 2011, Judge Yu asked for the in this court to date. And this was reiterated
reconsideration with the OCA-SPBLC by submitting to Leilani Lopez few moments ago.
On April 12, 2011, Chief Justice Corona, along with a copy of the withdrawal of the application signed
Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio and Associate by Ms. Tejero-Lopez.42 Please be guided accordingly.
Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales, approved Ms.
Tejero-Lopez's appointment. However, by her letter dated May 10, 2011, Ms. x x x x (Bold emphasis supplied)
Tejero-Lopez retracted her withdrawal, and
A week later, Judge Yu sent another letter stating
In the meantime, by letter dated March 31, 2011, signified her intention to pursue her application. 43
that she had apprised Ms. Tejero-Lopez of her
Judge Yu requested the temporary designation of
possible indictment for unlawful appointment,
Ms. Bernardo as the Clerk of Court,38 and furnished After an investigation that established that Ms.
grave coercion and unjust vexation, among
a copy of the letter to Ms. Tejero-Lopez.39 In the Tejero-Lopez did not voluntarily withdraw her
others.48 She thereby also expressed her refusal to
letter, Judge Yu expressed her protest against the application, the OCA-SPBLC continued processing
honor the "void ab initio" appointment of Ms.
appointment of "another applicant from her appointment,44 and she was eventually
Tejero-Lopez, which she characterized as "a big
Metropolitan Trial Court Branch 46, Pasay City, as appointed Clerk of Court III effective May 31,
joke." For the fullest appreciation of the contents,
well as other applicants who cannot be appointed 2011.45
the letter is quoted herein
because they lacked the requirement of the
below:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
personal endorsement by the judge." She further Upon receiving her appointment on June 7, 2011,
Madam:cralawlawlibrary
declared that it would be best to either hire a new Ms. Tejero-Lopez went to Judge Yu's chambers to
lawyer or to call for another batch of applicants in take her oath, but the latter refused her request to
Please be informed that today Leilani Lopez, the
the event that Ms. Bernardo would not be administer her oath. According to Ms. Tejero-Lopez,
applicant for Clerk of Court III who has withdrawn
appointed. Judge Yu questioned the integrity of the selection
her application long time ago, sought to see me
process, and told her directly that the Court had
because of her appointment, a legally infirm
The OCA-SPBLC, through Deputy Court appointed her in retaliation to her refusal to render
one. I accommodated her for a brief talk for the
Administrator Nimfa C. Vilches, denied Judge Yu's night court service. Judge Yu threatened Ms.
last time, hoping to not see her again and never to
request for Ms. Bernardo's temporary designation Tejero-Lopez with criminal cases of grave coercion
 20

bother me anymore. for the Lower Court is funny, and it made me applicant. I am unhappy right now of her
laugh. I rather laugh than be angry, than feel appointment, and it will affect my
It was explained to her that she will face helpless, than look powerless in this awful and enthusiasm and productivity in court. I
possible indictment of, among others, mean situation. Firmness of decision anchored on expressed my disgust unabashedly before
unlawful appointment, grave coercion and the principles of righteousness and justice is one of the Chief of OAS and the lawyer from the
unjust vexation, all punishable under the the characteristic of this unassuming court. I am Legal Department, and so I felt discourteous
Revised Penal Code, if she forcibly insist to happy to feel that God is with me, and He not as I was a victim of discourtesy here. For
take a seat in this court despite of numerous Satan is cheering with me in this lonely fight as to showing lack of delicadeza, Leilani Lopez was
oral and written opposition by the court to what is right and just. rejected openly[,] verbally[,] and in writing, made
her selection and appointment. Likewise, she to her by me and my court staff [sic] for numerous
can be thrown to jail for contempt of court, if Thank you. (Bold emphasis supplied) times, thus she is callous and discourteous.
such callousness and discourteousness
On June 17, 2011, Judge Yu submitted her formal
continue to exist in this court. Moreover, she Leilani Lopez deceived me by giving me a formal
protest49 against Ms. Tejero-Lopez' appointment, as
was told that if thievery extends to public office, letter of her withdrawal of application, only to find
follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
the elements of Theft under our penal code were out yesterday that she filed her waiver of
Chief Justice Renato C. Corona
established prima facie, as the concept of withdrawal which disclosure should have been
Supreme Court
apoderamiento or unlawful taking predominates in made to me by her in good faith. This qualifies her
P. Faura St., Manila City
this situation, an affront of the Rule of Law, for the crime of Other Deceits under Article 318 of
showing that the Rule of Jungle where might is the Revised Penal Code. In doing this, she does not
right triumphs as can be gleaned in a paper, a null FORMAL PROTEST TO THE APPOINTMENT OF have my trust and confidence, a biting reality since
and void appointment paper held by her. Her LEILANI LOPEZ AS BRANCH CLERK OF COURT OF the time she applied for the position until her
appointment is highly questionable. Leilani METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT BRANCH 47, PASAY numerous rejections. Dishonesty encompasses all
Lopez received the proverbial forbidden CITY that deviates sense of honesty. Our workplace
apple, obviously grown from a toxic tree. Our provides that "Dishonesty is a serious offense
court advised her for the last time not to eat Sir:cralawlawlibrary which reflects a person's character and exposes
it, or she will suffer the grave consequences, the moral decay which virtually destroys honor,
without any taint of threats to her. The ways All the laws provide the inherent relief of virtue, and integrity. It is a malevolent act that has
of a scholar seem not to have a place in this protest by the incumbent judge to an no place in the judiciary, as no other office in the
prestigious institution, for her appointment appointment of any staff in his or her court. government service exacts a greater demand for
is an example of brute force, they say it is a The appointed applicant Leilani Lopez is not moral righteousness from an employee than a
rape of the honor of this bench, others say it qualified and not fit to work as the branch position in the judiciary." If Leilani Lopez has a gull
is a spit of insult. However, this court will not clerk of court in my sala. [sic] to deceive me at this point in time, giving me
press formal charges against the poor Leilani her formal withdrawal letter and filing her waiver of
Lopez, a sorry victim of a subtle power play. Article Leilani Lopez lacked personal her withdrawal letter without my knowledge, and
24 of the New Civil Code says indirectly that the indorsement. The applicant knew this, and so she this was not disclosed to me by her despite her
court must be vigilant for the protection of morally said to me on June 14, 2011 that she does not opportunities to do so, this meant that she has a
dependent, ignorant, indigent, mentally weak, know why she was appointed. She attempted to dishonorable and vicious character, undeserving to
tenderness of age or other handicap of a person. get a personal indorsement from me on March 7, be in my court. She did this deceitful conduct to
Your office must be reminded that I took my oath 2011 that I rejected. She must submit her neuro- me and she showed unpredictable actuations to
seriously before SC Justice Antonio B. Nachura, and psychiatric test results to me and to the Board me and to the Board while she is still an applicant,
I swore to him that I will uphold the Constitution, because it is definitely abnormal, some kind of an she will most likely do it as a branch clerk of court
and I will remain faithful to my oath even after his obsession, to insist in clinging on to a position of a in my sala. And so I will always be wary with her
retirement in the judiciary. Consequently, this branch clerk of court after numerous oral and presence in my court, and it is a tremendous
court will not honor the void ab initio written opposition by a judge she will be working mental stress or for me as a judge.
appointment of Leilani Lopez, a big joke and with. This alone is a sign that she is unfit for the
so this court is laughing at her and all others job. Her obsession is dark, it is destructive because With due respect, there was a misconstruction
who are like her, not to put her and others down, she places her own personal interest over public of the laws on selection and appointment of
only to treat this delicate matter lightly in jest interest[.] [w]ith her presence in my court, the court personnel by the Board, it presupposes
strange things, sometimes contrary to law or public will definitely suffer, and so the judiciary. I that all the applicants submitted for consideration
contrary to the spirit of the law, do happen in as a judge will suffer. I am demoralized with this by the Board must have good and harmonious
judiciary. The Selection and Promotion Board rotten system of appointing an unfit working relationship with a judge he or she will
 21

work with and so the judge must have assented or considered than the rights and privileges of
agreed to the proposed application of all an applicant for a branch clerk of court, a II. Appointment of Ms. Mariejoy P. Lagman,
applicants, expressly or impliedly. If an appointed virtual stranger to me at the time of her Clerk III, RTC Branch 108, Pasay City
applicant is not the liking of the judge, there will be application, and now her character is dubious
disharmony in the court. The working relationship to me. Imagine, this kind of irregular In June 2010, Judge Yu initiated a complaint,
with [sic] be based on mistrust and distrust. It will appointment invites suits and casts disrepute docketed as A.M. No. P-12-3033 (formerly A.M. No.
not accomplish anything good for the judiciary as a amongst us, I doubt if this is what our 10-8-97-MeTC), entitled Memoranda of Judge Eliza
whole. Each other's working life as a judge and as a Supreme Court envisions or our Constitution B. Yu Issued to Legal Researcher Mariejoy P.
branch clerk of court will be miserable. This is not dreams for the Supreme Court. I re-plead all Lagman and to Court Stenographer Soledad J.
the spirit of the letter of all the laws pertaining to my letters and the attachments dated June 15 and Bassig, All of Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 47,
selection and appointment of Supreme Court 16, 2011 pertaining to the appointment of Leilani Pasay City, against Ms. Mariejoy P. Lagman, Legal
employee aspiring for confidential position such as Lopez that were furnished to the Office of the Court Researcher II of Branch 47, for grave misconduct,
branch clerk of court. In fact, I believe that the Administrator and to you to form part of this formal falsification, usurpation of judicial functions and
branch clerk of court must be co-terminus with a protest. Attached herewith is a formal complaint dishonesty.
judge's assignment in a particular court. I do not against Leilani Lopez. (Emphasis supplied)
engage in a power play, it happens that the Citing "pressure within the working environment"
personal indorsement of a branch clerk of I am requesting for a Solomonic resolution of this and in order to have "a self-assured and peaceful
court is my prerogative as a judge and I want protest. mind," Ms. Lagman requested her transfer to
to exercise that prerogative to accomplish another branch of the MeTC pending the hearing of
excellently in my judicial and non-judicial Thank you. the complaint against her.56 Eventually, the Court
tasks. There were substantive and procedural appointed her as Clerk III of Branch 108 of the RTC
Judge Yu submitted a supplemental formal protest
flaws with her selection and appointment as in Pasay City effective October 5, 2010, a demotion
dated June 28, 2011 describing the appointment to
branch clerk of court. The laws surrounding from her position as Legal Researcher in Branch
be "tainted with irregularity in gross violation of
the irregular appointment of Leilani Lopez, 47.
the substantive and procedural laws" and "void ab
including the fact of not resolving my
initio" for failure to obtain the favorable
grievance prior to her appointment, were Apparently, Ms. Lagman's appointment did not sit
recommendation from her as the presiding
misapplied in her case. We do not uphold the well with Judge Yu, who assailed it before the OCA-
judge.50 She argued that the OCA-SPBLC had failed
laws that cause quarrel and dissension in SPBLC as a "fast appointment" for being made
to assess the competence and qualifications of Ms.
court. Assuming Leilani Lopez took her oath despite her pending administrative complaint. 57
Tejero-Lopez; that Ms. Tejero-Lopez did not meet
of an irregular appointment which she is
the minimum requirements for the position; and
aware of, my recourse as a judge is to ask for On May 2, 2011, the OCA received a letter from
that the position of Branch Clerk of Court was
her detail to another court, preferable to the Judge Yu requesting for updates on the alleged
confidential.
Selection and Promotion Board. This will not delay in the appointment of a clerk of court in her
contribute for the success of my court in the branch, and her protest against the appointment of
In view of Judge Yu's refusal to honor her
interest of public service. Our workplace deprived Ms. Lagman, among others.58 She thereby
appointment, Ms. Tejero-Lopez requested
me of a court staff who I can completely trust, and threatened to file formal charges against the
Executive Judge Colasito through her letter of June
help me accomplish great things in the judiciary. members of the OCA-SPBLC,
11, 2011 for her detail to another office.51
The Board deprived me already of my prerogative thus:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
to choose my branch clerk of court, and so I want Sir:cralawlawlibrary
this deprivation to be put on record. If I lose this
Ms. Tejero-Lopez ultimately executed
legal battle in this workplace, I am a winner I am requesting your office to furnish me the
a sinumpaang salaysay charging Judge Yu with
because I brought to your attention, and all information on the
refusal to obey court order.52
Supreme Court justices, ultimately the public, such following:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
unrighteous and unjust manner of selecting and (1) xxx;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
On September 12, 2011, the Court dismissed Judge
appointing a branch clerk of court. You may have
Yu's protest against the appointment of Ms. Tejero-
been misled by the Board in signing her (2) xxx;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Lopez.53
appointment. You have many things to do as
Chief Justice, sometimes, you may not have (3) xxx;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Judge Yu was undaunted, however, and she filed a
read the minutes of Board and merely
motion for reconsideration,54 attaching the motion
followed its recommendation. As a judge, I (4) The report of an investigation of the very
to her supplemental explanation.55
have my rights and privileges, and far more delayed appointment of our Branch Clerk of Court,
 22

the position is vacant for over three (3) years honest-to-goodness opinion without fear of Manodon (Branch 48), requesting Judge Yu's
now;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary censorship.64 immediate suspension or detail to another station
pending investigation of all the administrative
(5) x x x; and A.M. No. 12-109-METC cases filed against her.
(Re: Letter dated 21 July 2011 of Executive
(6) The report of an investigation on the Judge Bibiano G. Colasito and Three (3) Other The common issue in the three complaints
appointment of Ms. Mariejoy P. Lagman in RTC Judges of the Metropolitan Trial Court, Pasay concerned the conduct of Judge Yu in relation to
Branch 108, Pasay City despite the pending City, For the Suspension or Detail To Another her staff, fellow Judges and other officers of the
administrative cases involving grave offenses Station of Judge Eliza B. Yu, Branch 47, Same Supreme Court, her disobedience of the Court's
against her. Court) issuances, and her manner of disposing cases.
I am requesting Atty. Wilma D. Geronga, Chief of
A.M. No. 11-2399-MTJ I. Oppressive conduct towards her staff
Legal Department, Docket and Clearance Division
of your office, to docket my letter dated April 28, (Amor V. Abad, et al., v. Hon. Eliza B. Yu);
and The complaining staffmembers of MeTC Branch 47
2011 together with the attachments addressed to
claimed that Judge Yu had constantly threatened
the Selection and Promotion Board for the Lower
A.M. No. 11-2378-MTJ them with administrative complaints;70 that she
Courts that said office received on the same day
(Executive Judge Bibiano G. Colasito, et al. v. had readily attributed malice upon their actions,
touching on the foregoing matters for the conduct
Hon. Eliza B. Yu) and had sown intrigue against their honor;71 that
of full investigation because I will take the
she had impulsively declared in open court during
appropriate action. I will not hesitate to press
A.M. No. 11-2399-MTJ refers to the complaint 65 filed the hearing of the case docketed as Civil Case No.
formal charges against your office if there
by the court staff of MeTC Branch 47 charging M-PSY-10-12032-CV entitled Fabra v. Global
was a transgression of the laws and if still
Judge Yu with grave misconduct, oppression, gross Classe that they had engaged in irregular
necessary. (sic) Stamping out corruption of
ignorance of the law and violation of the Code of conduct;72 that she had berated Mr. Ferdinand
any form is one of my advocacies in life.
Judicial Conduct. Santos even in front of all the other staff
(Emphasis supplied)
members;73 and that she had harassed the
In OCA IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ, four MeTC Judges and personnel who had brought administrative
Thank you.
70 MeTC court personnel assigned in Pasay City complaints against her (i.e. by refusing to sign the
The OCA filed a memorandum denouncing the filed two affidavit-complaints dated May 12, applications for leave of Noel Labid and Robert
misconduct and insubordination of Judge Yu 201166 and July 14, 2011,67 accusing Judge Yu with: Froilan Thomas, and by requiring them to submit
relative to the appointments of Ms. Tejero Lopez (1) gross insubordination; (2) refusal to perform unwarranted documents).74
and Ms. Lagman.59 official duty; (3) gross ignorance of the law or
procedure; (4) serious and grave misconduct The complaining staffmembers recalled that at one
On January 30, 2012, the Court required Judge Yu constituting violations of Canon 3, Rules 3.0 and time they had overheard the respondent
to show cause and explain why she should not be 3.08 of the Code of Judicial Conduct in relation to uttering:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
disciplined for her actions.60 Canon 6 of The New Code of Judicial Conduct of the Mananalo tayo sa kaso sila ang mali. Tayo ang
Philippine Judiciary; Sections 1 and 2, Canon 2 of matuwid hindi sila. x x x Ferdie, ready na nga pala
the New Code of Judicial Conduct; and Sections 1 yung permit to carry ko. Magdadala aka ng baril,
In her explanation,61 Judge Yu denied the and 2, Canon 4 of the Code of Judicial Conduct; (5) Cal 45.75
allegations, and maintained that she had only violation of Supreme Court rules, directives and by which they had felt threatened; and that seeing
exercised her freedom of speech; that it was her circulars; (6) violation of Canon 1 of the Code of the door to the respondent's chamber left wide
"statutory right as a judge" to question the Professional Responsibility; (7) violation of the open, they had sought refuge in the offices of her
"irregular appointment" of a branch clerk of court Lawyer's Oath and her oath of office as judge; (8) fellow Judges.76
whom she believed to be lacking in the basic oppressive conduct; and (9) violation of Article
requirements for the position;62 that it was "strange 23168 of the Revised Penal Code. Judge Yu also trained her sights on the Pasay City
to have a jurisprudence on alleged misconduct and
MeTC personnel when she requested ACA Bahia to
insubordination of a judge" based on mere letters; A.M. No. 12-109-METC relates to the Letter dated audit the Office of the Clerk of Court for allegedly
that her letters were privileged communications July 21, 201169 sent by her fellow Pasay City MeTC unremitted fees paid for the ex parte presentations
and could not be used against her, pursuant to her Judges, namely: Executive Judge Bibiano G. of evidence in replevin cases. 77 This incident,
constitutional right against self-incrimination;63 that Colasito (Branch 45), Vice-Executive Judge according to the complaining staffmembers,
she had no evil intention in writing her letters Bonifacio S. Pascua (Branch 44), Judge Restituto V. caused demoralization among the Pasay City court
because she was thereby only expressing her Mangalindan (Branch 46), and Judge Catherine P.
 23

personnel. adversely in the case of Equitable vs. Chua Ty Aside from her failure to accord the respect due
Kuen, Civil Case No. 2-03 for Replevin, as it seems her fellow Judges, Judge Yu was overheard uttering
II. Disrespectful attitude towards co-judges, the modus operandi is to win or dismiss cases by disparaging remarks against Court officers. In one
SC officers and offices argument that the evidence are photocopies, as instance, after the OCA SPBLC had recommended
also in this court's experience in case of People vs. Ms. Tejero Lopez to the position of Branch Clerk of
The complainant Judges charged Judge Yu with Basa, CC-00-1988 for Reckless Imprudence decided Court, Judge Yu made the following statement
being disrespectful towards other Judges when she on June 28, 1010, the material exhibits are against Court Administrator Marquez, to
wrote Vice Executive Judge Caridad G. Cuerdo of photocopies, some are not attached in the court wit:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
the RTC Branch 113, and accused Executive Judge records despite existence in the minutes and Yang si Midas Marquez na iyan napaka-highly
Pedro B. Corrales of the RTC Branch 118, Judge transcript of records, all these examples are incompetent, kung lalaki lang ako sinuntok ko na
Maria Rosario B. Ragasa of the RTC Branch 108, presumably, are warnings of existence of wicked iyan, basta gwapo at maganda, mga walang utak.
MeTC Executive Judge Colasito, and MeTC Vice- harm in this court. Thus, your office should Oh, tandaan nyo yan ha! Iyang OCAD kalaban
Executive Judge Pascua with violations of Canon 1, scrutinize release of cash bonds. Of course, there natin hindi kakampi.83
Section 3 and Canon 2, Section 3 of the New Code were complaints of alleged selling of decisions by
Judge Yu also said at another
of Judicial Conduct, and violation of Section 1, court staff in cahoots with each other during Judge
occasion:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
paragraph (c) of Presidential Decree No. 1829 Gina Palamos and Judge Josephine Vito Cruz who
Iyang auditor na Cielo na iyan, traidor, sana noong
(obstruction of justice).78 were aware of this money-making devious scheme.
pinakain ko nilagyan ko na lang ng lason.
Allegedly, Judge Yu used herOIC Ferdinand A. This court hopes that your office will take note of referring to SC Auditor Cielo Calonia who had
Santos in sending the letter to Clerk of Court IV this letter which the contents here were supplied earlier denied having informed her about court
Miguel C. Infante.79 The letter insinuated that Judge by our judge that deserves to be acted upon swiftly personnel profiting from the collection of ex
Gina Bibat-Palamos and Judge Josephine Vito-Cruz by the Office of the Court Administrator to parte fees.84
had failed to act despite their knowledge on the eradicate, if not lessen corruption in the judiciary.
purported selling of decisions by court employees, The complainants claimed that Judge Yu's
Moreover, Judge Yu issued a resolution in Civil Case
pertinently stating:80chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary disrespectful attitude towards her fellow Judges
No. B-03-08 entitled Rodelio Hilario v. Shirley
Lastly, this court experienced few attempts to and the Court's officials constituted a violation of
Pabilona,81 whereby she declared that she was not
withdraw cash bond without motions by including Section 3 of Canon 1, and Section 3 of Canon 2
the co-equal of Judge Vito-Cruz of the Municipal
in the orders granting release of cash bonds, of The New Code of Judicial Conduct.
Trial Court in Cardona, Rizal, as
including those confiscated, and the public
follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
prosecutor did not object for failure to read III. Gross ignorance of laws, rules and
With due respect, the principle of "co-equality"
previous order of confiscation, presumably such regulations
between the two courts provided in paragraph 5 of
order is detached from the court records, as there
the motion for reconsideration, to wit, "In essence,
are instances the pleadings, motions and The complaining staffmembers averred that Judge
the incumbent Presiding Judge cannot over-rule the
oppositions are removed from the records, then Yu: (a) had assigned the duty of correcting draft
regular procedure adopted by her predecessor
attached again after investigation of the court as to decisions, orders and resolutions to on the-job
judge, because they are of the same level," finds
where is the particular paper. This is something old trainees (OJTs) in violation of Memorandum Circular
no application in this case because a predecessor's
because for example, Acting Judge Josephine Vito- No. 5-2003 entitled Re: Prohibiting the
judge orders can be interfered and encroached
Cruz was able to sign commitment orders when Accommodation of Students to Undergo On-TheJob
upon by the incumbent judge when they are
records show that the accused was arrested and Training/Practicum in the Different Offices of the
contrary to the principle of equity, existing law and
detained already, and this fact was on paper Court; (b) had designated an Officer-in-Charge
jurisprudence. Moreover, the predecessor
immediately preceding the order that she can read (OIC) for Branch 47, who did not possess the
judge, Honorable Josephine A. Vito Cruz is a
it, if it was not detached and attached again after minimum qualifications for the position and without
Municipal Trial Court Judge of Cardona, Rizal
her order; she was able to sign orders on two approval from the Court; and (c) had ordered her
while undersigned is a Metropolitan Trial
arraignments of same accused in different dates in staff to advetiise and offer for sale the books she
Court Judge of Pasay City, their salary grades
several occasions, and this court noted that in had authored in violation of SC Administrative
are not at par with each other so it is quite
calendaring, there were attempts to mislead by Circular No. 09-99.85
incorrect with defendant's counsel
writing it is for arraignment instead of pre-trial that
declaration that the predecessor judge and
to relay on it, the court will issue two arraignment The complainants in A.M. No. 11-2399-MTJ and OCA
the incumbent judge are of the same
orders; and lost or detached exhibits that she IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ alleged that Judge Yu: (a) had
level.82 (Bold emphasis supplied)
decided on such point only to know later on the authorized the prosecution of Criminal Case No. M-
receiving copy of the plaintiff that she decided PSY-09-08592-CR entitled People v. Ramil Fuentes,
 24

et al.86 without the presence and prior parents;100 that her designation of Mr. Santos as an Judge Vito-Cruz; that such statement was a
endorsement of the public prosecutor; (b) had OIC did not violate CSC Memorandum No. 6-2005 rejoinder to the unfair comments of the
allowed the arraignment of the accused in Criminal because the position of OIC required trust and defendants' lawyer;115 that the statement "spoke of
Case No. MPSY-11-13957-CR entitled People v. confidence;101 that she did not order her the truth" and was not, therefore,
Balwinder Singh,87 and the change of plea by the staffmembers to sell and advertise her defamatory;116 that in not furnishing to her the
accused in Criminal Case No. M-PSY-11-13159-CR books;102 that she had cited the counsels disrupting memorandum regarding the resolution prior to
entitled People v. Lito Manduriao88 in the absence the court proceedings with contempt of court and filing the administrative complaint, Executive Judge
of the public prosecutor;89 (c) had ordered the had imposed the corresponding fines on Colasito had deprived her of the opportunity to
presentation of ex parte evidence in Civil Case No. them;103 that there was recent jurisprudence amend the same "just to suit their whims, caprices
M-PSY-11-12626-CV before the OIC who was not a allowing a trial to proceed even in the absence of and fancies;" and that the filing of the
member of the Bar in violation of Section 9, Rule the public prosecutor provided no prejudice was administrative complaint against her had been
30 of the Rules of Court;90 and (d) had required the caused to the State;104 that there was a need to done treacherously.117
plaintiffs in replevin cases to submit receipts of verify the case records with respect to the
payment of legal fees under Sections 8(e) and allegations that she had allowed the prosecution of OCA IPI No. 12-2456-MTJ
21(e) of Administrative Circular No. 35-2004, as criminal cases in the absence of the public (Judge Bibiano G. Colasito, et al., all of the
well as an explanation why they were making prosecutor because of the complainants' Metropolitan Trial Court [MeTC] Pasay City v.
payments to the OIC and stenographers during propensity to falsify documents; that the Judge Eliza B. Yu, MeTC, Branch 47, Pasay
the ex parte presentation of evidence.91 complainants were not the proper parties to raise City)
any issues related to the criminal
Judge Yu was being held to account also for her proceedings;105 that there were provisions of This administrative matter concerned the letter
failure to protect and uphold the dignity of her the Rules of Court allowing the waiver of certain dated January 12, 2012118 signed by MeTC
court by not castigating the opposing counsels who rights according to the agreement of the Executive Judge Colasito, Vice-Executive Judge
had physically attacked each other during court parties;106 and that the provision on reception of ex Bonifacio S. Pascua, Judge Restituto V.
proceedings. She was heard to have parte evidence is merely directory because of the Mangalindan, Jr., and Clerk of Court Miguel C.
remarked: Hindi ko sila kinontempt kasi wala word "may."107 Infante charging Judge Yu with oppression in
naman akong mabibenefit.92 issuing the order dated December 1, 2011119 in
As to the charge of oppression, Judge Yu countered Criminal Case No. M-PSY-09-08592-CR
In her comment,93 Judge Yu denied the accusations, that she had always been kind and generous entitled People v. Ramil Fuentes, et
and attributed malice and fraud to all the towards her staffinembers;108 that she did not al., viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
complainants, branding their accusation as the humiliate Mr. Santos;109 that she did not terrorize The stenographer in this case Romer Aviles is
manifestation of a "tyranny in numbers."94 She her staffmembers, although she had displayed her directed to make and attach the transcript of
dismissed the charges against her as false, anger and displeasure whenever they committed stenographic notes (TSN) dated September 7, 2011
frivolous, meritless, and intended to harass irregularities;110 that she had not sown intrigues within ten (10) days from receipt of this order copy
her95 and destroy her reputation.96 She declared against her staffmembers, but had constantly furnished to Court Administrator Jose Midas P.
that she did not know most of the court employees reminded them to refrain from committing any Marquez and Assistant Court Administrator Thelma
who had executed and signed the complaint; and graft and corrupt practices; 111 that in the hearing of C. Bahia by the process server Maxima Sayo with
warned that they had opened themselves to the case of Fabra v. Global Classe, she had only corresponding return and proof of service and to
criminal, civil and administrative liabilities by replied to the manifestation made by Atty. Agustin surrender the tape containing the recorded
signing the complaint.97 Javellana regarding the false and irresponsible acts proceedings on said date to the Officer-in-Charge
of her court staffmembers;112 that the alleged Ferdinand Santos. Failure to comply with this will
Anent the charges of gross ignorance of the law, threat in relation to her licensed firearm was compel this Court to issue show cause for
Judge Yu contended that the students who were untrue; and that the entering of the incident in the contempt of court against the responsible
OJTs had sought permission to report to her court police blotter was libelous.113 stenographer. Moreover, he and Executive Judge
in compliance with their school requirements, but Bibiano Colasito, et al. who are signatories in
they were told not to carry on judicial tasks; 98 that Judge Yu denied uttering statements against Court the false and malicious complaint under OCA
the memorandum dated November 2, 2010 was Administrator Marquez, and SC Auditor IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ alleging gross ignorance
not followed, and was not officially given because Calonia.114 She said that as far as the resolution of the law of this Court by surreptitiously
of the prohibition against OJTs in the courts; 99 that alluding to Judge Vito Cruz was concerned, the taking a TSN, minutes and order dated March
Ms. Angelica Rosali had acted only as an observer court minutes were falsified, as to which Ms. 22, 2011 of this case on the absence of public
to comply with her school requirements, as an Soledad Bassig and the lawyers were co- prosecutor, when a trial can proceed without
accommodation of the request of her (Judge Yu's) conspirators; that she harbored no ill will towards public prosecutor is allowed under our
 25

existing jurisprudence is directed to explain exhausted and weak upon arriving home from application.132
within seventy-two (72) hours from the work; that Noel had confided to her that Judge Yu
receipt of this order why they should not be had directed him to go to different offices in the Mrs. Labid recalled that she had returned the
cited in contempt of court under Rule 71, Supreme Court to deliver copies of her orders and following day to again plead with Judge Yu, but Mr.
Section 3(a) and (d) of the Revised Rules of letters, as well as her books or manuals, despite Santos had prevented her from seeing Judge Yu
Court. Process server Maxima Sayo is directed to his medical condition;126 that shortly after arriving and had instead handed her a memorandum for
personally serve copies of this order to Executive home from work on June 7, 2011, Noel had become her son that reads as
Judge Bibiano Colasito et al., with corresponding delirious and weak due to profuse bleeding in the follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
return. mouth; that on the following day, she had gone to Dear Mr. Labid,
Branch 47 to inform the staff that Noel would not
Tentatively set the contempt proceedings be reporting to work; that she had then learned You have been consistently absent in this court due
February 15, 2012 at 8:30a.m. that Noel had moved a heavy table inside the office to sickness. As per record, your absences with
upon the instructions of Judge Yu;127 that Noel had leave due to treatment of cancer in the court are
SO ORDERED. (Bold emphasis supplied) reported back to work on June 10, 2011, but his as follows: for the whole months of February 2011
bleeding had recurred and he had been constantly and March 2011, you also incur several days
To avert a crisis and disharmony in the Pasay City
brought to the hospital since then;128 that on June absences for April and May 2011 while for the
MeTCs, the Court suspended Judge Yu from office
28, 2011, she had submitted Noel's applications for months of June, 2011 you incur 15 days absent
effective February 1, 2012.120
leave at Judge Yu's office covering the periods of (June 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27,
June 8 and 9, 2011,129 and of June 13-30, 28, 29, 30, 2011). Being a government (public
In her comment, Judge Yu m'aintains that she
2011;130 that she had returned on July 5, 2011 to servant) employee, you are not suppose to be
validly issued the subject order by virtue of the
the sala of Judge Yu, and had then learned that the always absent from your work and if the absences
inherent contempt powers of the court,121 and in
latter had not signed Noel's application; that she are due to sickness, you must submit original copy
accordance with the rulings in People v.
was then told by Court Stenographer Roman Aviles of medical certificate. Your continued absence in
Godoy and Salcedo v. Hernandez;122 that the
to see and talk with Judge Yu; that she had met your work affects the performance of this Court
complainants should have availed of the
with Judge Yu in her chambers, and during their that affects also the performance of your co-
appropriate relief in questioning the order instead
conversation, Judge Yu had allegedly employees. As per Civil Service Commission ruling;
of filing the administrative complaint; and that the
remarked:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary as a general rule, an employee whose continued
OCA could not rule on the propriety of issuing the
Mabait naman ako sa anak mo. Pag-inuutusan ko absence from his work due to his lingering illness,
subject order because doing so was beyond the
siya binibigyan ko pa siya ng pera, siguro aabot ng the Department Head, if he sees to it that the
OCA's power and prerogative.123
P15,000.00 sa isang taon ang maibibigay ko sa performance of his office is much affected because
kanya. Pero bakil pumirma siya sa petition na of the continued absence of such the employee,
OCA IPI No. 11-2398-MTJ nagsasabi na bobo ako at corrupt? x x x halala pa the Department Head in his own discretion, may
(Josefina G. Labid v. Judge Eliza B. Yu) na dinagdag lang sita ni Emma Sayo kasi di ask his superior for a replacement of such
nakatype ang pangalan nila. Kung ganoon ang employee - thus the affected employee may file for
This administrative matter stemmed from the tingin nita sa akin, bakit di na lang sila magresign? permanent disability or terminal leave.
complaint filed by Mrs. Josefina G. Labid charging 131
Judge Yu with oppression, gross ignorance of the In view of the above matters, you are required to
law, and conduct unbecoming of a judge in that Judge Yu had replied that Noel would be in a
submit the following documents: Certificate of Fitn
connection with the fate of her son, Noel, who had better position to address her (Mrs. Labid) concern;
ss to Work (if not contagious), Duration of
served as Utility Worker I at the MeTC Branch 47. 124 that she had begged Judge Yu to sign her son's
Recovery (from illness) and Certificate of discharge
application for leave, explaining that she had to
from the hospital (June 17 and 24, 2011) prior to
Mrs. Labid narrated that in January 2011, Noel had submit the document before the deadline in order
the approval of your leave of absences for the
been diagnosed with "Cancer of the floor of the to claim monetary aid from the Supreme Court
months of June, 2011.
mouth, Stage IV-A;" that Noel had then applied for Health and Welfare Fund; that instead of signing,
leave of absence covering the period of his Judge Yu had left her inside the chambers, and had
given instructions to Mr. Santos; that upon her (sgd)
treatment from January 2011 until March 2011,
return, Judge Yu had advised that Noel should first Ferdinand A. Santos
which Judge Yu had approved without any
submit a medical clearance before she would sign Officer-in-charge133
incident;125 that being the sole breadwinner of the
family, Noel had reported to work on April 4, 2011 the application for leave; and that she had then Mrs. Labid believed that Judge Yu had dictated the
against his doctor's advice; that she (Mrs. Labid) appealed to Judge Yu by leaving a handwritten contents of the memorandum to Mr. Santos after
had started noticing that Noel would appear letter requesting the approval on Noel's their previous conversation; and that Judge Yu's
 26

unjustified refusal to sign Noel's application for       1 File (82KB)

leave had been motivated by malice and ill-will,   BLOWN KISS?? I haven't claim yet my meal stub
arising from the administrative complaint against  (see image p. 37) now you are sending me a blown kiss ... why don't
her that Noel had signed and joined. She you send me your cell no. asap so we can practice
mentioned that her son had later on died on  MEAL STUB your fave 69?
August 15, 2011.134
Hon, thank you for your MEAL STUB ... when and __________________________________ September 2,
In her comment,135 Judge Yu denied the where can I claim it? 2009 __________________________________
imputations of Mrs. Labid. She justified her denial take care & love you.142
of Noel's application for leave by citing in her Eliza B. Yu
Judge Yu sent another message to Judge San
undated and unsigned Memorandum136 the ruling PRO LOVE (No Jokening
Gaspar-Gito's Facebook account with the
in A.M. No. 2004-41-SC (January 13, 2005) Here)                                                                   
subject Meal Stub, to
entitled Re: Memorandum Report of Atty. Thelma 7:43am
wit:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
C. Bahia against Ms. Dorothy Salgado. She
__________________________________ August 31, 2009
maintained that Mrs. Labid had not submitted the YES TO LOVE NO TO LUST!!
__________________________________
documents she had required.137 She denied having Why naman you are heating me up out of your
received any handwritten letter from Mrs. Labid; hundreds FB friends?
and having known of Noel's condition. She insisted HHHmmm ... don't fall in love online kasi you
Eliza B.
that Noel had volunteered to lift the table as part of
Yu                                                                        are not supposed to kiss, kiss a pc monitor ... He
his job as a utility worker.138 He He
                                9:20am
MEAL STUB No dialogues from you lately, are we in a silent
A.M. No. MTJ-13-1821 "titillating" movie?
(Hon. Emily L. San Gaspar v. Hon. Eliza B. Yu) dear ems, i sent your meal stub at your yahoo Wala ba tayong rehearsals dito? FAMAS award na
account to honor you this national heroes day. it's rin ba tayo?
This administrative matter emanated from the good you gave me an idea of your preferred Buti na lang magaan loob ko sa iyo,
Letter-Complaint of Judge Emily L. San Gaspar-Gito sexual position, there's no need to study that SOUL MATES tayo. Isasauli ko na ang meal stub mo
of MeTC Branch 20,139 whereby the latter imputed 69, you'll get it from me spontaneously ... ... wala naman
to Judge Yu conduct unbecoming of a judge for that's easy, pulled down your underwear, and eat nakalagay when and
constantly sending alarming messages with sexual what's in between your thighs ... but you have to where to claim, wala ring cell phone no. mo (siguro
undertones via Facebook and electronic mail. pay me $10 first ... He He He! take care and see trip mo lang mag send ng lewd pic kasi
143
you later...  (Bold emphasis supplied) photographer ka in your past life, lewd
Judge San Gaspar-Gito and Judge Yu became photographer ... He He He).
acquainted in May 2009 when the latter was the The message contained an attachment similar to Dami kong tanong sa iyo, pero impersonal kasi ang
public prosecutor pinch hitting at the MeTC Branch the image of a man and a woman juxtaposed in a computer kaya wala na akong masyadong tanong
20 in Manila where the former presided as Judge. 69 position appearing in the previous Yahoo online ... maliban sa ano na ba civil status mo,
144
They became Facebook friends upon Judge Yu's message.  Judge San Gaspar-Gito ignored both MAINIT KA MASYADO?? Yung photo profile mo, dina
initiative, and Judge San Gaspar-Gito accepted her communications, but Judge Yu continued sending "cute little devil" ...
request as a matter of courtesy. 140 Judge San more puzzling messages to the complainant's Face ikaw ay "red hot and horny"145 na ... tandaan mo
Gaspar-Gito claimed that Judge Yu normally sent book account, viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary honey NO TO CYBERSEX! NO TO PHONE SEX! PAY
long messages that she had ignored most of the __________________________________ September 1, ME $10 FIRST BEFORE 69 (prone to HIV AIDS na
time.141 On August 30, 2009, Judge San Gaspar-Gito 2009 __________________________________ sexual position ang 69 kaya sa swimming pool yan
received in her Yahoo account a peculiar message ginagawa). Take care and see you
from Judge Yu, as later.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary Eliza B.
NATIONAL HEROES DAY'S THANK YOU Sunday, Yu                                                                        __________________________________ September 4,
August 30, 2009 6:02 PM                               11:21pm 2009 __________________________________
YOUR MEAL STUB ...
From: "ELIZA YU" Eliza B.
giving me FEVER honey ... YOU ARE KEEPING ME Yu                                                                       
To: [email protected] WIDE AWAKE. I need a bath no not a bath ... I need                                 9:24pm
a sex therapist He He He 2 VISITS
 27

Darlin so it goes, somethings are meant to be.. __________________________________ September 17,

hey ems, i really miss you, so i plan to visit you at Take my hand, take my whole life too 2009 __________________________________
your chamber this sept. 1 and 21. are you available for I can't help fallin in love with you...
at these dates?? pls. reply. take care and see you Eliza B.
later. Like a river flows, surely to the sea Yu                                                                       
Darlin so it goes, somethings are meant to be..                                 7:23pm
Eliza B. MOVIE AGAIN
Yu                                                                               Take my hand take my whole life too for I can't
                          9:47pm help Star Cinema's "In My Life," the ABS-CBN Movie
falling in love with you outfit's grandest film offering for 2009, earned a
hey, wish me good luck for my report tom at justice record P20 million in ticket sales on its first day of
rene corona's class, it's a "MIXED NUTS" feelings to for I cant help falling in love with .... screening. I don't recommend you and Owen this
have a future chief justice as an audience (he's a You.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary move (but Gener, Tiya and Yaya would enjoy
"terrorist" ... he he he ... but he did not give me a watching this together ... He He He) TAKE CARE!
HIGH FEVER unlike you! ha ha ha!) pls. tell me xxxxxxxxxxxx
what time you will be at your chamber this sept. 7 __________________________________ September 18,
and 21 so i can visit you? PREPARE THE $10.x's and __________________________________ September 12, 2009 __________________________________
o's.146 2009 __________________________________
Confounded, Judge San Gaspar-Gito finally xxxxxxxxxxxx
confronted Judge Yu on the messages. Instead of Eliza B.
giving a direct reply, Judge Yu continued sending Yu                                                                               Eliza B.
puzzling messages. Their exchanges ran as                           7:07am Yu                                                                       
follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary MOVIES                                 7:00am
__________________________________ September 6, Some Kind
2009 __________________________________ hey since you are a movie buff, watch
"BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN", you will enjoy the sex honey i'm some kind of sloth at home and enjoy
Eliza B. between 2 cowboys in a tent. The 1st sex was much freedom, and i miss you, tsup! tsup! tsup!
Yu                                                                               made out of lust while the 2nd sex was made out take care always. see you later!
                        10:41am of love! In the movie, the "measure of love was not
CLUELESS INQUIRER jealousy but sacrifice." __________________________________ September 18,
2009 __________________________________
hey what's that meal stub and 69, got no idea __________________________________ September 14,
about it? Does my fb send something to everyone? 2009 __________________________________ Emily San
Ami in a game? huh, m wondering! Gaspar                                                                      
Eliza B.                     11:18pm
Eliza B. Yu                                                                              
Yu                                                                                                  8:43am I think i would be watching in my life, have you
                              10:44am l'Hymne A l'Amour watched it? Is it nice?
A TRIBUTE TO ELVIS PRESLEY
Hey, after watching "Brokeback Mountain", I __________________________________ September 19,
Wise Men say recommend you to watch "When Night Is Falling", 2009 __________________________________
only fools rush in there was a sizzling (red hot) sex between a
but I cant help university literature professor at a religious college xxxxxxxxxxxx
falling in love with you and a free-spirited circus performer inside a tent,
too just like "Brokeback Mountain". Certainly, you Eliza B.
Shall I stay will enjoy "When Night Is Falling" more than Yu                                                                              
would it be a sin "Brokeback Mountain" because you liked Edith                           4:07pm
if I can't help falling in love with you... Piafs "l'Hymne A l'Amour." IN MY LIFE

Like a river flows, surely to the sea xxxxxxxxxxxx hey fb sweetie, ems not that i don't want to
accompany you in a movie house, it's just that you
 28

succeeded heating me up with that 69 meal stub, it Facebook                                                          Besides, I will only call you if I have your cell no.
will be dangerous ... to watch this in my life movie Monday, September 28, 2009 5:45PM not text you. An1way, take care always.
together, i may go down on you in a movie house God bless you.149
that would be highly scandalous ... I will give you a From: "ELIZA YU"
dvd/vcd of it, I will go to video shops for it To: [email protected] PS                                                                     
tomorrow (whether you have watched it or not, Monday, September 28, 2009 6:06PM
even I did not recommend it to you) ... i am trying Dear Emily, I raised the issue
to shrug off a fuzzy, groovy feeling with you, OH before, about 4 months ago, about your From: "ELIZA YU"
NO! anyways, take care, take care, take care, i membership in Facebook, your To: [email protected]
knew you have convention next week. if you are answer was acceptable...
interested to join with us at GUMBO resto next ems, don't be like
week, just say so (dean froilan is a great guy, and a Your declaration about consensus MeTC magistrate (one of
genius, interesting to meet him, this i recommend in the convention seems to be an Your judges pals according to your FB posting) who
to you). Oh, i still have to give you complimentary after-thought, logic rejects it permanently dismissed a case on the ground of
copies of my articles published in the lawyers as plausible. But I BELIEVE you. speedy trial when accused
review. you gotta wait, i keep my promises. see There is no reason not to TRUST you. jumped bail.
you later . x's and o's for you. p.s. movie watching I also understand the consensus.
is not my ideal activity with you (it's at the bottom When there was a MR by
of the list, i rather watch you than tagalog Because you seemed HAPPY connecting the prosecutor, it was
movies).147 to your friends particularly those very granted on the basis of
far in FB, it's not a smart choice to sacrifice substantive justice.
Judge San Gaspar-Gito decided to deactivate her
your happiness at the expense of consensus.
Facebook account. Yet, the deactivation did not
Also, there are ways to circumvent Of course, there was double jeopardy
deter Judge Yu from sending messages to Judge
the consensus' prohibition. You can change your already, the MR was granted
San Gaspar-Gito's Yahoo account to expr ss her
name to your nickname, and remove traces that correctly. And the pemanent (sic)
disagreement over the Facebook deactivation,
will link it to your work. You blended your dismissal was wrong.
thus:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
work with your personal life in FB,
[No Subject]                                                         
of course your work's nature extend to your You are intelligent, you
Friday, September 25,2009 6:14PM
personal life, the price you pay, not because of finished your law schooling at
the demand of your work, it's the price for your 24 years old ranked 5th in your
From: "ELIZA YU"
your idealism with your work. It's up to class ... DO NOT DE-ACTIVATE
To: [email protected]
you what perspective you take, you YOUR FACEBOOK FOR MORE THAN
are intelligent, you ought to choose the best 3 MONTHS.
Dear Emily, what happened to your FB account?
option. Your FB speaks a lot about you. Talk and see you later.150
I told you to rest, I understand that it's so tiring
You may not talk much about yourself in mails
after travelling, our bodies crave sleep!
but by reading your posts and looking at Oh God, I Forgot ...                                         
If I have your mobile no., I could have flown there
your photos, you give clues of yourself, Monday, September 28, 2009 8:47PM
and joined you. Still, I believe there is plenty of
you leave lots of fingerprints online.
time
Deactivating it is not the best option, From: "ELIZA YU"
ahead of us. Anyway, I did not mean you stay away
For now... To: [email protected]
from Facebook or me... COME ON, tell me, you are
joking
By the way, our office told me, I cannot Tsup! Honey, next time you re-activate your FB,
giving up Facebook ... you have ovet 190 friends,
troubleshoot in your court, because you pls. change your ...
they will
have two prosecutors already NO ROOM FOR ME PHOTO PROFILE
MISS you. You have my no. still (09175217828),
THERE. DELETE:
you can contact me,
I told the staff to call you up about this. Your Status, Birthday,
you should contact me, I am not running away
I promised to troubleshoot next month, which School, Work,
from you, rain or shine.
is not possible to happen. I learned that your and all your PHOTOS.
I will stay even I am a problem. Take care always.
court was Hooded, I was at home when notified, it's OK to be wild online...
Talk and see you later. Of course, God bless us. 148
I failed to help you clean up the mess. That's why, Be cautious and prudent.
there is the importance of mobile connection. Take care always.
 29

It's a good choice to deactivate your Facebook

Couple of weeks, I will be very busy will [sic] school account - it will bring you good harm. Of course not, you look prettier in person
papers due to ending sem and Sometimes, you have to convince yourself than in photos. I don't think your
my second wind, will re-lobby that your status has changed a lot, you change prettiest photo can substitute the real you,
for my promotion. friends, you change status, change lifestyle and you are so warm in person.
Sept 30, I have lunch with ... ... leave Face book. Take care always.154
Oct 1, I have dinner with ...
Judge San Gaspar-Gito was prompted to explain
Oct 2, I have appointment with ... I cannot deactivate my Facebook account,
that her sister had used her Facebook
Oct 3, I have my last report it was Dean Froilan Bacungan who invited me to
account,155 but Judge Yu apparently disbelieved the
 I have dinner at Gumbo for Dean's birthday join. I created my Facebook account for him.
explanation and retorted
Oct 5, I have lunch at Aristocrat Thank you. Take care always.
instead:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Oct 6, I have cocktail at Manila Hotel God bless you.
Be Right Back                                                     
Oct 7, I have appointment at Ajinomoto
Friday, October 23, 2009 10:42PM
Oct 8, I will meet ... I'M SO SORRY AGAIN ... I gave you lots
Oct 9, I will meet another ... of trashes online. Anyway, emails are easy to
From: "ELIZA YU"
delete.152
To: [email protected]
I am regular troubleshooter, too.
Judge Yu subsequently sent an e-mail with a
I will see you later. Of course, I miss you.
subject that read: "CONGRATS 4 UR ELECTION AS Hello there Ems, the sister act explanation was
God bless. MWAH! tsup ...151
P.R.O. CDO METC NATIONAL CONVENTION, W/ cool! I'm sure it will be accepted by your MeTCJAP
A month after sending the meal stub message, MORE REASON 2 DELETE MY EMAILS 2 U. TY. GOD in case it found out you still maintain a Facebook
Judge Yu apologized for said message, to BLESS," but without an accompanying message.153 account notwithstanding its express prohibition.
wit:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary Congrats, you seemed to be a member of the
I AM SO SORRY ...                                            A few weeks later, Judge Yu confronted Judge San "palusot".com! (He He He)
Saturday, October 3, 2009 6:22AM Gaspar-Gito regarding the reactivation of her
Facebook account in the following What is the name of your sister? You mean having
From: "ELIZA YU" manner:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary same parents? Affinity? Sorority? Job-related?
To: [email protected] CHILL OUT                                                           Religious Organization? I thought you were the
Friday, October 23, 2009 2:13AM youngest child. Did I hear it right, you said while I
Hello there Emily, I found out that Facebook sent was looking at your gold medal on the wall, you
unauthorized gifts (lewd ones) to its account From: "ELIZA YU" have 5 siblings? Going back to your sister, why
subscribers, I asked my classmates if they sent To: [email protected] would she do that? First, isn't she confident enough
this and that gift applications and they said no. to be herself online? Second, she is unaware that it
Hey Milay, I have a trouble shooting assignment will put you in harm by feigning to be you? Third,
I am so sorry for my nonsense replies to this coming Monday (October 26) in MeTc Branch did you not warn her? Fourth, Why did you tolerate
that 69 gift application I received from your 23, her? You could have changed your password
Facebook account (which you wondered). I will pass by your court for sure, anytime so she cannot have an access.
Now, I believe it was not you who sent it to me. I will drop by, unless I'm in a bad mood
I could have been a Facebook computer system like you today! Chill out ... it's basic, when the I thought it was definitely a rude answer(@ yahoo)
error answer as to why you re activated you Facebook account?
or maybe a Facebook prank hacker. to the question is obvious DO NOT ANSWER! Only, I cannot judge you or anyone online, ifs not
Why did you re-activate your Facebook account? my task to do so. As I said before, it is OK to be
I deleted all your emails. I hope Oh No, you gave a wrong answer! wild, wild, wild online.
you will delete my emails to you also As expected, you are an Oscar awardee,
including this email for peace of mind remember? Actually, your FB account was checking my FB
and as a safety measure. Hhhmmm... lots of Oscar trophies you quite account at those times you de-activated it. I
OH FORGET ALL MY EMAILS TO YOU SINCE JUNE collected at Facebook (He He He). laughed at you ... oh no, not you ... now, your sister
AFTER Nobody can prohibit you in the for it. Still, it was the reason for my writing of "daily
READING & RIDDING THIS APOLOGY EMAIL. Deal?? exercise of your POLICE POWER in the activity" entries at FB that I was doing OK - after
This is our MOA. Facebook - that's the force of lust (He He He). you went "PUFF" at FB, without saying any
Your little siesta wants your photos? goodbye. Of course, I may deserve it, you may
 30

expect something, I failed to write, like a visit threatened to initiate an administrative complaint. correspondence here at FB..
perhaps. But you did not give me your mobile no. This threat prompted the respondent to take down
so no seeing, only reading mails. Hhhmmm ... so the fake account.159 Juliet Tabanao-Galicinao July 2 at 8:45pm
your sister got my mobile no. also. It's so cool!
There is a possibility, it was your sister, I talked to The complainant also received a message on April Hi! Emily is definitely not bisexual. We have been
online or did those stuff which I believed it was you 2, 2010 with an attached image of a boy holding a friends and roomates in school for ages and I can
from June to October. Well, then, I should meet pair of scissors,160 and a sign reading Full Brazillian honestly say she is straight. She is also very
your sister! Is she living with your popsie? What is 5¢.161 happily married with one kid. I am not saying this
the name your father? Let us then visit them. because we are friends. I am just stating a fact. I
The last straw came on July 4, 2010 when Judge am not offended though. Glad I was able to correct
Anyway, I have to go, I will visit the Franciscan San Gaspar-Gito received a message from her a mistake. What made you think so? (just
missionary after this. I will donate biscuits and fruit friend, Juliet Tabanao-Galicinao, informing her that wondering)
juices for the abandoned children. I have a a certain Bambi Yu had inquired about her sexual
favourite cousin, with an awesome academic orientation, viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary Bambie Yu July 3 at 5:48am Report
credentials and very pretty, who is a miraculous Juliet Tabanao-Galicinao July 4 at 12:15am
real, real in flesh, real in her words and deed, a (no subject) What made me think Milay is an AC DC? It does not
sister belonging to the Franciscan missionary. She matter. While I thank you for your honest to
was assigned in Italy for almost 10 years as a nun, Milay:cralawlawlibrary goodness answer, and I would like to return the
and she can read, write, Italian. I have to buy her a favor by answering your question but judges have
cake, it's her birthday today. Doesn't Italy means Some crazy woman e-mailed me. Her name is restrictions and limited correspondence online.
an abbreviation of I Trust And Love You? bambi yu. I accepted her on Facebook because she Judges are expected to be courteous to fellow
told me you were friends. Then last Friday, she judges. I promised not to speak or write anything
I will talk to you later. I will drop by at your court on sent me a weird message asking if you were about Emily that would put her in bad light. I honor
October 26, for sure am to pass by in going or bisexual. I promptly answered her and after that, I my promises. She has high aspirations in the
coming from MeTc Branch 23, my first time to go deleted her from my facebook list, as well as any judiciary which we should support. Besides, we are
there. I'm so accessible, so simple. It was you, or it common friends we might have. I am telling you enemies for judicial excellence awards. You can
was your sister, should I say, that make things this so you will be warned that there are envious ask her directly the question please. She is the only
complicated. The article, "A Tribute to a Great people like this. I am copying here the contents of one who can answer it correctly. My lips are sealed
Mentor", it was your sister who wrote it? Well, our exchange for your own records. this time. Have a nice day. Thank you. God bless!
Justice Angelina Sandoval Gutierrez is her ideal
woman. A tall order. Oh no, no need to tell me the as follows:cralawlawlibrary Bambie Yu July 3 at 6:04am Report
orientation or preference of the author of the
article by mere reading of it. Take care always. God bambi yu:cralawlawlibrary PS: Just to take advantage of your generosity,
bless you always. Be right back. 156 because Emily broke her vow not to open her
I read your post about judge of the year award to Facebook account which she claimed to be
The following day, Judge Yu sent another lengthy
Milay today. I was about to comment but your post Pandora's box, can you do me a little favor, to ask
message apologizing for her previous
disappeared. She wrote me months ago that she her to delete all my emails? She told me she kept
actions.157 But to add more confusion, Judge Yu
closed her Facebook account because it became a all my old emails despite my instruction to delete
sent a message on November 17, 2009 containing
Pandora's box. I'm curious, is she an AC DC?? (I am them after reading. Our emails contained gossips
a La Paz Bachoy recipe, but with a notation at the
actually laughing) You are listed as among her best which will lead to our disbarment as honorable
end reading: we shall claim the 69 meal stub in a
friends, you must be competent to answer this members of the bar. Thus, I was anxious to learn
dirty kitchen.158
inquiry. Rest assured that this is highly from your post that hinted she opened up her
confidential. Thanks. God bless.. Facebook account again yesterday, this meant she
Aside from attributing to Judge Yu the sending of
broke a vow. My emails may still be there, and I
messages containing sexual innuendos, Judge San
Juliet Tabanao-Galicinao July 2 at 8:19am what is have waited for her assurance that she have
Gaspar-Gito accused her of creating a fake
an AC DC? deleted all. I did not receive any such assurance
Facebook account under the name "Rudela San
from her that my emails are gone except that she
Gaspar." That account contained captured
Bambie Yu July 2 at 3:48pm Report closed her FB account. I was relieved with that
photographs, including that of the complainant's
closed FB account until yesterday. I kept writing
son allegedly taken from her deactivated account.
AC DC is non-offensive slang for bisexual. Is she a her before to delete my emails. She does not reply.
Judge San Gaspar-Gito confronted Judge Yu and
bisexual? Thanks for replying. Judges have limited Anyway, I am not going to speak anything bad
 31

against her. I would be glad if I will get an July 22, 2011 Corps in 1865,178 which should be treated as an
assurance from you, as her bestfriend, that she artwork rather than as pornography;179 that she
already deleted the emails. We are not speaking to Atty. Reynaldo L. San Gaspar had treated the message as a joke, but Judge San
each other because we have a huge No. 154 P. Talavera St., Gaspar-Gito would continually send similar
misunderstanding and, I said earlier, we are Pakil, 4017, Laguna graphics through the Facebook gift section
enemies, mortal enemies for the judicial excellence everytime she would ask her to troubleshoot in her
award. Dear Atty. San Gaspar:cralawlawlibrary sala;180 that she did not send some of the
messages to Judge San Gaspar-Gito whom she
Thank you again & good day.162 Our court is inviting you for a brief conference in knew to be very much married;181 that she had
our court on August 5, 2011 around 1:00 p.m. to become alarmed upon learning that Judge San
Judge San Gaspar-Gito formally filed the present
4:00 p.m. or any available and convenient time and Gaspar-Gito had repeatedly read her messages,
administrative complaint on July 12, 2010. 163
place for you, to clarify matters pertaining to the and had treated the same as "treasures" that she
two (2) letters both dated July 12, 2010 of your had refused to delete;182 and that her messages
Judge Yu submitted her comment by way of a
sister Judge Emily L. San Gaspar-Gito. She can were intended to be "double entendres" and should
compliance dated October 12, 2010, 164 and
come with you if she wants to. not be considered as having any sexual
attached her own complaint-affidavit charging
connotations but instead as having been innocently
Judge San Gaspar-Gito with conduct unbecoming of
Your cooperation is highly appreciated. uttered.183
a judge, and requesting the OCA to conduct a
discreet investigation on the complaint. 165 She
Thank you. In her September 26, 2013 manifestation, 184 Judge
manifested that she had come upon two versions
Yu attached a copy of her credit card bill
of Judge San Gaspar-Gito's complaint. 166
Very truly yours, supposedly showing that she had been charged
$10.00 when she opened the meal stub sent by
The following day, Judge Yu wrote to the OCA
expressing her dissatisfaction over the (sgd.) Judge San Gaspar-Gito. She posited that the lewd
investigation being conducted by the OCA.167 Judge Eliza B. Yu graphics had originated from Judge San Gaspar-
Gito who had tampered the electronic messages
Copy furnished: submitted as evidence herein.185
On October 22, 2010 Judge Yu submitted a
supplemental manifestation arguing that Judge San Judge Emily L. San Gaspar-Gito
Metropolitan Trial Court Branch 20, Manila Regarding her exchanges with Ms. Galicinao, Judge
Gaspar-Gito did not only violate the Code of
Yu invoked the exclusionary rule because she did
Judicial Ethics, the Civil Code and the Revised In the meantime, the Court referred the matter to not give her consent to use the private messages
Penal Code, but also Republic Act No. 8792, the Court of Appeals (CA),173 and directed Judge as evidence.186
specifically Section 32168 on confidentiality of San Gaspar-Gito to allow the Chief of the
electronic messages. She described the complaint Management Information System Office (MISO) to CA Associate Justice Hakim S. Abdulwahid
letters as poison letters, and denied all the gain access to her Facebook and Yahoo accounts. conducted the investigation, and scheduled several
material averments stated therein.169
hearings. It appears that despite notice, Judge Yu
Pursuant to the Court's directive, the MISO did not appear in the hearings, and instead
Judge San Gaspar-Gito submitted her reply.170 accessed the Yahoo and Facebook accounts of manifested her willingness to submit the matter for
Judge San Gaspar-Gito. Later on, Mr. Alexander M. decision based on the records. She also waived her
Judge Yu wrote the OCA on March 18, 2011 Arevalo, the Acting Chief of the MISO, submitted attendance, including the right to cross examine
formally withdrawing her complaint against Judge his report,174 attaching and certifying to the the complainant,187 in order to avoid generating
San Gaspar-Gito.171 messages/communications extracted from the "hostile feelings and antagonistic views" upon the
Yahoo and Facebook accounts of Judge San entry of appearance as counsel of Atty. Gener Gito,
On July 22, 2011, Judge Yu sent a letter to Judge Gaspar-Gito.175 Judge San Gaspar-Gito's husband.188
San Gaspar-Gito's brother, Atty. Reynaldo L. San
Gaspar,172 to wit:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary In her memorandum,176 Judge Yu accused Judge Justice Abdulwahid submitted his Report and
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES San Gaspar-Gito with dishonesty and violation of Recommendation dated September 26,
National Capital Judicial Region the right to privacy.177 She insisted on her 2013,189 wherein he recommended the suspension
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT innocence, claiming that Judge San Gaspar-Gito from office of Judge Yu for a period of three months
Branch 47, Pasay City had sent her the meal stub with the attached due to simple misconduct and conduct unbecoming
Tel. No. 831-1109 image; that based on her research, the image was of a judge. He concluded that the barrage of
a photo engraving by Felicien Rops for Le Diable au inappropriate messages sent by Judge Yu, as well
 32

as her stalking through the internet, constituted Lim as gross misconduct, and a violation of Section with only partially, inadequately or selectively, 201 or
conduct unbecoming of a judge; and that her use 6, Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct; for her to altogether disregard. At the very least,
of her court's letterhead to summon the Judge Yu's conduct in relation to the request for her resistance to A.O. No. 19-2011 manifested an
complainant's brother fell under the category of sick leave by Noel Labid, and the appointment of uncommon arrogance on the part of a Judge of a
simple misconduct.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary Ms. Tejero-Lopez as oppression;196 regarded as court of the first-level towards the Court itself.
gross ignorance of the law Judge Yu's acts of Such attitude smacked of her unbecoming
Recommendation and Evaluation of the Office allowing the criminal proceedings in her court to condescension towards the Court and her judicial
of the Court Administrator continue without the presence of the public superiors. We cannot tolerate her attitude lest it
prosecutor, and of ordering the reception of needlessly sows the seeds of aiTogance in others
On October 13, 2015, the Court directed the OCA evidence by the OIC who was not a member of the that can ultimately destroy the faith and trust in
to submit a comprehensive evaluation, report and Bar;197 and considered Judge Yu's issuance of the the hierarchy of courts so essential in the effective
recommendation on the consolidated cases. 190 show cause order against Executive Judge functioning of the administration of justice.
Colasito, et al. as grave abuse of her authority.198
The OCA complied through Deputy Court Moreover, Judge Yu's resistance to the
Administrator (DCA) Jenny Lind R. Aldecoa- The OCA agreed with the recommendation and implementation of A.O. No. 19-2011 disrupted the
Delorino191 by submitting a findings of Justice Abdulwahid to consider Judge orderliness of the other Pasay City MeTCs to the
Memorandum192 containing the following Yu's actuations towards Judge San Gaspar Gito as prejudice of public interest. This effect became
recommendation:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary conduct unbecoming of a judge, but clarified that unavoidable, for Executive Judge Colasito
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully Judge Yu's use of the official letterhead of her court necessarily required the other courts to render
recommended for the consideration of the in summoning the brother of Judge San Gaspar- additional night court duties to cope with her
Honorable Court that respondent Judge Eliza B. Yu, Gito to a conference demonstrated her abuse of refusal to render night court duties.
Branch 47, Metropolitan Trial Court, Pasay City, be power, and constituted a violation of Section 8,
found GUILTY of INSUBORDINATION, GROSS Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct.199 Judge Yu compounded her condescension towards
IGNORANCE OF THE LAW, REFUSAL TO the Court and her judicial superiors by her
PERFORM OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS, GROSS Ruling of the Court bypassing them to directly communicate her
MISCONDUCT AMOUNTING TO VIOLATION OF personal reservations about A.O. No. 19-2011 to
THE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT, GRAVE We agree with the findings and recommendations Secretary Lim, the proponent of holding the night
ABUSE OF AUTHORITY, OPPRESSION, of the OCA.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary courts, and other quarters like the police authority
and CONDUCT UNBECOMING OF A JUDGE, and in Pasay City. Her reservations extended to
be DISMISSED FROM THE SERVICE with I assailing the legal foundation and the practicality
forfeiture of all benefits, except accrued leave Noncompliance with A.O. No. 19-2011 for holding the night courts. Her doing so broadcast
credits, and disqualification from reinstatement or to them the notion that obedience to A.O. No. 19-
appointment to any Rublic office including Judge Yu forthwith resisted the implementation of 2011 and similar issuances of the Court could be
government-owned or controlled corporations.193 A.O. No. 19-2011 because of her unresolved deferred at the whim and caprice of a lowly ranked
protest against the issuance. She explained that judicial officer like her. Although she might have
The OCA recommended that the charges of gross regarded her reservations as impressed with
ignorance of the law in allowing OJTs to perform her compliance with A.O. No. 19-2011 would render
her protest moot. But her unresolved protest was outstanding merit, that was no justification for her
judicial work and directing the court staff to sell the to defer or reject the implementation of A.O. No.
books authored by Judge Yu, as well as the not a sufficient justification for her to resist the
implementation of A.O. No. 19-2011. She was quite 19-2011 in her court for any length of time, and to
allegation of malicious utterances against Court be public about it. A.O. No. 19-2011 dealt with an
Administrator Marquez should be dismissed for aware that A.O. No. 19-2011 was issued pursuant
to Section 6, Article VIII of the Constitution, which administrative matter on the administration of
being unsubstantiated;194 and upheld Judge Yu's justice and procedure over which the Court was the
requiring the plaintiffs with pending replevin cases confers to the Court the power of administrative
supervision over all courts,200 and was for that supreme and sole authority. She should have the
to pay legal fees for transcripts, pursuant to her maturity to know so, and to bow her head before
judicial prerogative to ensure that court funds were reason an issuance to be immediately
implemented and unquestioningly obeyed by the that authority. Her freedom to exercise her
properly accounted for.195 constitutional right to free speech and expression
affected Judges.
was not a consideration. She had no privilege to
The OCA declared Judge Yu's refusal to comply with disobey; hers was but to follow.
A.M. No. 19-2011 and to honor the appointments of The resistance by Judge Yu to the the
Ms. Lagman and Ms. Tejero-Lopez as implementation of A.O. No. 19-2011 was
unexpected. She was quite aware that A.O. No. 19- Judge Yu's having directly communicated her
insubordination; Judge Yu's letter to DOT Secretary misgivings about A.O. No. 19-2011 to Secretary
2011 was not a mere request for her to comply
 33

Lim and to other quarters was beyond forgiving by question her fitness and worthiness of the honor refusing to be bound by the issuance of the Court
the Court. She thereby strongly hinted that the and integrity attached to her judicial office.205 as the duly constituted authority on court
Court was altogether wrong and impractical about procedures and the supervision of the lower courts.
holding night courts. What she accomplished from According to Himalin v. Balderian,206 the refusal of To tolerate her insubordination and gross
such exercise was to broadcast how little regard a Judge to comply with any resolution or directive misconduct is to abet lawlessness on her part. She
she had for the Court and its issuances. Her of the Court constituted insubordination and gross deserved to be removed from the service because
attitude constituted an open insubordination that misconduct, viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary she thereby revealed her unworthiness of being
extensively diminished the respect owed to the [A] judge who deliberately and continuously failed part of the Judiciary.210
Court by the public, especially by the latter who and refused to comply with a resolution of this
were directly affected in the implementation of Court was held guilty of gross misconduct and II
A.O. No. 19-2011. There is no question that when a insubordination, the Supreme Court being the Refusal to honor the appointments of court
Judge becomes the transgressor of the law that she agency exclusively vested by our Constitution with personnel
has sworn to uphold, she places her office in administrative supervision over all courts and court
disrepute, encourages disrespect for the law, and personnel from the Presiding Justice of the Court of Although Judge Yu insisted on the irregularity of
impairs public confidence in the integrity of the Appeals to the lowest municipal trial court clerk. the appointment of Ms. Tejero-Lopez for lack of
Judiciary itself.202 The Court can hardly discharge such constitutional personal endorsement from her as the Presiding
mandate of overseeing judges and court personnel Judge, and of the appointment of Ms. Lagman due
It is timely for the Courrto use this occasion to and taking proper administrative sanction against to a pending administrative complaint, the
remind Judge Yu and other judicial officers of the them if the judge or personnel concerned does not appointments of Ms. Tejero-Lopez and Ms. Lagman
land that although they may enjoy the freedoms of even recognize its administrative authority. were valid and regular. As such, Judge Yu had no
speech and expression as citizens of the Republic, good reason to reject the appointments.
Insubordination is the refusal to obey some order
they should always conduct themselves, while
that a superior officer is entitled to give and to
exercising such freedoms, in a manner that should To start with, Ms. Tejero-Lopez and other
have ob yed. It imports a willful or intentional
preserve the dignity of their judicial offices and the applicants had undergone scrutiny and processing
disregard of the lawful and reasonable instructions
impartiality and independence of the Judiciary. As by the duly constituted committee, and the OCA
of the employer.207 Judge Yu's obstinate resistance
to this duty to observe self-restraint, Section 6, had then signed and executed the appointment.
to A.O. No. 19-2011 displayed both her rebellious
Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for Nonetheless, the authority to appoint still
character and her disdain and disrespect for the
the Philippine Judiciary is clear and emanated from the Court itself.211 Judge Yu's
Court and its directives.
forthright, viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary objection to Ms. Tejero-Lopez's appointment for
Sec. 6. Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled to lack of her personal endorsement was not enough
Judge Yu's unwillingness to comply with A.O. No.
freedom of expression, belief, association and to negate the appointment. Judge Yu had no right
19-2011 was also a betrayal of her sworn duty to
assembly, but in exercising such rights, they shall to reject the appointment, making her rejection
maintain fealty to the law,208 and brought dishonor
always conduct themselves in such a manner as to another instance of gross insubordination by her.
to the Judiciary. In that regard, her conduct
preserve the dignity of the judicial office and the This consequence has been elucidated in Edaño v.
amounted to gross misconduct, defined as
impartiality and independence of the judiciary. Asdala,212 as follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
For sure, Judge Yu's expression of her dissent Misconduct means intentional wrongdoing or [R]espondent Judge Asdala, in insisting on the
against A.O. No. 19-2011 was misplaced. We may deliberate violation of a rule of law or standard of designation of respondent Nicandro as OIC, blithely
as well declare that she did not enjoy the privilege behavior in connection with one's performance of and willfully disregarded the Memorandum of this
to dissent. Regardless of her reasons for official functions and duties. For grave or gross Court, through the OCA, which approved the
dissenting, she was absolutely bound to follow A.O. misconduct to exist, the judicial act complained of designation of Amy Soneja alone and not in
No. 19-2011. Indeed, she did not have the should be corrupt or inspired by the intention to conjunction with respondent Nicandro - as
unbridled freedom to publicly speak against A.O. violate the law, or a persistent disregard of well- OIC. While the presiding judge, such as
No. 19-2011 and its implementation, for her being known rules. The misconduct must imply wrongful respondent Judge Asdala, can recommend
the Judge that she was differentiated her from the intention and not a mere error of judgment.209 and endorse persons to a particular position,
ordinary citizen exercising her freedom of speech this recommendation has to be approved by
In all, Judge Yu exhibited an unbecoming arrogance this Court. Again, the respondent judge
and expression who did not swear obedience to the
in committing insubordination and gross ought to know that the Constitution grants
orders and processes of the Court without
misconduct. By her refusal to adhere to and abide this Court administrative supervision over all
delay.203 Her resistance to the implementation of
by A.O. No. 19-2011, she deliberately disregarded the courts and personnel thereof. In the case
A.O. No. 19-2011 constituted gross insubordination
her duty to serve as the embodiment of the law at at bar, despite the Court's approval of Amy
and gross misconduct, 204 and put in serious
all times. She thus held herself above the law by Soneja's designation, the respondent judge
 34

allowed, if not insisted on, the continued discharge upon Ms. Tejero-Lopez amounted to oppression,
of the duties of OIC by respondent Nicandro. b. In case of a complaint filed by a private person, which refers to an act of cruelty, severity, unlawful
Respondent Judge Asdala even had the gall to a prima facie case is found to exist by the exaction, domination or excessive use of
insist that as presiding judge she has the authority disciplining authority. authority.222
and discretion to designate "anyone who works
The rule, which is reiterated in Section 42 of
under her, as long as that person enjoys her trust III
the Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the
and confidence." Coming from a judge, such Issuing a show-cause order against fellow
Civil Service (RRACCS) of 2011,218 cannot be
arrogance, if not ignorance, is inexcusable. The Judges and court personnel
interpreted otherwise.
memorandum from the OCA regarding the
designation of court personnel is no less an order According to the OCA, Judge Yu gravely abused her
Accordingly, Judge Yu's administrative complaint
from this Court. Court officials and personnel, authority in issuing the show-cause order against
had no bearing on Ms. Lagman's appointment,
particularly judges, are expected to comply with his fellow Judges, the complainants against her in
more so because Ms. Lagman was held liable only
the same. Respondent judge's gross OCA IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ. The OCA rendered its
for simple misconduct, a less grave offense that did
insubordination cannot be countenanced. 213 finding thereon, as
not merit termination from public service for the
Judge Yu could only recommend an applicant for a first offense.219 It is relevant to point out, too, that follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
vacant position in her court for the consideration of Judge Yu had no personality to object to or oppose This Office finds it absolutely irregular for
the SPBLC, which then accorded priority to the Ms. Lagman's appointment, considering that only a respondent Judge Yu to require the
recommendee if the latter possessed superior qualified next-in-rank employee has been complainants in OCA IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ to
qualifications than or was at least of equal recognized as a party-in-interest to file the protest explain within seventy-two (72) hours upon
qualifications as the other applicants she did not in accordance with paragraph 1.6.1, Article IX of receipt of notice why they should not be
recommend.214 The SPBLC explained to Judge Yu the 2002 Revised Manual of Clerks of Court.220 cited in contempt for surreptitiously taking
the selection process that had resulted in the the TSNs, orders and minutes of the
appointment of Ms. Tejero-Lopez. She could not Thirdly, we also take Judge Yu to task for proceedings in Criminal Case No. M-PSY-09-
impose her recommendee on the SPBLC which was disrespectful language uttered against the Court, 08592-CR and using these as part of their
legally mandated to maintain fairness and no less. She characterized the appointment of Ms. attachments to their complaint. As the
impartiality in its assessment of the Tejero-Lopez as "void ab initio" and "a big joke." respondent in OCA IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ,
applicants215 based on performance, eligibility, The use of such language in assailing the Court's respondent Judge Yu has no authority to
education and training, experience and exercise of its absolute power of appointment was summon the complainants (Executive Judge
outstanding accomplishments, psycho-social highly offensive and intemperate. She thereby Colasito, et al.) because it is only the
attributes and personality traits, and potentials.216 disregarded her obligation to show respect and Supreme Court who has the power to issue
deference toward the Court and its officials. She directives requiring the parties in an
Secondly, Judge Yu's rejection of the appointment was thereby guilty of another serious misconduct. administrative case to appear and to present
of Ms. Lagman was just as unwarranted. their respective arguments in support of
And, fourthly, Judge Yu issued verbal threats of their position.
Under Section 34, Rule II of the Uniform Rules on filing administrative, civil and criminal charges
Administrative Cases in the Civil against Ms. Tejero-Lopez unless she withdrew her Not only is her directive misplaced, it also shows
Service (URACCS),217 a pending administrative application. Judge Yu reiterated the threats in her respondent Judge Yu's utter lack of respect and
complaint shall not disqualifY an employee from letter dated June 14, 2011 addressed to Atty. disdain for the Supreme Court. It must be noted
promotion, thus:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary Pabello.221 Ms. Tejero-Lopez felt intimidated enough that the parties in Criminal Case No. M-PSY-09-
Section 34. Effect of the Pendency of an because she actually withdrew her application 08592-CR (the accused Ramil Fuentes et al. and
Administrative Case. - Pendency of an (although she later went on with it). The making of the plaintiff Republic of the Philippines) are
administrative case shall not disqualify respondent the verbal threats by Judge Yu to compel a outsiders to the administrative controversy
from promotion or from claiming subordinate to withdraw her application constituted between respondent Judge Yu and the
maternity/paternity benefits. grave abuse of authority on the part of Judge Yu. complainants in OCA IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ.
Grave abuse of authority is committed by a public However, respondent Judge Yu acted as if she
For this purpose, a pending administrative case officer, who, under color of his office, wrongfully was the investigating authority instead of
shall be construed as inflicts upon a person any bodily harm, being the respondent. She took undue
follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary imprisonment, or other injury; it is an act advantage of her position as a judge and
a. When the disciplining authority has issued a characterized with cruelty, severity, or excessive used the judicial process for her own benefit.
formal charge; or use of authority. Also, the intimidation exerted Such action clearly depicts an abusive
 35

character which has no place in the judiciary. administrative complaint against her. She thereby head. Application for sick leave in excess of
(Bold emphasis supplied)223 breached her duty to disqualify herself from acting five (5) successive days shall be accompanied
at all on the matter. Such self-disqualification was by a proper medical certificate.
The issuance of the show-cause order by Judge Yu
required under Section 5, Canon 3, and Section 8
represented clear abuse of court processes, and
of Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for xxxx
revealed her arrogance in the exercise of her
the Philippine Judiciary,
authority as a judicial officer. She thereby 2.2.2. Approval of sick leave
viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
knowingly assumed the role of a tyrant wielding Sick leave shall be granted only on account of
Section 5. Judges shall disqualify themselves from
power with unbridled breadth. Based on its sickness or disability on the part of the employee
participating in any proceedings in which they are
supervisory authority over the courts and their concerned or of any member of his immediate
unable to decide the matter impartially or in which
personnel, the Court must chastise her as an family.
it may appear to a reasonable observer that they
abusive member of the Judiciary who tended to
are unable to decide the matter impartially. Such
forget that the law and judicial ethics Approval of sick leave, whether with pay or
proceedings include, but are not limited to,
circumscribed the powers and discretion vested in without pay, is mandatory provided proof of
instances where:cralawlawlibrary
her judicial office. sickness or disability is attached to the
application in accordance with the applicable
(a) The judge has actual bias or prejudice
Nothing extenuated Judge Yu's abuse of authority requirements. Unreasonable delay in the
concerning a party or personal knowledge of
and arrogance. Instead of accepting the error of approval thereof or non-approval without
disputed evidentiary facts concerning the
her ways, Judge Yu defended her conduct by justifiable reason shall be a ground for
proceedings;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
insisting on having the authority to initiate appropriate sanction against the official
contempt proceedings against her fellow Judges concerned. (Emphasis supplied)
xxxx
and court personnel. She supported her insistence
Noel Labid complied with the 2002 Revised Manual
by citing the rulings in People v. Godoy,224Zaldivar
Section 8. Judges shall not use or lend the prestige by submitting the medical certificate and the
v. Sandiganbayan,225 and Salcedo v.
of the judicial office to advance their private clinical abstracts issued and certified by the
Hernandez.226 But the cited rulings had no
interest, x x x. Medical Records Division of the Philippine General
relevance at all. People v. Godoy related to the
Hospital (PGH). The medical certificate indicated
contemptuous newspaper article involving a case By insisting on her inherent authority to punish her
that he had been suffering from "Bleeding
that the trial court had decided. Zaldivar v. fellow Judges for contempt of court, Judge Yu
submandibular mass in hypovolemic shock
Sandiganbayan required the Tanodbayan- wielded a power that she did not hold. Hence, she
Squamous cell Carcinoma Stage IV floor of
Ombudsman, a party in the case, to explain his was guilty of gross
mouth,"229 while the clinical abstracts dated June
contumacious remarks about an ongoing case to misconduct.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
14, 2011230 and June 23, 2011231 indicated the
the media. Salcedo v. Hernandez concerned the
same reason for his hospital admission. However,
contemptuous remarks by counsel for the IV Judge Yu was unconvinced by such submissions,
petitioner in a motion filed before the Court. In Refusal to sign the application for leave of and adamantly refused to approve Noel's leave
short, the factual settings for the cited rulings absence and other allegations of oppression application supposedly based on the ruling in Re:
involved parties or counsel of the parties, while the
Memorandum Report of Atty. Thelma C. Bahia
factual setting in this administrative matter The 2002 Revised Manual for Clerks of Court against Ms. Dorothy Salgado.232
concerned the act of merely copying the records of governs the approval of an application for sick
Judge Yu's court for purposes of producing leave by court "personnel. Paragraphs 2.2.1227 and Judge Yu apparently misapplied the cited ruling.
evidence against her in the administrative cases 2.2.2,228 Chapter X of the 2002 Revised Manual
her fellow Judges and the concerned court requires the submission of a medical certificate or Re: Memorandum Report of Atty. Thelma C. Bahia
employees would be initiating against he. The proof of sickness prior to the approval of the against Ms. Dorothy Salgado concerned the
latter were not parties in any pending case in her application for sick leave, habitual absenteeism of the respondent court
court. thus:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary personnel, and her belated submission of the
2.2.1 Application for sick leave medical certificates proving her illness. Crucial was
Moreover, the Court notes that Judge Yu's issuance All applications for sick leave of absence for one (1) the finding that despite several attempts by her
of the show-cause order emanated from her desire full day or more shall be made on the prescribed office to contact the respondent and to inquire on
to retaliate against her fellow Judges and the form and shall be filed immediately upon the her situation, she had deliberately failed to inform
concerned court employees considering that the employee's return from such leave. Notice of her superior of her absence and her condition. This
allegedly contumacious conduct was the copying of absence, however, should be sent to the is not the same in the case of Noel.
court records to be used as evidence in the immediate supervisor, and/or agency
 36

Under paragraph 2.1.2233 of the 2002 Revised bears the burden of proving by substantial archived. Upon receipt of the newly filed criminal
Manual, heads of offices like Judge Yu possessed evidence the allegations in his complaint.235 or civil cases within a day, the officer-incharge
the authority to confirm the employee's claim of ill shall place them, at the court's chambers. After the
health. Being aware of Noel's true medical V evaluation of these cases, the undersigned judge
condition after having met with Mrs. Labid who had Charges of gross ignorance of the law shall instruct the officer-in-charge to turn over
seen her to plead for the approval of her son's these cases to the encoder for typing. Thereafter,
leave application, Judge Yu was not justified in I. Allowing on-the-job-trainees after (sic) these newly filed criminal and civil cases
demanding a prior written notice about Noel's are typed and printed within the day, a copy shall
serious medical condition. Neither was she justified In OCA IPI No. 11-2399-MTJ, the complainants be furnished to the undersigned judge. The said
in still requiring Noel to submit the certificate of charged that Judge Yu had allowed on-the-job cases will be given by the officer-in-charge to the
fitness to work considering that he had yet to trainees (OJTs) to have access to court records. She records officer and process server for safekeeping.
report for work. denied this charge, however, and claimed that the The monthly report must be submitted within the
students were merely "observers" because of the 1st week up to the 2nd week of the following month.
Noel's medical certificate and clinical abstracts had prohibition. The OCA found this charge
sufficiently established the reason for his absence unsubstantiated. All other orders must be typed within the week
and his hospital admission. Despite his obvious after their issuance in open court. Every Friday, the
critical condition, Judge Yu chose to ignore the We do not agree with the OCA's finding. Officer-in-Charge must see to it that all orders
medical records certified by a government health issued within the week are typed within the same
institution, and unjustifiably demanded the The memorandum dated November 2, week.
submission of documents that the 2002 Revised 2010236 issued by Judge Yu indicated her intention
Manual did not require. Judge Yu did not to delegate the duties of an encoder to a certain After the receipt of the printed copy of the newly
convincingly establish that her actions came within Ms. Angelica Rosali, one of the OJTs concerned, filed civil and criminal cases from the encoder, the
the limits of her authority as a court manager, or thus:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary undersigned judge shall instruct the officer-in-
were sanctioned by existing court regulations and MEMORANDUM charge to calendar these cases and to delegate
policies. Her unjustified refusal to approve Noel's fairly the typing of the notices of these cases. The
leave application exposed her to administrative TO: Mrs. Amor Abad, Officer-in-Charge, Mr. Romer officer-in-charge is directed to mimeograph the
sanction under paragraph 2.2.2 of the 2002 Aviles and Mr. Froilan Robert Tomas, forms of subpoenas, summons, other notices, order
Revised Manual. Accordingly, Judge Yu was again Stenographers, Mrs. Emelina San Miguel, Records to file an answer or counter-affidavit in cases
guilty of grave abuse of authority. Officer, Mrs. Maxima Sayo, Process Server, and Ms. covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure, order
Angelica Rosali, Encoder. for the issuance of warrant of arrest, warrant of
It is not hard to believe that Judge Yu deliberately arrest, commitment order, minutes, pre-trial order
refused to sign Noel's leave application in order to RE: Preference of Typing Orders, Encoding of and such other pro-forma orders as determined by
cause additional hardship to him in retaliation for Monthly Report, Submission of Monthly Report, this Court subject to delegation. With respect to an
his joining the administrative complaint against Typing of Pro-Forma Notices and Orders and Other order on archiving of a case, there must be a
her. We consider to be credible Mrs. Labid's Related Concerns corresponding warrant of arrest. The Officer-in-
narration that Judge Yu had expressed her Charge is responsible for the checking of the
resentment towards Noel for his signing the In the interest of service, the stenographers are correct name of the case title, date, parties
complaint against her. By acting so, therefore, ordered to type first the orders on sentence, and addresses of these proforma orders
Judge Yu was vindictive, and exhibited indifference dismissal and archival of cases within the day of subject to delegation. Erroneous typing of
to the plight of the critically ill subordinate in issuing the same in open court. Said orders must case title, date, parties and addresses,
urgent need of assistance. She was guilty of be placed at the court's chambers before 2:00 p.m. among others is considered gross inefficiency
oppression, which is any act of cruelty, severity, for signature after checking of the case titles and if committed ten (10) consecutive times, and
unlawful exaction, domination or excessive use of dates by the office[r]-in-charge. Thereafter, after it calls [f]or an explanation. If re-committed
authority constituting oppression.234 Her oppression (sic) signing of these orders by the undersigned another ten (10) consecutive times, this
did not befit an administrator of justice. judge, these will be forwarded to the encoder of merits disciplinary sunction. (Emphasis
the monthly report. The encoder shall encode supplied)
Nonetheless, we dismiss the other allegations of immediately these orders upon receipt
oppression towards the staffmembers of Branch 47 thereof. The encoder shall be responsible for For strict compliance.
for failure of the complainants to substantiate the the typing of newly filed criminal and civil
same. In administrative cases, the complainant cases, the cases submitted for decision, and Thank you.
the cases decided, dismissed and
 37

(Sgd.) Eliza B. Yu "MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 5-2003 position of Clerk of Court III was a second level
Judge position with a minimum educational requirement
PROHIBITING THE ACCOMMODATION OF STUDENTS of a Bachelor of Laws degree, at least one year
That the memorandum was not disseminated to
TO UNDERGO ON-THE-JOB TRAINING/PRACTICUM IN relevant experience, four hours of relevant
the person concerned, and that it was not
THE DIFFERENT OFFICES OF THE COURT training, and a professional career service
implemented were immaterial to the charge. The
eligible.240
fact that Judge Yu issued the memorandum naming
It is observed that some offices of the Court allow
Ms. Rosali, a student, as the encoder and assigning
students of different colleges and universities to On the other hand, the CSC Memorandum Circular
to her court duties similar to those of a regular
undergo on-the-job training/practicum without No. 06-05 dated February 15, 2005 provides the
court employee signified Judge Yu's intention to
authority or approval by the Chief Justice. following guidelines:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
treat Ms. Rosali as a trainee instead of as a mere
CSC MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 06-05
observer. Ms. Rosali denied in her sinumpaang
Due to security reasons which prompted the Court  
salaysay237 that she had received the
to deny previous requests of colleges and
memorandum and performed encoding tasks, but TO: All Heads of Constitutional Bodies;
universities for on-the-job training/practicum, it is
nonetheless confirmed that she was directed to Departments, Bureaus and Agencies of the
noted that the practice of some offices allowing
docket the decisions and staple the returns. The National Government; Local Government
students to undergo on-the-job training/practicum
other student "observers," namely: Ms. Johaira O. Units; Government-Owned or Controlled
jeopardizes not only the functions of some offices
Mababaya, Ms. Catherine L. Sarate and Mr. Corporations; and State Universities and
but also their confidential records. Notably, the
Eduardo M. Pangilinan III, also attested that they Colleges
accommodation of these students pose as a
had conducted their court observation as "assistant
security risk.
court stenographer."
SUBJECT: Guidelines on Designation
ACCORDINGLY, in order to ensure the security of
Under the circumstances, Judge Yu could not feign
officials and employees of the Court as well as its In its Resolution No. 050157 dated February 7,
ignorance of the tasks assigned to and performed
records, all Chiefs of Offices/Services/Divisions of 2005, the Commission has adopted the following
by the OJTs. If she had been strict about accepting
the Court, including those of the Presidential guidelines on Designation in the civil
student trainees, then she should not have
Electoral Tribunal, Judicial and Bar Council and the service:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
assigned court-related tasks. In this regard, Judge
Philippine Judicial Academy, are hereby directed to xxxx
Yu deliberately ignored OCA Circular No. 111-2005
disallow on-the-job training/practicum in
in prohibiting OJTs,
their respective offices/services/divisions. B. Designees can only be designated to positions
thus:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
OCA CIRCULAR NO. 111-2005 within the level they are currently occupying.
xxxx However, Division Chiefs may be designated to
TO : THE COURT OF APPEALS, SANDIGANBAYAN, perform the duties of third level positions.
The provision of the above memorandum
COURT OF TAX APPEALS, REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS,
shall likewise apply to all trial courts to serve First level personnel cannot be designated to
SHARI'A DISTRICT COURTS, METROPOLITAN TRIAL
as a guide for similar requests of students perform the duties of second level positions.
COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL
and as reflective of the policy of the Court on
CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, SHARI'A CIRCUIT COURTS
the matter. x x x x (Emphasis supplied)
SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 5-2003 Re: Designating a first-level personnel like Mr. Santos
For the information and guidance of all concerned.
PROHIBITING THE ACCOMODATION OF STUDENTS as OIC defied CSC Memorandum Circular No. 06-05
TO UNDERGO ON-THE-JOB TRAINING/PRACTICUM IN because the position of OIC was reserved for
x x x x (Emphasis supplied)
THE DIFFERENT OFFICES OF THE COURT personnel belonging to the second level. It
II. Designating an Officer-in-Charge becomes immaterial whether nobody from Branch
The Supreme Court En Banc in its Resolution dated 47 opposed the designation because the
6 September 2005, in A.M. No. 05-7-16-SC, Re: Judge Yu designated as OIC of Branch 47 of the memorandum circular expressly prohibits
Analysis of the Current Judicial System Using MeTC Mr. Ferdinand Santos, who occupied the designation of first level personnel to a second
Information Technology by Student of the De La position of Clerk III. Under the 2002 Revised level position. It is emphasized that the
Salle University, Resolved to direct the Manual, the position of Clerk III fell under the first memorandum is crafted in the negative; hence, the
undersigned to CIRCULARIZE to all lower courts level position with a minimum educational memorandum is mandatory, and imports that the
Memorandum Circular No. 05-2003 dated 25 June requirement of two years of college studies, 238 and act required shall not be done otherwise than
2003, to wit:cralawlawlibrary a career service sub-professional eligible. 239 The designated.241
 38

6 indorsements for signature :of the Judge; no power to rule on objections to any question or
Judge Yu's contention that the designation of the and to the admission of exhibits, which objections shall
OIC was based on trust and confidence had no be resolved by the court upon submission of his
basis. We underscore that the OIC referred to here 1.3.2. Performs other duties that may be report and the transcripts within ten (10) days from
was the acting Branch Clerk of Court (Clerk of 7 assigned to him. termination of the hearing. (Emphasis supplied)
Court III). The 2002 Revised Manual enumerates Clerks of court are officers of the law who perform The word may used in the rule related only to the
the following duties and responsibilities of a branch vital functions in the prompt and sound discretion by the trial court of delegating the
clerk of court, viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary administration of justice. Their office is the hub of reception of evidence to the Clerk of Court, not to
1.3.1 Adjudicative Support Functions adjudicative and administrative orders, processes the requirement that the Clerk of Court so
1.3.1. Attends all court sessions and concerns. They perform delicate functions as delegated be a member of the Bar. The rule on ex
1 designated custodians of the courts funds, parte reception of evidence was unequivocal on
revenues, records, properties and premises.242 The this point, and required no elaboration. Neither the
1.3.1. Supervises the withdrawal of all records functions of a clerk of court require a higher degree agreement by the parties nor their acquiescence
2 of cases to be heard and the preparation of education as well as understanding of the law could justify its violation.243 It followed that Judge
of the notices of hearings, court's and court processes, that they cannot be delegated Yu could not validly allow the presentation of
calendar, reports, minutes, monthly to first level personnel such as Mr. Santos. The evidence ex parte before Mr. Santos who was a
reports, inventory of cases, index of position requires not only trust and confidence, but mere OIC because he was not a member of the
exhibits, and paging of records of cases; most importantly, education and experience. Bar. Breach of the rule on reception of evidence
Ineluctably, the respondent ignored the clear represented her ignorance of the rule of procedure
1.3.1. Sees to it that all returns of notices are import of CSC Memorandum Circular No. 06-05 in in question, and subjected her to administrative
3 attached to the corresponding evidence designating Mr. Santos as OIC. liability for misconduct.244
properly marked during the hearing as
collected in an exhibit folder; and III. Ordering presentation of ex IV. Allowing criminal proceedings without the
parte evidence before the OIC who was not a actual participation of the public prosecutor
1.3.1. Signs notices of orders and decisions for
member of the Bar
4 service to the parties, release papers of
Anent the charge that she allowed the prosecution
detained prisoners who are acquitted
Judge Yu argued that she did not commit any of criminal actions without the presence of the
and/or who filed their corresponding bail
irregularity in ordering the presentation of ex public prosecutor, Judge Yu retorted that the
bonds duly approved by the presiding
parte evidence before herOIC who was not a complainants were not the proper parties to assail
judge.
member of the Bar because the rule on the her orders; that the accused in People v.
1.3.2 Non-Adjudicative Functions reception of evidence by a member of the Bar was Manduriao had begged to be arraigned without
only directory under Section 9, Rule 30 of counsel after being informed of the penalty for the
1.3.2. Plans, directs, supervises and the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure, which uses offense charged; and that the trial of the case
1 coordinates the activities of all personnel the word may. could proceed without the public prosecutor, b ut
in a branch of a multiple sala for not in the absence of a judge.245
effectiveness and efficiency; Judge Yu's argument does not impress.
1.3.2. Keeps tab of the attendance and We are appalled that a Judge like the respondent
Section 9, Rule 30 of the Revised Rules of Civil would explain herself in such a fundamentally
2 whereabouts of court personnel during
Procedure expressly requires that only clerks of wrong manner.
office hours;
court who are members of the Bar can be
1.3.2. Controls and manages all court records, delegated to receive evidence ex parte, Section 5, Rule 110 of the Rules of
3 exhibits, documents, properties and thus:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary Court states:cralawlawlibrary
supplies; Section 9. Judge to receive evidence; delegation to
clerk of court. - The judge of the court where Section 5. Who must prosecute criminal actions.
1.3.2. Administers oath; the case is pending shall personally receive - All criminal actions commenced by a
4 the evidence to be adduced by the parties. complaint or information shall be prosecuted
However, in default or ex parte hearings, and under the direction and control of the
1.3.2. Issues certificates of appearances and in any case where the parties agree in prosecutor. In case of heavy work schedule
5 clearances; writing, the court may delegate the reception or in the event of lack of public prosecutors,
1.3.2. Drafts/prepares correspondence and of evidence to its clerk of court who is a the private prosecutor may be authorized in
member of the bar. The clerk of court shall have
 39

writing by the Chief of the Prosecution Office In addition, Judge Yu disregarded Section 6, Rule account the capacity of the accused to give such
or the Regional State Prosecution Office to 116 of the Rules of Court when she allowed the consent. We have nothing to show that Judge Yu
prosecute the case subject to the approval of change of plea by the accused in People v. took the pains to enforce the safeguards.
the Court. Once so authorized to prosecute the Manduriao without the assistance of counsel. Judge
criminal action, the private prosecutor shall Yu justified herself by claiming that she had Every judge was expected to know the
continue to prosecute the case up to the end of the apprised the accused of the penalty for the offense fundamental substantive and procedural
trial even in the absence of a public prosecutor, charged, which had then convinced the accused to requirements on arraignment and right to
unless the authority is revoked or otherwise change his plea. counsel.252 We have always been clear about the
withdrawn. right of the accused to counsel under the
The Court cannot accept her justification. In Gamas Constitution, and about the requirements for the
xxxx v. Oco,250 we took the respondent judge to task for arraignment of an accused under the Rules of
conducting an arraignment without the presence of Court. As such, Judge Yu was guilty of gross
Accordingly all criminal actions shall be prosecuted counsel, and observed:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary ignorance of the law, which is ignorance of the law
under the control and direction of the public Section 6 of Rule 116 means when the law is so elementary, and when one
prosecutor.246 The true reason is that the that:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary professes not to know it, or when one acts as if she
prosecution of criminal offenses is always a public [W]hen a defendant appears [at the arraignment] does not know it. Canon 6 of the New Code of
function.247 In People v. Ramos,248 we cautioned without [an] attorney, the court has four important Judicial Conduct prescribes that competence is a
that the exception stated in Section 5, supra, duties to comply with: 1-It must inform the prerequisite to the due performance of the judicial
should be strictly construed, defendant that it[,] is his right to have [an] office. In Judge Yu's case, her competence was
thus:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary attorney before being arraigned; 2-After giving him indispensable to her fair and proper administration
The exception provided in Section 5 must be such information the court must ask him if he of justice in her office. By failing to adhere to and
strictly applied as the prosecution of crime is desires the aid of attorney; 3-If he desires and is implement existing laws, policies, and the basic
the responsibility of officers appointed and unable to employ [an] attorney, the court must rules of procedure, she seriously compromised her
trained for that purpose. The violation of the assign [an] attorney de oficio to defend him; and 4- ability to be an effective
criminal laws is an affront to the People of If the accused desires to procure an attorney of his magistrate.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
the Philippines as a whole and not merely the own the court must grant him a reasonable time
person directly prejudiced, who is merely the therefor. VI
complaining witness. This being so, it is Sending of inappropriate messages was
Compliance with these four duties is mandatory.
necessary that the prosecution be handled by conduct unbecoming of a judicial officer
The only instance when the court can arraign an
persons sldlled in this function instead of
accused without the benefit of counsel is if the
being entrusted to private persons or public Judge Yu denied sending the messages to Judge
accused waives such right and the court, finding
officers with little or no preparation for this San Gaspar-Gito, and countered that it was the
the accused capable, allows him to represent
responsibility. The exception should be allowed latter who first sent the "meal stub" message. She
himself in person. However, to be a valid waiver,
only when the conditions therefor as set forth in maintained that the messages were confidential
the accused must make the waiver voluntarily,
Section 5, Rule 110 of the Rules on Criminal and inadmissible as evidence under the
knowingly, and intelligently. In determining
Procedure have been clearly established. exclusionary rule.
whether the accused can make a valid waiver, the
In Pinote v. Ayco,249 the Court castigated the court must take into account all the relevant
respondent judge for allowing the presentation of circumstances, including the educational Judge Yu's reliance on the exclusionary rule fails.
the defense witnesses in the absence of the public attainment of the accused. In the present case,
prosecutor or the private prosecutor specially however, respondent judge contends that The exclusionary rule, or the fruit of the poisonous
designated for the purpose. A breach of the Rules complainants waived their right to counsel and tree doctrine, presupposes a violation of law on the
of Court like that could not be rectified by insisted on their immediate arraignment. 251 part of the agents of the Govemment,253 and bars
subsequently giving the Prosecution the chance to the admission of evidence obtained in violation of
The justification that the accused had waived his the right against unreasonable searches and
cross-examine the witnesses. Judge Yu committed
right to counsel, and had changed his plea after seizures expressly defined under Section 2, Article
a flagrant error by allowing the direct examination
the respondent Judge had explained to him the III of the Constitution.254 The exclusionary rule
of the defense witness without the public
imposable penalty for the offense did not stand under Section 3(2), Article III of the Constitution
prosecutor, or without the private counsel duly
considering that in order that the waiver by the refers to the prohibition against the issuance of
authorized by the public prosecutor in Criminal
accused of his right to counsel would be valid, the general warrants that encourage law e nforcers to
Case No. M-PSY-09-08592-CR.
trial court must ensure that the accused did so go on fishing expeditions.255
voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently, taking into
 40

Judge Yu did not specify that the State had conclusions by CA Justice Abdulwahid that they did judges shall not use the prestige of such office to
unlawfully intruded into her privacy. The subjects contain sexual insinuations that were ostensibly advance their personal interests.260
of the present inquiry were the messages sent by improper for a Judge to write and send to another.
The submission is well-founded.
her to Judge San Gaspar-Gito. Regardless of the The messages, however they may be read and
mode of their transmission, the ownership of the understood, were at least vexatious and annoying.
In Ladignon v. Garong,261 we discoursed on the
messages pertained to the latter as the recipient. In any case, the sender showed her deep-seated
liability of Judges for using their official letterhead
Considering that it was the latter who granted proclivities reflective of conduct unbecoming of a
to advance their personal interests,
access to such messages, there was no violation of member of the Judiciary.
thus:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Judge Yu's right to privacy. As such, the grant of
x x x In Rosauro v. Kallos, we found the respondent
access by Judge San Gaspar-Gito did not require Finally, the OCA submits that Judge Yu's use of the
Judge liable for violating Rule 2.03 of the Code of
the consent of Judge Yu as the writer.256 To recall, letterhead of her office or court in summoning to a
the Judicial Conduct when he used his stationery
the Court directed the MISO to retrieve the conference Atty. Reynaldo San Gaspar, the brother
for his correspondence on a private transaction
messages for purposes of these cases.257 Based on of Judge San Gaspar-Gito, constituted abuse of
with the complainant and his counsel parties with a
the certification issued by the authorized MISO power, and violated Section 8, Canon 4 of the New
pending case in his court. The Court
personnel,258 the messages were extracted from Code of Judicial Conduct,
held:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
the Yahoo and Facebook accounts of Judge San thus:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
By using his sala's stationery other than for official
Gaspar-Gito with the use of her official workstation. Respondent Judge Yu's use of the letterhead of
purposes, respondent Judge evidently used the
Hence, the exclusionary rule did not apply. Branch 47, MeTC, to invite Atty. Reynaldo San
prestige of his office x x x in violation of Rule 2.03
Gaspar, complainant Judge Gito's brother, to her
of the Code.
Judge Yu denied the imputed significance of the court is no different from the aforecited cases.
messages. Respondent Judge Yu's letter reads as We do not depart from this rule on the use of
follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary official stationary. We clarify, however, that the use
The denial lacked persuasion. In her October 3, Our court is inviting you for a brief conference in of a letterhead should not be considered
2009 message to Judge San Gaspar-Gito's Yahoo our court on August 5, 2011 around 1:00 p.m. to independently of the surrounding circumstances of
account, Judge Yu apologized to Judge San Gaspar- 4:00 p.m. or any available and convenient time and the use-the underlying reason that marks the use
Gito, and expressly clarified that Judge San Gaspar- place for you, to clarify certain matters pertaining with the element of "impropriety" or "appearance
Gito had not sent the "meal stub." Judge Yu even to the two (2) letters both dated July 12, 2010 of of impropriety". In the present case, the
requested Judge San Gaspar-Gito to "forget all your sister Judge Emily L. San Gaspar-Gito. She can respondent Judge crossed the line of propriety
[her] emails ... since June ..."259 This apologetic come with you if she wants to. when he used his letterhead to report a complaint
tone from Judge Yu rendered her denial of involving an alleged violation of church rules and,
responsibility devoid of substance. Your cooperation is highly appreciated. possibly, of Philippine laws. Coming from a judge
with the letter addressed to a foreign reader, such
Moreover, the barrage of messages, most of which Thank you. report could indeed have conveyed the impression
were sent within the same day, makes us believe of official recognition or notice of the reported
It is worthy to note that aside from appropriating
that they had all come from Judge Yu. Although she violation.
the court's letterhead, respondent [J]udge Yu used
insisted that Judge San Gaspar-Gito had sent the
the words "our court" to invite Atty. San Gaspar for
"meal stub," Judge Yu did not offer any plausible The same problem that the use of letterhead
the purpose of clarifying matters relative to the
explanation on the other messages containing poses, occurs in the use of the title of Judge
ongoing controversy between her and complainant
sexual innuendos. or Justice in the correspondence of a member
Judge Gito. Even for an ordinary layman, receiving
of the Judiciary. While the use of the title is
a letter from the court would already create the
It is notable that the Facebook and Yahoo an official designation as well as an honor
impression that his presence in the said venue is
messages started in August 2009 when Judge Yu that an incumbent has earned, a line still has
compulsory. Indeed, the letter to Atty. San Gaspar
was still a public prosecutor. Nonetheless, she to be drawn based on the circumstances of
is a clear illustration of how respondent Judge Yu
could still be disciplined for such acts committed the use of the appellation. While the title can
abuses her power as a member of the bench so
prior to her appointment to the Judiciary because be used for social and other identification
that others would give in to her wishes. She
her internet stalking of Judge San Gaspar-Gito purposes, it cannot be used with the intent
undoubtedly took advantage of her position and
continued after she had herself become a MeTC to use the prestige of his judicial office to
used the same as a leverage against complainant
Judge in Pasay City on January 12, 2010 and lasted gainfully advance his personal, family or
Judge Gito who filed a case against her. This is
until July 2010. other pecuniary interests. Nor can the prestige
patently a violation of Section 8, Canon 4 of the
of a judicial office be used or lent to advance the
New Code of Judicial Conduct which mandates that
Our reading of the messages supports the studied private interests of others, or to convey or permit
 41

others to convey the impression that they are in a 2. In A.M. No. MTJ-13- 5. Gross ignorance of the law for:
special position to influence the judge. (Canon 2, 1836 and A.M. No. MTJ-12-1815, (a) allowing on-the-job trainees and
Rule 2.03 of the Code of Judicial Conduct) To do gross insubordination for her designating an OIC who did not
any of these is to cross into the prohibited field of unwarranted refusal to honor the possess the minimum qualifications
impropriety.262 appointments of court personnel for the position and without
and rejection of the appointment of approval from the Court (OCA IPI
In the letter in question, Judge Yu used the phrase
Ms. Lagman; disrespect toward No. 11-2399-MTJ; (b) ordering the
"our court" in issuing the invitation to Atty. San
the Court for her intemperate and presentation of ex parte evidence
Gaspar. She was obviously intending to use her
disrespectful language in before the OIC despite his not
authority as an incumbent Judge to advance her
characterizing Ms. Tejero-Lopez's being a member of the Bar (OCA
personal interest. Such conduct was reprehensible
valid appointment as void ab IPI No. 11-2378-MTJ); (c) allowing
because she thereby breached Section 4 of Canon
initio and a big joke; and grave criminal proceedings to be
1 and Section 1 of Canon 4 of the New Code of
abuse of conducted without the actual
Judicial Conduct, viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
authority and oppression for participation of the public
CANON 1
issuing verbal threats of filing prosecutor (A.M. No. MTJ-12-
INDEPENDENCE
administrative, civil and criminal 1815); and (d) authorizing the
charges against Ms. Tejero-Lopez change of plea by the accused
xxxx
unless the latter withdrew her without the assistance of counsel;
application;ChanRoblesVirtualawlib and
SECTION. 4. Judges shall not allow family, social, or
rary
other relationships to influence judicial conduct or
judgment. The prestige of judicial office shall not 6. In A.M. No. MTJ-13-1821,
be used or lent to advance the private interests of 3. In OCA IPI No. 11-2378- conduct unbecoming of a
others, nor convey or permit others to convey the MTJ and OCA IPI No. 12-2456- judicial officer for sending
impression that they are in a special position to MTJ, grave abuse of authority inappropriate messages with
influence the judge.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary and abuse of court sexual undertones to a fellow
processes for issuing the show- female Judge, and for using the
cause order against her fellow official letterhead of her judicial
CANON 4
Judges and court personnel; office in summoning a lawyer to a
PROPRIETY
and gross misconduct conference.
amounting to violation of
Propriety and the appearance of propriety are
the Code of Judicial Conduct for In view of the totality of the serious infractions
essential to the performance of all the activities of
not disqualifying herself in acting committed by Judge Yu, the OCA recommended her
a judge.
on the supposedly contumacious dismissal from the service with the following
conduct of her fellow Judges and ratiocination, to wit:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
SECTION 1. Judges shall avoid impropriety and the
concerned court personnel in In all the cases subject of this consolidated
appearance of impropriety in all of their activities.
copying the records of her administrative matters, the totality of the
court;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary infractions committed by Judge Yu, i.e.. Gross
xxxx
Ignorance of the Law, Insubordination and Refusal
VII 4. In OCA IPI No. 12-2398-MTJ, to Perform Official Functions, Gross Misconduct
The Penalties refusal to perform official Amounting to Violation of the Code of Judicial
functions and oppression for Conduct, Grave Abuse of Authority, Oppression,
In fine, the administrative offenses Judge Yu refusing to sign the application for and Conduct Unbecoming a Judge, underscores the
committed were the following, to leave of absence despite the fact that she is not fit to occupy the position of a
wit:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary employee having complied with the judge. She has done more than enough harm to
requirements, and for doing so in the reputation of the judiciary and the
1. In A.M. No. MTJ-12-1823, retaliation for the employee's administration of justice, exacerbated by the
insubordination and gross having joined as signatory of oppression she has inflicted on her subordinates
misconduct for her non- administrative complaint filed and her utter disrespect for her superiors.
compliance with A.O. No. 19- against
2011;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary her;ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary In similar instances, the Supreme Court did not
 42

hesitate to impose upon erring judges the ultimate liability. The administration of justice cannot be her open disrespect towards her fellow judges, her
penalty of dismissal from service as they have entrusted to one like her who would readily ignore blatant abuse of the powers appurtenant to her
indeed fallen short of the standards required of and disregard the laws and policies enacted by the judicial office, and her penchant for threatening the
them as dispensers of justice. These same Court to guarantee justice and fairness for defenseless with legal actions to make them
standards must be required of respondent Judge all.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary submit to her will, we should also be imposing the
Yu, failing which she must be meted the penalty of penalty of disbarment. The object
dismissal from the service. 263 VIII of disbarment is not so much to punish the
Disbarment Cannot Be Meted attorney herself as it is to safeguard the
The recommendation of the OCA is well-taken.
Without Due Process administration of justice, the courts and the public
from the misconduct of officers of the court.
Judge Yu unquestionably committed several gross
The foregoing findings may already warrant Judge Also, disbarment seeks to remove from the Law
and serious administrative offenses ranging from
Yu's disbarment. Profession attorneys who have disregarded their I.
gross misconduct and gross ignorance264 to the
awyer's Oath and thereby proved themselves unfit
lesser offense of conduct unbecoming of a judicial
A.M. No. 02-9-02-SC, dated September 17, 2002 to continue discharging the trust and respect given
officer.265 Under Section 8, Rule 140 of the Rules of
and entitled Re: Automatic Conversion of Some to them as members of the Bar.268
Court, either gross misconduct or gross
ignorance of the law is punished by either: (1) Administrative Cases Against Justices of the Court
of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan; Judges of The administrative charges against respondent
dismissal from the service, forfeiture of benefits,
Regular and Special Courts; and Court Officials Judge Yu based on grounds that were also grounds
and disqualification from reinstatement to any
Who are Lawyers as Disciplinary Proceedings for disciplinary actions against members of the Bar
public office; or (2) suspension from office without
Against Them Both as Such Officials and as could easily be treated as justifiable disciplinary
salary and other benefits for more than three
Members of the Philippine Bar,267 relevantly initiatives against her as a member of the Bar. This
months but not exceeding six months; or (3) fine of
states:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary treatment is explained by the fact that her
more than P20,000.00 but not exceeding
Some administrative cases against Justices of the membership in the Bar was an integral aspect of
P40,000.00.266 Under Section 46B, Rule 10 of
Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan; judges of her qualification for judgeship. Also, her moral and
the Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the
regular and special courts; and court officials who actual unfitness to remain as a Judge, as found in
Civil Service, either oppression or gross
are lawyers are based on grounds which are these cases, reflected her indelible unfitness to
insubordination - also considered grave offenses
likewise grounds for the disciplinary action of remain as a member of the Bar. At the very least, a
- is punishable with suspension from office for a
members of the Bar for violation of the Lawyer's Judge like her who disobeyed the basic rules of
period ranging from six months and one day to one
Oath, the Code of Professional Responsibility, and judicial conduct should not remain as a member of
year for the first offense, and dismissal from the
the Canons of Professional Ethics, or for such other the Bar because she had thereby also violated her
service for the second offense. Under Section 11,
forms of breaches of conduct that have been Lawyer's Oath.269
Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, conduct
unbecoming of a judicial officer merits either: traditionally recognized as grounds for the
discipline of lawyers. Indeed, respondent Judge Yu's violation of the
(1) fine of not less than P1,000.00 but not
fundamental tenets of judicial conduct embodied in
exceeding P10,000.00; or (2) censure; or (3)
In any of the foregoing instances, the the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
reprimand; or (4) admonition with warning.
administrative case shall also be considered Judiciary would constitute a breach of the following
a disciplinary action against the respondent canons of the Code of Professional Responsibility,
The grossness and severity of her offenses taken
Justice, judge or court official concerned as a to wit:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
together demonstrated Judge Yu's unfitness and
member of the Bar. The respondent may CANON 1 - A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE
incompetence to further discharge the office and
forthwith be required to comment on the CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND AND
duties of a Judge. Her arrogance and
complaint and show cause why he should not PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND FOR LEGAL
insubordination in challenging A.O. No. 19-2011,
also be suspended, disbarred or otherwise PROCESSES.
and her unyielding rejection of the appointments of
disciplinarily sanctioned aa member of the Rule 1.02 - A lawyer shall not counsel or abet
court personnel constituted gross insubordination
Bar. Judgment in both respects may be activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
and gross misconduct, and warranted her
incorporated in one decision or resolution. lessening confidence in the legal system.
immediate dismissal from the Judiciary. Her
requiring her fellow Judges to submit to her Under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, CANON 6 THESE CANONS SHALL APPLY TO
authority by virtue of her showcause order, an attorney may be disbarred on the ground LAWYERS IN GOVERNMENT SERVICE IN THE
whereby she revealed her utter disrespect towards of gross misconduct and willful disobedience DISCHARGE OF THEIR OFFICIAL TASKS.
and disdain for them, as well as her conduct of any lawful order of a superior court. Given Rule 6.02 - A lawyer in the government service
unbecoming of a judicial officer aggravated her her wanton defiance of the Court's own directives, shall not use his public position to promote or
 43

advance his private interests, nor allow the latter done now in these consolidated cases. The Case
to interfere with his public duties.
WHEREFORE, the Before the Court is an administrative complaint
CANON 11 - A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND
Court FINDS and PRONOUNCES respondent JUD filed by Adelpha E. Malabed (complainant) against
MAINTAIN THE RESPECT DUE TO THE COURTS AND
GE ELIZA B. YU GUILTY of GROSS Atty. Meljohn B. De la Peña (respondent) for
TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST ON
INSUBORDINATION; GROSS IGNORANCE OF dishonesty and grave
SIMILAR CONDUCT BY OTHERS.
THE LAW; GROSS MISCONDUCT; GRAVE misconduct.chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Rule 11.03 - A lawyer shall abstain from
ABUSE OF AUTHORITY;
scandalous, offensive or menacing language or
OPPRESSION; and CONDUCT UNBECOMING OF The Facts
behavior before the Courts.
A JUDICIAL OFFICIAL; and, ACCORDINGLY,
The Court does not take lightly the ramifications of DISMISSES her from the service EFFECTIVE In her Complaint1 dated 7 August 2007,
Judge Yu's misbehavior and misconduct as a IMMEDIATELY, with FORFEITURE OF ALL HER complainant charged respondent with dishonesty
judicial officer. By penalizing her with the supreme BENEFITS, except accrued leave credits, and for "deliberately and repeatedly making falsehood"
penalty of dismissal from the service, she should further DISQUALIFIES her from.reinstatement or that "misled the Court." First, complainant claimed
not anymore be allowed to remain a member of appointment to any public office or employment, that the Certificate to File Action in the complaint
the Law Profession. including to one in any government-owned or filed by respondent refers to a different complaint,
government-controlled corporations. that is the complaint filed by complainant's brother
However, this rule of fusing the dismissal of a against Fortunato Jadulco. In effect, there was no
Judge with disbarment does not in any way Respondent JUDGE ELIZA B. YU is directed to Certificate to File Action, which is required for the
dispense with or set aside the respondent's right to show cause in writing within ten (10) days from filing of a civil action, in the complaint filed by
due process. As such, her disbarment as an notice why she should not be disbarred for respondent on behalf of his client Fortunato
offshoot of A.M. No. 02-9-02-SC without requiring violation of the Lawyer's Oath, the Code of Jadulco.
her to comment on the disbarment would be Professional Responsibility, and the Canons of
violative of her right to due process. To accord due Professional Ethics as outlined herein. Second, complainant alleged that respondent did
process to her, therefore, she should first be not furnish her counsel with a copy of the free
afforded the opportunity to defend her professional Let a copy of this decision be furnished to the patent covered by Original Certificate of Title (OCT)
standing as a lawyer before the Court would Office of the Court Administrator for its information No. 1730, but respondent forwarded a copy to the
determine whether or not to disbar and guidance. Court of Appeals. Complainant claimed that she
her.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary could not properly defend herself without a copy of
SO ORDERED.ChanRoblesVirtu the title. She further claimed that the title
IX presented by respondent was fabricated. To
Final Word support such claim, complainant presented
IV. Dilemmas of Lawyers Certifications from the Department of Environment
The Court will not hesitate to impose the extreme A. Conflict of Interest and Natural Resources (DENR) and the Registry of
penalty on any judicial officer who has fallen short 1. Notarization different from Deeds in Naval, Biliran, allegedly confirming that
of the responsibilities of her worthy office. Any representation there is no file in their offices of OCT No. 1730.
conduct that violates the norms of public
accountability and diminishes the faith of the
people in the judicial system must be Complainant also alleged that respondent was
condemned.270 No act or omission by a Judge or EN BANC guilty of conflict of interest when he represented
Justice that falls short of the exacting norms of the occupants of the lot owned by complainant's
holding the public office of dispensing justice can family, who previously donated a parcel of land to
A.C. No. 7594, February 09, 2016
be condoned, for the most important thing for the Roman Catholic Church, which deed of
every Judge or Justice is to preserve the people's donation respondent notarized.
faith and confidence in the Judiciary as well as in ADELPHA E. MALABED, Complainant, v. ATTY.
the individuals who dispense justice. The image of MELJOHN B. DE LA PEÑA, Respondent. Complainant further accused respondent of
the Judiciary must remain unsullied by the conniving with Regional Trial Court (RTC), Naval,
misconduct of its officials. The Court will not shirk DECISION Biliran, Branch 16 Judge Enrique C. Asis, who was
from its duty of removing from the Bench any his former client in an administrative case, to rule
Judge or Justice who has stained the integrity and in his clients' favor. Complainant narrated the
CARPIO, J.:
dignity of the Judiciary.271 This is what must be outcomes in the "cases of Estrellers which were
 44

filed in the [Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC)] only temporary, and he had not received any positions of Associate Dean and Professor of the
and reversed by the RTC, in the exercise of its salary except honorarium. Respondent stated that NIT - University of Eastern Philippines College of
appellate jurisdiction to favor respondent x x x and he even furnished the Office of the Bar Confidant Law and receiving salaries therefor, in violation of
his client[s] x x x." (OBC) and the MCLE Office a copy of his the accessory penalty of prohibition on
designation as Associate Dean, and since there reemployment in any government office as a result
Complainant charged respondent with grave were no objections, he proceeded to perform the of his dismissal as a judge.
misconduct when he defied the accessory penalty functions appurtenant thereto. He likewise
of his dismissal as a judge. Respondent worked as submitted an affidavit from Edgardo Garcia, The IBP Commissioner recommended that
Associate Dean and Professor of the Naval Institute complainant in the administrative case against respondent be suspended from the practice of law
of Technology (NIT) - University of Eastern him, who interposed no objection to his petition for for one year.8chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Philippines College of Law, which is a government judicial clemency filed before this Court.
institution, and received salaries therefor, in On 28 October 2011, the IBP Board of Governors
violation of the accessory penalty of dismissal Complainant filed a Reply-Affidavit4 on 22 January issued a Resolution adopting the IBP
which is his perpetual disqualification from 2008. Respondent filed a Rejoinder to Reply5 on 20 Commissioner's recommendation. The Resolution
reemployment in any government office. February 2008. Complainant filed a Surrejoinder to reads:   
the Rejoinder to Reply6 on 20 February 2008. All RESOLUTION NO. XX-2011-137
In his Comment2 dated 16 December 2007, these submissions basically reiterated the Adm. Case No. 7594
respondent basically denied the charges against respective arguments of the parties and denied Adelpha E. Malabed vs. Atty. Meljohn De La Peña
him. Respondent alleged that "the [Certificate to each other's
File Action] he used when he filed Civil Case No. allegations.chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary RESOLVED to ADOPT and APPROVE, as it is hereby
[B-] 1118 for quieting of title before the Regional unanimously ADOPTED and APPROVED the Report
Trial Court, Branch 16, Naval, Biliran was the The Ruling of the IBP and Recommendation of the Investigating
certification of Lupon Chairman, the late Rodulfo Commissioner in the above-entitled case, herein
Catigbe, issued on May 9, In his Report and Recommendation,7 Integrated Bar made part of this Resolution as Annex "A" and
2001."3chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary of the Philippines (IBP) Commissioner Norberto B. finding the recommendation fully supported by the
Ruiz noted the foul language used by respondent in evidence on record and the applicable laws and
Respondent also claimed that the free patent title his pleadings submitted before the IBP. rules, and finding Respondent guilty of dishonesty
was attached to the folio of the records in Civil Respondent described complainant's counsel as and grave misconduct, Atty. Meljohn B. De La Peña
Case No. B-1118 and he furnished a copy of the "silahis" and accused complainant of "cohabiting is hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for
same to complainant's counsel. Assuming opposing with a married man x x x before the wife of that one (1) year.9chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
counsel was not furnished, respondent wondered married man died." According to the IBP The Issue
why he raised this matter only upon filing of the Commissioner, such offensive language "[is a]
instant complaint. clear manifestation[] of respondent's gross The sole issue in this case is whether respondent is
misconduct that seriously affect his standing and guilty of dishonesty and grave
Respondent argued that notarization of the deed of character as an officer of the court." misconduct.chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
donation had no relation to the case filed against
the occupants of the lot. Respondent likewise With respect to the charges of dishonesty and
stressed that the matter regarding Judge Asis's The Ruling of the Court
grave misconduct, the IBP Commissioner found
rulings favorable to his clients should be addressed that respondent is guilty of the same "as evidenced
to Judge Asis himself. Respondent is guilty of gross misconduct.
by the numerous documents attached by
complainant in all the pleadings she has
As regards the charge of grave misconduct for Using foul language in pleadings
submitted." Respondent committed acts of
defying the accessory penalty of dismissal from the dishonesty and grave misconduct (1) for using a
service, respondent admitted that he accepted the In his Comment, respondent called complainant's
Certificate to File Action which was used in a
positions of Associate Dean and Professor of the counsel "silahis by nature and complexion"10 and
complaint filed by complainant's brother Conrado
NIT - University of Eastern Philippines College of accused complainant of "cohabiting with a married
Estreller against Fortunato Jadulco, who is
Law, which is a government institution. However, man x x x before the wife of that married man
respondent's client; (2) for not furnishing
respondent countered that he was no longer died."11 In his Rejoinder, respondent maintained
complainant's counsel with a copy of the free
connected with the NIT College of Law; and thus, that such language is not foul, but a "dissertation
patent covered by OCT No. 1730 which was
this issue had become moot. Respondent further of truth designed to debunk complainant's and her
attached to the Comment respondent filed with the
claimed that his designation as Assistant Dean was counsel's credibility in filing the administrative
Court of Appeals; and (3) for accepting the
 45

case."12chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary title in Civil Case No. B-1118 was filed with the RTC outside the scope of this administrative case,
on 18 October 2000. The Certificate of absent any clear and convincing proof that
We are not convinced. Aside from such language Endorsement, which respondent claimed was the respondent himself orchestrated such fabrication.
being inappropriate, it is irrelevant to the certificate to file action he used in Civil Case No. B- The DENR and Registry of Deeds certifications do
resolution of this case. While respondent is entitled 1118, was issued on 9 May 2001, or after the filing not prove that respondent manufactured OCT No.
and very much expected to defend himself with of the complaint on 18 October 2000. It is apparent 1730. Such documents merely confirm that OCT
vigor, he must refrain from using improper that the Certificate of Endorsement did not exist No. 1730 does not exist in their official
language in his pleadings. In Saberon v. yet when the complaint in Civil Case No. B-1118 records.chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Larong,13 we stated:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary was filed. In other words, there is no truth to
x x x [W]hile a lawyer is entitled to present his case respondent's allegation that the subject matter of Conflict of interest
with vigor and courage, such enthusiasm does not Civil Case No. B-1118 was brought before the
justify the use of offensive and abusive language. Lupon Tagapamayapa and that a certificate to file Complainant accuses respondent of conflict of
Language abounds with countless possibilities for action was issued prior to the filing of the interest when the latter allegedly notarized a deed
one to be emphatic but respectful, convincing but complaint. Clearly, respondent misrepresented that of donation of a parcel of land executed by
not derogatory, illuminating but not offensive. he filed a certificate to file action when there was complainant's family in favor of the Roman Catholic
none, which act violated Canon 10, Rule 10.01, and Church. Eventually, respondent allegedly sought to
On many occasions, the Court has reminded Rule 10.02 of the Code of Professional litigate as counsel for the opposing parties who are
members of the Bar to abstain from all offensive Responsibility, to wit:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary occupants in the lot owned by complainant's
personality and to advance no fact prejudicial to CANON 10. A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS family.
the honor or reputation of a party or witness, AND GOOD FAITH TO THE COURT.
unless required by the justice of the cause with Suffice to state that notarization is different from
which he is charged. In keeping with the dignity of Rule 10.01 - A lawyer shall not do any falsehood; representation. A notary public simply performs the
the legal profession, a lawyers language even in nor consent to the doing of any in court; nor shall notarial acts authorized by the Rules on Notarial
his pleadings must be dignified. he mislead, or allow the Court to be misled by any Practice, namely, acknowledgments, oaths and
artifice. affirmations, jurats, signature witnessings, and
For using improper language in his pleadings,
respondent violated Rule 8.01 of Canon 8 of the copy certifications. Legal representation, on the
Rule 10.02 - A lawyer shall not knowingly misquote other hand, refers to the act of assisting a party as
Code of Professional Responsibility which
or misrepresent the contents of a paper, x x x. counsel in a court action.
states:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Rule 8.01 - A lawyer shall not, in his professional Failure to furnish opposing counsel with copy
dealings, use language which is abusive, offensive of title As regards complainant's serious accusations
or otherwise improper. against respondent of conniving with Judge Asis
With regard to respondent's alleged act of not and conspiring with the latter to render judgments
Non-submission of certificate to file action favorable to respondent's clients, such are bare
furnishing complainant's counsel with a copy of the
free patent title, we find that it does not constitute allegations, without any proof. Complainant simply
The submission of the certificate to file action, narrated the outcomes of the proceedings in Civil
dishonesty.
which evidences the non-conciliation between the Case Nos. 1017, 860 and 973, which were filed by
parties in the barangay, is a pre-condition for the the Estrellers in the MCTC and reversed by the
Admittedly, the Court of Appeals was furnished a
filing of a complaint in court.14 Complainant claims RTC. Complainant conveniently failed to present
copy of OCT No. 1730, which means that a copy of
that there is no such certificate in the complaint any concrete evidence proving her grave
the title exists. There is no showing that
filed by respondent on behalf of Fortunato Jadulco, accusation of conspiracy between respondent and
respondent deliberately did not furnish
et al. Instead, what respondent submitted was the Judge Asis. Moreover, charges of bias and partiality
complainant's counsel with a copy of the title. The
certificate to file action in the complaint filed by on the part of the presiding judge should be filed
remedy of complainant should have been to file
complainant's brother, Conrado Estreller, against against the judge, and not against the counsel
with the Court of Appeals a motion to furnish
Fortunato Jadulco.15chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary allegedly favored by the
complainant or counsel with a copy of the title so
she and her counsel could examine the same. judge.chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Respondent counters that what he used "when he
filed Civil Case No. [B-] 1118 for Quieting of Title, Violation of prohibition on reemployment in
Moreover, whether OCT No. 1730 is fabricated, as
etc. x x x was the certification x x x issued on May government office
complainant alleges, is a question of fact
9, 2001, x x x."
demanding an examination of the parties'
respective evidence. Obviously, this matter falls In our 9 February 1994 Resolution,16 we dismissed
Based on the records, the complaint for quieting of respondent as Acting Judge of Municipal Trial Court
 46

of Naval, Leyte and Presiding Judge of the order," the Court held that failure to comply with De la Peña GUILTY of gross misconduct and
Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Caibiran-Culaba, Court directives constitutes gross misconduct, accordingly SUSPEND him from the practice of law
Leyte for partiality, with prejudice to insubordination or disrespect which merits a for two (2) years with a WARNING that the
reappointment to any public office, including lawyer's suspension or even commission of the same or similar act or acts shall
government-owned or controlled corporations. disbarment.chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary be dealt with more severely.

There is no dispute that respondent knows full well Gross Misconduct Let copies of this Decision be furnished the
the consequences of his dismissal as a judge, one Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the Office of the
of which is the accessory penalty of perpetual In sum, respondent committed gross misconduct Bar Confidant, and all courts in the Philippines for
disqualification from reemployment in any for (1) misrepresenting that he submitted a their information and guidance.
government office, including government-owned or certificate to file action issued by the Lupon
controlled corporations. Despite being disqualified, Tagapamayapa when in fact there was none prior SO ORDERED
respondent accepted the positions of Associate to the institution of the civil action of his client,
Dean and Professor of NIT-College of Law, a Fortunato Jadulco, in Civil Case No. B-1118; (2) EN BANC
government institution, and received using improper language in his pleadings; and (3)
compensation therefor. defying willfully the Court's prohibition on
A.C. No. 5482               February 10, 2015
reemployment in any government office as
Respondent alleges that his designation was only accessory penalty of his dismissal as a judge.
temporary, and "no fixed salary was attached to Gross misconduct is defined as "improper or wrong JIMMY ANUDON and JUANITA
his designation except for honorarium." conduct, the transgression of some established and ANUDON, Complainants,
Respondent also claims that he furnished a copy of definite rule of action, a forbidden act, a dereliction vs.
his designation to the OBC and MCLE office as a of duty, willful in character, and implies a wrongful ATTY. ARTURO B. CEFRA, Respondent.
"gesture of x x x respect, courtesy and approval intent and not a mere error in
from the Supreme Court." He further avers that judgment."19chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary RESOLUTION
complainant in the administrative case against him
(as a judge) posed no objection to his petition for Under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court,
clemency. LEONEN, J.:
gross misconduct is a ground for disbarment or
suspension from the practice of law.
Respondent's contentions are untenable. The SEC. 27. Disbarment or suspension of attorneys by Whoever acts as Notary Public must ensure that
prohibition on reemployment does not distinguish Supreme Court; grounds therefor. — A member of the parties executing the document be present.
between permanent and temporary appointments. the bar may be disbarred or suspended from his Otherwise, their participation with respect to the
Hence, that his designation was only temporary office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any document cannot be acknowledged. Notarization of
does not absolve him from liability. Further, deceit, malpractice, or other gross misconduct in a document in the absence of the parties is a
furnishing a copy of his designation to the OBC and such office, grossly immoral conduct, or by reason breach of duty.
MCLE office does not in any way extinguish his of his conviction of a crime involving moral
permanent disqualification from reemployment in a turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he Complainants Jimmy Anudon (Jimmy) and Juanita
government office. Neither does the fact that is required to take before admission to practice, or Anudon (Juanita) are brother- and sister-in-
complainant in his previous administrative case did for a willful disobedience of any lawful order of a law.1 Complainants and Jimmy’s brothers and sister
not object to his petition for clemency. superior court, or for corruptly or willfully co-own a 4,446-square-meter parcel of land
appearing as an attorney for a party to a case located in Sison, Pangasinan covered by Transfer
In view of his disqualification from reemployment without authority so to do. The practice of soliciting Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 69244. 2 Respondent
in any government office, respondent should have cases at law for the purpose of gain, either Atty. Arturo B. Cefra (Atty. Cefra) is a distant
declined from accepting the designation and personally or through paid agents or brokers, relative of Jimmy and Juanita. He was admitted to
desisted from performing the functions of such constitutes malpractice. the bar in 1996. He practices law and provides
positions.17 Clearly, respondent knowingly defied services as notary public in the Municipality of
the prohibition on reemployment in a public office In view of respondent's repeated gross misconduct,
we increase the IBP's recommended penalty to Sison, Pangasinan.3
imposed upon him by the Court.
suspension from the practice of law for two (2)
In Santeco v. Avance,18 where respondent lawyer years. On August 12, 1998, Atty. Cefra notarized a Deed
"willfully disobeyed this Court when she continued of Absolute Sale4 over a land covered by TCT No.
her law practice despite the five-year suspension WHEREFORE, we find respondent Atty. Meljohn B. 69244. The names of Johnny Anudon (Johnny),
 47

Alfonso Anudon (Alfonso), Benita Anudon-Esguerra In addition to the forgery of their signatures, Jimmy Paran’s relatives, Viola Carantes and Lita Paran,
(Benita), and complainants Jimmy and Juanita and Juanita stated that it was physically impossible brought the Deed of Absolute Sale tothe residences
appeared as vendors, while the name of Celino for their brothers and sister, Johnny, Alfonso, and of Jimmy, Juanita, and Johnny’s son, Loejan Anudon
Paran, Jr. (Paran) appeared as the vendee. 5 Benita, to sign the Deed of Absolute Sale. Johnny (Loejan) to have the document signed.23 Viola
and Benita were in the United States on the day Carantes and Lita Paran informed Atty. Cefra that
Jimmy and Juanita claimed that the Deed of the Deed of Absolute Sale was executed, while they witnessed Jimmy, Juanita, and Loejan sign the
Absolute Sale was falsified. They alleged that they Alfonso was in Cavite.9 document.24 Loejan affixed the signatures for his
did not sign the Deed of Absolute Sale. Moreover, father, Johnny, and his uncleand aunt, Alfonso and
they did not sign it before Atty. Cefra.6 The Due to the forgery of the Deed of Absolute Sale, Benita.25
National Bureau of Investigation’s Questioned the Assistant Provincial Prosecutor, with Jimmy and
Documents Division certified that Jimmy and Juanita as witnesses, filed a case of falsification of Atty. Cefra admitted knowing that Loejan affixed
Juanita’s signatures were forged. 7 This is contrary public document against Atty. Cefra and Paran.10 the signatures of Johnny, Alfonso, and Benita "with
to Atty. Cefra’s acknowledgment over the the full knowledge and permission of the
document, which states: Jimmy and Juanita also initiated a disciplinary three[.]"26 He allowed this on the basis of his belief
action by filing a Complaint11 with this court on that this was justified since Loejan needed the
BEFORE ME, a Notary Public for and in the August 6, 2001 questioning the propriety of Atty. proceeds of the sale for the amputation of his
Municipality of Sison, personally appeared JOHNNY Cefra’s conduct as lawyer and notary public. mother’s leg.27 It clearly appeared that Loejan
ANUDON, ALFONSO ANUDON, BENITA ESGUERRA, forged the three (3) signatures. Loejan did not
JIMMY ANUDON and JUANITA ANUDON, who have formal authorization to sign on behalf of his
In the Resolution12 dated September 19, 2001, this father, uncle, and aunt.
exhibited to me their respective Community Tax court required Atty. Cefra to comment on the
Certificates as above-indicated, known to me and administrative complaint. Atty. Cefra filed multiple
known to be the same persons who executed the Motions for Extension of Time,13 which this court According to Atty. Cefra, he "notarized the
foregoing Deed of Absolute Sale and acknowledged granted.14 Despite the allowance for extension of questioned document in good faith, trusting in
to me that the same is their free act and voluntary time, Atty. Cefra did not comply with this court’s [complainants’] words and pronouncements; with
deed. order to file a Comment. This court fined Atty. the only purpose of helping them out legally and
Cefra in the Resolutions dated March 12, financially[.]"28
This instrument, which refers to a Deed of Absolute 200315 and November 17, 2003.16 In both
Sale over a parcel of lot, consists of two pages and Resolutions, this court directed Atty. Cefra to file After receiving Atty. Cefra’s Comment, this court
have [sic] been signed by the parties and the his Comment.17 referred the case to the Integrated Bar of the
respective witnesses on each and every page Philippines for investigation, report, and
thereof. Atty. Cefra’s continued refusal to file his Comment recommendation.29
caused this court to order his arrest and
WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL THIS 12TH DAY OF commitment.18 Thus, the National Bureau of During the investigation of the Integrated Bar of
AUGUST, 1998. Investigation’s agents arrested Atty. Cefra at his the Philippines, Juanita appeared without any
residence on January 14, 2007.19 counsel and manifested her intention to solicit the
(Sgd.) services of the Public Attorney’s Office.30 She also
Atty. Cefra finally submitted his Comment20 on informed the Investigating Commissioner that her
January 15, 2008. co-complainant, Jimmy, had already passed
ARTURO B. CEFRA away.31 The mandatory conference was held on
February 20, 2009.32 On the same day, the
Notary Public In his defense, Atty. Cefra stated that Jimmy and Investigating Commissioner issued an
Juanita were aware of the sale of the property Order33 terminating the mandatory conference and
covered by TCT No. 69244. He narrated that on July requiring the parties to submit their respective
Until December 31, 1999 10, 1998, Juanita and Jimmy’s wife Helen Anudon Position Papers.
went to his residence to consult him on how they
PTR NO. 2461164; 1-7-98 could sell the land covered by TCT No. 69244 to
Paran.21 Atty. Cefra claimed that he assisted in the The Investigating Commissioner found that Atty.
preparation of the documents for the sale, which Cefra’s conduct in notarizing the Deed of Absolute
SISON, PANGASINAN8 Sale violated the Notarial Law.34 In addition, Atty.
included the deed of sale and the acknowledgment
receipts for payment.22 On August 13, 1998, Cefra violated Canon 1 of the Code of Professional
 48

Responsibility,35 which requires that "[a]lawyer The notarization of documents ensures the was voluntarily affixed by him for the
shall uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the authenticity and reliability of a document. As this purposes stated in the instrument or
land and promote respect for law and legal court previously explained: document, declares that he has executed
processes." Hence, the Investigating Commissioner the instrument or document as his free and
recommended the revocation of Atty. Cefra’s Notarization of a private document converts such voluntary act and deed, and, if he acts in a
notarial commission and the disqualification of document into a public one, and renders it particular representative capacity, that he
Atty. Cefra from reappointment as notary public for admissible in court without further proof of its has the authority to sign in that capacity.
two (2) years. The Investigating Commissioner also authenticity. Courts, administrative agencies and (Emphasis supplied)
recommended the penalty of suspension from the the public at large must be able to rely upon the
practice of law for six (6) months.36 acknowledgment executed by a notary public and Rule IV, Section 2(b) states further:
appended to a private instrument. Notarization is
In Resolution No. XIX-2011-24937 dated May 14, not an empty routine; to the contrary, it engages SEC. 2. Prohibitions.—. . .
2011, the Board of Governors of the Integrated Bar public interest in a substantial degree and the
of the Philippines resolved to adopt the report and protection of that interest requires preventing
recommendation of the Investigating those who are not qualified or authorized to act as (b) A person shall not perform a notarial act if the
Commissioner.38 However, they recommended that notaries public from imposing upon the public and person involved as signatory to the instrument or
the penalty imposed on Atty. Cefra be modifed: the courts and administrative offices document—
generally.45 (Citation omitted)
Atty. Arturo B. Cefra is hereby SUSPENDED from (1) is not in the notary’s presence personally at the
the practice of law for one (1) year and immediate The earliest law on notarization is Act No. time of the notarization; and
Revocation of his Notarial Commission and 2103.46 This law refers specifically to the
Perpetual Disqualification from re-appointment as acknowledgment and authentication of instruments (2) is not personally known to the notary public or
Notary Public.39 (Emphasis in the original) and documents. Section 1(a) of this law states that otherwise identified by the notary public through
an acknowledgment "shall be made before a competent evidence of identity as defined by these
Atty. Cefra filed a Motion for notary public or an officer duly authorized by law of Rules.
Reconsideration,40 asking the Integrated Bar of the the country to take acknowledgments of
Philippines to temper the recommended penalty instruments or documents in the place where the The rules require the notary public to assess
against him.41 In Resolution No. XXI-2014- act is done." whether the person executing the document
9342 dated March 21, 2014, the Board of Governors voluntarily affixes his or her signature. Without
of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines proposed to The 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice reiterates that physical presence, the notary public will not be
lower its original penalty against Atty. Cefra: acknowledgments require the affiant to appear in able to properly execute his or her duty under the
person before the notary public. Rule II, Section 1 law. In Gamido v. New Bilibid Prisons Officials, 47 we
Atty. Arturo B. Cefra [is] SUSPENDED from the states: stated that "[i]t is obvious that the party
practice of law for one (1) year, his notarial acknowledging must . . . appear before the notary
practice, if presently existing, immediately SECTION 1. Acknowledgment.—"Acknowledgment" public[.]"48 Furthermore, this court pronounced
REVOKED and his notarial practice SUSPENDED for refers to an act in which an individual on a single that:
two (2) years.43 (Emphasis in the original) occasion:
[a] document should not be notarized unless the
On September 9, 2014, the Office of the Bar (a) appears in person before the notary persons who are executing it are the very same
Confidant reported that both parties no longer filed public and presents and integrally ones who are personally appearing before the
a Petition for Review of Resolution No. XXI-2014- complete instrument or document; notary public. The affiants should be present to
93.44 attest to the truth of the contents of the document
and to enable the notary to verify the genuineness
(b) is attested to be personally known to of their signature. Notaries public are enjoined
We agree and adopt the findings of fact of the the notary public or identified by the notary from notarizing a fictitious or spurious document.
Investigating Commissioner. Respondent Atty. public through competent evidence of In fact, it is their duty to demand that the
Arturo B. Cefra violated the Notarial Law and the identity as defined by these Rules; and document presented to them for notarization be
Code of Professional Responsibility in notarizing a signed in their presence. Their function is, among
document without requiring the presence of the (c) represents to the notary public that the others, to guard against illegal deeds.49 (Citations
affiants. signature on the instrument or document omitted)
 49

Notarization is the act that ensures the public that Aside from Atty. Cefra’s violation of his duty as a We thus find that the penalty recommended
the provisions in the document express the true notary public, Atty. Cefra is also guilty of violating against Atty. Cefra should be modified to take into
agreement between the parties. Transgressing the Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. account all his acts of misconduct.
rules on notarial practice sacrifices the integrity of This canon requires "[a] lawyer [to] uphold the
notarized documents. It is the notary public who Constitution, obey the laws of the land and WHEREFORE, this court finds respondent Atty.
assures that the parties appearing in the document promote respect for law and legal processes." He Arturo B. Cefra GUILTY of notarizing the Deed of
are the same parties who executed it. This cannot contumaciously delayed compliance with this Absolute Sale dated August 12, 1998 in the
be achieved if the parties are not physically court’s order to file a Comment. As early as absence of the affiants, as well as failure to comply
present before the notary public acknowledging September 19, 2001, this court already required with an order from this court. Accordingly, this
the document. Atty. Cefra to comment on the Complaint lodged court SUSPENDS him from the practice of law for
against him. Atty. Cefra did not comply with this two (2) years, REVOKES his incumbent notarial
Atty. Cefra claims that Jimmy and Juanita wanted order until he was arrested by the National Bureau commission, if any, and PERPETUALLY
to sell their land. Even if this is true, Jimmy and of Investigation. Atty. Cefra only filed his Comment DISQUALIFIES him from being commissioned as a
Juanita, as vendors, were not able to review the on January 15, 2008, more than seven years after notary public. Respondent is also STERNLY
document given for notarization. The Deed of this court’s order. Atty. Cefra’s actions show utter WARNED that more severe penalties will be
Absolute Sale was brought to Atty. Cefra by Paran’s disrespect for legal processes. imposed for any further breach of the Canons in
representatives, who merely informed Atty. Cefra the Code of Professional Responsibility.
that the vendors signed the document. Atty. Cefra The act of disobeying a court order constitutes
should have exercised vigilance and not just relied violation of Canon 1158 of the Code of Professional Let copies of this Resolution be furnished to the
on the representations of the vendee. Responsibility, which requires a lawyer to "observe Office of the Bar Confidant, to be appended to
and maintain the respect due to the courts[.]" respondent's personal record as attorney. Likewise,
It is possible that the terms and conditions copies shall be furnished to the Integrated Bar of
favorable to the vendors might not be in the Under Rule 138, Section 27, paragraph 159 of the the Philippines and all courts in the country for
document submitted by the vendee for Rules of Court, "wilful disobedience of any lawful their information and guidance.
notarization. In addition, the possibility of forgery order of a superior court" constitutes a ground for
became real. disbarment or suspension from the practice of law. SO ORDERED.
Atty. Cefra’s disobedience to this court’s directive
In Isenhardt v. Atty. Real,50 Linco v. Atty. issued in 2001 was not explained even as he
eventually filed his Comment in2008. Clearly, his SECOND DIVISION
Lacebal,51 Lanuzo v. Atty. Bongon,52 and Bautista v.
Atty. Bernabe,53 the respondent notaries were all disobedience was willful and inexcusable. Atty.
guilty of notarizing documents without the Cefra should be penalized for this infraction. March 18, 2015
presence of the parties. In Linco, Lanuzo, and
Bautista, the respondents notarized documents In Sebastian v. Atty. Bajar,60 this court suspended a A.C. No. 10695
even if the persons executing those documents lawyer who refused to comply with this court’s
were already dead at the time of notarization. In directives to submit a Rejoinder and to comment CRESCENCIANO M. PITOGO, Complainant,
Bautista, the respondent, like Atty. Cefra, also on complainant’s Manifestation.61 The lawyer vs.
allowed another individual to sign on behalf of complied with the order to file a Rejoinder only ATTY. JOSELITO TROY SUELLO, Respondent.
another despite lack of authorization. 54 In these after being detained by the National Bureau of
cases, this court imposed the penalty of Investigation for five (5) days.62 Likewise, she
disqualification as notaries for two (2) years and complied with the order to comment through a RESOLUTION
suspension from the practice of law for one (1) Manifestation filed after four (4) months without
year. explaining her delay.63 This court found that the LEONEN, J.:
lawyer’s "conduct indicates a high degree of
In the recent case of De Jesus v. Atty. Sanchez- irresponsibility. . . . [Her] obstinate refusal to Crescenciano M. Pitogo (Pitogo) purchased a
Malit,55 the respondent lawyer notarized 22 public comply with the Court’s orders ‘not only betrays a motorcycle from EMCOR, Inc. However, EMCOR,
documents even without the signatures of the recalcitrant flaw in her character; it also Inc. allegedly failed to cause the registration of the
parties on those documents.56 This court underscores her disrespect of the Court’s lawful motorcycle under his name. Pitogo, thus, filed a
suspended the respondent-lawyer from the orders which is only too deserving of reproof.’"64 Civil Complaint before the Regional Trial Court
practice of law for one (1) year and perpetually against EMCOR, Inc.1
disqualified her from being a notary public.57
 50

The motorcycle was eventually registered in Pitogo' of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. Pitogo On January 10, 2012, Commissioner Hector B.
s name based on three (3) documents notarized by alleges that there were discrepancies between the Almeyda of the Commission on Bar Discipline of
respondent Atty. Joselito Troy Suello (Suello).2 The three (3) documents notarized by Suello and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines recommended
documents indicate that they are registered in Suello’s entries in his notarial register.11 Suello’s suspension from the active practice of law
Suello' s notarial register as follows: for six (6) months, as well as the revocation of his
Specifically, Pitogo claims that Suello’s notarial commission as a notary public. He also
register showed that the above entries pertain to recommended Suello’s disqualification as notary
1. Deed of Assignment between Maria P. Doc. No. 436; public for two (2) years.24
the following documents:
Ponce / Rogelio Ponce and EMCOR, Inc. Book No. 83;
Page No. 88;
a. Doc. No. 436: Deed of Absolute Sale of On April 15, 2013, the Integrated Bar of the
Series of
Mr. Roel D. Rago;12 Philippines Board of Governors issued the
20093
Resolution adopting and approving the findings of
2. Deed of Sale with Assumption of Mortgage Doc. No. 437, Commissioner Almeyda’s recommendation but
b. Doc. No. 437: Deed of Absolute Sale of further recommended to increase the penalty of
between Maria P. Ponce and Mariza G. Ono-on Page No. 88; Mrs. Conchita Pitogo Tautho;13
Book No. 83, disqualification as notary public to four (4) years,
Series of thus:
20094 c. Doc. No. 235: Contract to Sell of BF
Property Development Corporation.14 RESOLVED to ADOPT and APPROVE, as it is hereby
3. Deed of Sale with Assumption of Mortgage Doc. No. 235; unanimously ADOPTED and APPROVED, with
between Mariza G. Ono-on and Crescenciano M. Page No. 85;
In his Answer to the Affidavit-Complaint, Suello modification, the Report and Recommendation of
Pitogo Book No. 83;
denies having notarized the three (3) documents the Investigating Commissioner in the above-
Series of obtained from the Land Transportation Office.15 He entitled case, herein made part of this Resolution
20095 denies the allegation that he disowned the as Annex "A", and finding the recommendation
documents.16 He admits that he certified the fully supported by evidence on record and the
documents as true copies.17 applicable laws and rules and considering
respondent violated the Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the
In his Position Paper, Suello explains that it was his Code of Professional Responsibility, Atty. Joselito
Pitogo obtained a copy of the three (3) documents secretary who certified Pitogo’s documents on Troy Suello’s Notarial Commission is
from the Land Transportation Office, Danao City, August 3, 2009.18 Pitogo called Suello the next day hereby REVOKED immediately if presently
Cebu. On August 3, 2009, he went to Suello’s office to ask for a certification.19 When he advised Pitogo commissioned and DISQUALIFIED from
to have them certified. Pitogo claims that when he that he can get it at his office after verifying the reappointment as Notary Public for four (4)
called Suello the next day to tell him about the documents, Pitogo informed him that his secretary years.25 (Emphasis in the original)
importance of these documents to his civil case, already certified them as true copies. 20 Suello told
Suello "disowned the documents."6 Suello instead Pitogo that his secretary was not given such Suello filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the
ordered his secretary to give Pitogo a copy of his authority.21 April 15, 2013 Integrated Bar of the Philippines
notarial register.7 Board of Governors Resolution based on the
Suello also claims that Pitogo threatened to file an ground that the penalty imposed on him was
In the letter dated August 7, 2009, Pitogo administrative case against him if he did not issue excessive:
reiterated to Suello that the documents were a certification stating whether the documents were
important in his civil case pending before the really notarized by him or were 1. That the sanction imposed is excessive. The
Regional Trial Court. He requested Suello to certify fabricated.22 According to Suello, Pitogo needed the respondent realizes that the mere existence of
the authenticity and veracity of the three (3) certification that the three (3) documents used to those documents with his notarization makes him
documents he obtained from the Land register the motorcycle under his name were inevitably answerable for them. Regardless how
Transportation Office.8 He wanted to determine if fabricated so he could claim 1.7 million in damages unaware he may be of how these came about, he is
the documents were duly notarized by Suello or for EMCOR, Inc.’s alleged non-registration of his still the only one to answer for them. Not the
were merely fabricated.9 Pitogo did not receive a motorcycle. 23 Pitogo’s claim against EMCOR, Inc. complainant and not any party who may have
reply from Suello.10 was apparently mooted by the registration of the access to his office implements to do this. It made
motorcycle under his name. him aware of the need review his procedure to
On September 10, 2009, Pitogo filed his Affidavit- avoid these mistakes. Respondent however finds
Complaint against Suello before the Cebu Chapter
 51

the sanction against him is much too excessive and Notary Public from four (4) years to two (2) years. (8)The fee charged for the notarial
respectfully invokes the following, to wit: The IMMEDIATE REVOCATION of his Notarial act;
Commission, if existing, under said Resolution
A.This is the first infraction lodged stands.28 (Emphasis in the original) (9)The address where the
against him in his 15 years of notarization was performed if not in
practice. After reviewing the case records and considering the notary’s regular place of work
the parties’ submissions, this court adopts the or business; and
B.The respondent is not in bad faith findings of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
and has no dishonest or selfish Board of Governors in its May 3, 2014 Resolution (10)Any other circumstance the
motive. but modifies the penalties imposed upon notary public may deem of
respondent Atty. Joselito Troy Suello.1âwphi1 significance or relevance.
C.There is no actual or potential
injury caused to any private Respondent is administratively liable for his ....
party;26 negligence in keeping and maintaining his notarial
register. Recording every notarial act in the
notarial register is required under Rule VI the (e) The notary public shall give to each instrument
Suello also apologized for his oversight: Notarial Rules,29 thus: or document executed, sworn to, or acknowledged
before him a number corresponding to the one in
2. That substantial justice has not been done. The his register, and shall also state on the instrument
Sec. 2. Entries in the Notarial Register. – (a) For or document the page/s of his register on which the
respondent completely understands that this every notarial act, the notary shall record in the
matter only pertains to him and his liability and not same is recorded. No blank line shall be left
notarial register at the time of the notarization the between entries.
about anybody or anything else. His indignation following:
distracted him to the mistaken belief that the
complainant’s dubious motives would not merit his Failure to properly record entries in the notarial
complaint attention because he did not come with (1)The entry number and page register is also a ground for revocation of notarial
clean hands. After being properly reminded, the number; commission:
respondent realizes his mistake and respectfully
apologizes for his oversight to this Honorable (2)The date and time of day of the SECTION 1. Revocation and Administrative
Commission. The respondent finds it however notarial act; Sanctions. – . . . .
grossly unjust that he is imposed with such
sanction for resisting to accommodate and be a (3)The type of notarial act;
part of the unscrupulous undertaking sought to be (b) In addition, the Executive Judge may revoke the
accomplished motivating the complaint which is commission of, or impose appropriate
much bigger wrong.27 (4)The title or description of the administrative sanctions upon, any notary public
instrument, document or who:
proceeding;
On May 3, 2014, the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines Board of Governors issued the ....
Resolution partially granting Suello’s Motion for (5)The name and address of each
Reconsideration, thus: principal; (2) fails to make the proper entry or entries in his
notarial register concerning his notarial acts[.] 30
RESOLVED to DENY Respondent’s Motion for (6)The competent evidence of
Reconsideration, there being no cogent reason to identity as defined by these Rules if Notarial acts give private documents a badge of
reverse the findings of the Commission and the the signatory is not personally authenticity that the public relies on when they
resolution subject of the motion, it being a mere known to the notary; encounter written documents and engage in
reiteration of the matters which had already been written transactions. Hence, all notaries public are
threshed out and taken into consideration under (7)The name and address of each duty-bound to protect the integrity of notarial acts
Resolution No. XX-2013- 416 dated April 15, 2013. credible witness swearing to or by ensuring that they perform their duties with
However the Board DEEMED it judicious to reduce affirming the person’s identity; utmost care. This court explained in Bote v. Judge
the penalty imposed on Atty. Joselito Troy Suello Eduardo:31
from DISQUALIFICATION from reappointment as
 52

A notarial register is prima facie evidence of the but it does not change the nature of the CARPIO, J.:
facts there stated. It has the presumption of violation.1âwphi1
regularity and to contradict the veracity of the The Case
entry, evidence must be clear, convincing, and Besides, respondent’s remorse was displayed after
more than merely preponderant. . . . a penalty was recommended by the Integrated Bar The case before the Court is a disbarment
of the Philippines Board of Governors. It was not proceeding filed by Rebecca J. Palm (complainant)
.... motivated by a realization of a wrong committed against Atty. Felipe Iledan, Jr. (respondent) for
on an individual but only by a desire to temper the revealing information obtained in the course of an
. . . Notarization is not an empty, meaningless, penalty. It came too late. attorney-client relationship and for representing an
routinary act. It is invested with such substantial interest which conflicted with that of his former
public interest that only those who are qualified or In Agadan, et al. v. Atty. Kilaan,38 the same client, Comtech Worldwide Solutions Philippines,
authorized may act as notaries public. Notarization violations of Notarial Rules and Code of Inc. (Comtech).
converts a private document into a public Professional Responsibility were meted with the
document, making that document admissible in penalty of one-year suspension of notarial The Antecedent Facts
evidence without further proof of its authenticity. commission and three-month suspension from the
For this reason, notaries must observe with utmost practice of law.39 We find the same penalties
care the basic requirements in the performance of proper under the circumstances. Complainant is the President of Comtech, a
their duties. Otherwise, the confidence of the corporation engaged in the business of computer
public in the integrity of this form of conveyance software development. From February 2003 to
WHEREFORE, we find respondent Atty. Joselito November 2003, respondent served as Comtech’s
would be undermined.32 Troy Suello GUILTY of violating Canon 1 and Rule retained corporate counsel for the amount of
1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and ₱6,000 per month as retainer fee. From September
Hence, when respondent negligently failed to enter the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. Accordingly, to October 2003, complainant personally met with
the details of the three (3) documents on his he is SUSPENDED from the practice of law for respondent to review corporate matters, including
notarial register, he cast doubt on the authenticity three (3) months and is STERNLY WARNED that potential amendments to the corporate by-laws. In
of complainant’s documents. He also cast doubt on any similar violation will be dealt with more a meeting held on 1 October 2003, respondent
the credibility of the notarial register and the severely. His notarial commission is immediately suggested that Comtech amend its corporate by-
notarial process. He violated not only the Notarial revoked if presently commissioned. He laws to allow participation during board meetings,
Rules but also the Code of Professional is DISQUALIFIED from being commissioned as through teleconference, of members of the Board
Responsibility, which requires lawyers to promote notary public for one (1) year. of Directors who were outside the Philippines.
respect for law and legal processes. 33
SO ORDERED. Prior to the completion of the amendments of the
Respondent also appears to have committed a corporate by-laws, complainant became
falsehood in the pleadings he submitted. In his 2. Lawyer represents inconsistent uncomfortable with the close relationship between
Answer to complainant’s Affidavit-Complaint, interests of two or more opposing respondent and Elda Soledad (Soledad), a former
respondent claimed that he certified complainant’s officer and director of Comtech, who resigned and
parties
documents as true copies.34 Later, in his Position who was suspected of releasing unauthorized
Paper, he passed the blame to his secretary. 35 This disbursements of corporate funds. Thus, Comtech
violates the Code of Professional Responsibility, decided to terminate its retainer agreement with
which prohibits lawyers from engaging in dishonest respondent effective November 2003.
and unlawful conduct.36 FIRST DIVISION

A.C. No. 8242               October 2, 2009 In a stockholders’ meeting held on 10 January

Respondent’s secretary cannot be blamed for the 2004, respondent attended as proxy for Gary
erroneous entries in the notarial register. The Harrison (Harrison). Steven C. Palm (Steven) and
notarial commission is a license held personally by REBECCA J. PALM, Complainant, Deanna L. Palm, members of the Board of
the notary public. It cannot be further delegated. It vs. Directors, were present through teleconference.
is the notary public alone who is personally ATTY. FELIPE ILEDAN, JR., Respondent. When the meeting was called to order, respondent
responsible for the correctness of the entries in his objected to the meeting for lack of quorum.
or her notarial register.37 Respondent’s apparent DECISION Respondent asserted that Steven and Deanna Palm
remorse may assuage the injury done privately, could not participate in the meeting because the
 53

corporate by-laws had not yet been amended to participation of board members by The IBP-CBD recommended that respondent be
allow teleconferencing. teleconferencing. suspended from the practice of law for one year,
thus:
On 24 March 2004, Comtech’s new counsel sent a Respondent alleged that there was no conflict of
demand letter to Soledad to return or account for interest when he represented Soledad in the case WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most
the amount of ₱90,466.10 representing her for Estafa filed by Comtech. He alleged that respectfully recommended that herein respondent
unauthorized disbursements when she was the Soledad was already a client before he became a be found guilty of the charges preferred against
Corporate Treasurer of Comtech. On 22 April 2004, consultant for Comtech. He alleged that the him and be suspended from the practice of law for
Comtech received Soledad’s reply, signed by criminal case was not related to or connected with one (1) year.4
respondent. In July 2004, due to Soledad’s failure the limited procedural queries he handled with
to comply with Comtech's written demands, Comtech. In Resolution No. XVII-2006-5835 passed on 15
Comtech filed a complaint for Estafa against December 2006, the IBP Board of Governors
Soledad before the Makati Prosecutor’s Office. In The IBP’s Report and Recommendation adopted and approved the recommendation of the
the proceedings before the City Prosecution Office Investigating Commissioner with modification by
of Makati, respondent appeared as Soledad’s suspending respondent from the practice of law for
counsel. In a Report and Recommendation dated 28 March
2006,3 the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP- two years.
CBD) found respondent guilty of violation of Canon
On 26 January 2005, complainant filed a 21 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and of Respondent filed a motion for reconsideration. 6
Complaint1 for disbarment against respondent representing interest in conflict with that of
before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). Comtech as his former client. In an undated Recommendation, the IBP Board of
2
Governors First Division found that respondent’s
In his Answer,  respondent alleged that in January The IBP-CBD ruled that there was no doubt that motion for reconsideration did not raise any new
2002, Soledad consulted him on process and respondent was Comtech’s retained counsel from issue and was just a rehash of his previous
procedure in acquiring property. In April 2002, February 2003 to November 2003. The IBP-CBD arguments. However, the IBP Board of Governors
Soledad again consulted him about the legal found that in the course of the meetings for the First Division recommended that respondent be
requirements of putting up a domestic corporation. intended amendments of Comtech’s corporate by- suspended from the practice of law for only one
In February 2003, Soledad engaged his services as laws, respondent obtained knowledge about the year.
consultant for Comtech. Respondent alleged that intended amendment to allow members of the
from February to October 2003, neither Soledad Board of Directors who were outside the Philippines
nor Palm consulted him on confidential or In Resolution No. XVIII-2008-703 passed on 11
to participate in board meetings through December 2008, the IBP Board of Governors
privileged matter concerning the operations of the teleconferencing. The IBP-CBD noted that
corporation. Respondent further alleged that he adopted and approved the recommendation of the
respondent knew that the corporate by-laws have IBP Board of Governors First Division. The IBP
had no access to any record of Comtech. not yet been amended to allow the Board of Governors denied respondent’s motion for
teleconferencing. Hence, when respondent, as reconsideration but reduced his suspension from
Respondent admitted that during the months of representative of Harrison, objected to the two years to one year.
September and October 2003, complainant met participation of Steven and Deanna Palm through
with him regarding the procedure in amending the teleconferencing on the ground that the corporate
corporate by-laws to allow board members outside by-laws did not allow the participation, he made The IBP Board of Governors forwarded the present
the Philippines to participate in board meetings. use of a privileged information he obtained while case to this Court as provided under Section 12(b),
he was Comtech’s retained counsel. Rule 139-B7 of the Rules of Court.
Respondent further alleged that Harrison, then
Comtech President, appointed him as proxy during The IBP-CBD likewise found that in representing The Ruling of this Court
the 10 January 2004 meeting. Respondent alleged Soledad in a case filed by Comtech, respondent
that Harrison instructed him to observe the represented an interest in conflict with that of a We cannot sustain the findings and
conduct of the meeting. Respondent admitted that former client. The IBP-CBD ruled that the fact that recommendation of the IBP.
he objected to the participation of Steven and respondent represented Soledad after the
Deanna Palm because the corporate by-laws had termination of his professional relationship with Violation of the Confidentiality of Lawyer-
not yet been properly amended to allow the Comtech was not an excuse. Client Relationship
 54

Canon 21 of the Code of Professional Responsibility It is settled that the mere relation of attorney and acquired while he was still Comtech’s
provides: client does not raise a presumption of retained counsel. Further, respondent made the
confidentiality. 11 The client must intend the representation after the termination of his retainer
Canon 21. A lawyer shall preserve the confidence communication to be confidential. 12 Since the agreement with Comtech. A lawyer’s immutable
and secrets of his client even after the attorney- proposed amendments must be approved by duty to a former client does not cover transactions
client relationship is terminated. (Emphasis at least a majority of the stockholders, and that occurred beyond the lawyer’s employment
supplied) copies of the amended by-laws must be filed with the client.16 The intent of the law is to impose
with the SEC, the information could not have upon the lawyer the duty to protect the client’s
been intended to be confidential. Thus, the interests only on matters that he previously
We agree with the IBP that in the course of disclosure made by respondent during the handled for the former client and not for matters
complainant’s consultations, respondent obtained stockholders’ meeting could not be considered a that arose after the lawyer-client relationship has
the information about the need to amend the violation of his client’s secrets and confidence terminated.17
corporate by-laws to allow board members outside within the contemplation of Canon 21 of the Code
the Philippines to participate in board meetings of Professional Responsibility.
through teleconferencing. Respondent himself WHEREFORE, we DISMISS the complaint against
admitted this in his Answer. Atty. Felipe Iledan, Jr. for lack of merit.
Representing Interest in Conflict With the
Interest of a Former Client SO ORDERED.
However, what transpired on 10 January 2004 was
not a board meeting but a stockholders’ meeting.
Respondent attended the meeting as proxy for The IBP found respondent guilty of representing an SECOND DIVISION
Harrison. The physical presence of a stockholder is interest in conflict with that of a former client, in
not necessary in a stockholders’ meeting because violation of Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility which provides: A.C. No. 6174               November 16, 2011
a member may vote by proxy unless otherwise
provided in the articles of incorporation or by-
laws.8 Hence, there was no need for Steven and Rule 15.03 - A lawyer shall not represent conflicting LYDIA CASTRO-JUSTO, Complainant,
Deanna Palm to participate through interest except by written consent of all concerned vs.
teleconferencing as they could just have sent their given after a full disclosure of the facts. ATTY. RODOLFO T. GALING, Respondent.
proxies to the meeting.
We do not agree with the IBP. DECISION
In addition, although the information about the
necessity to amend the corporate by-laws may In Quiambao v. Bamba,13 the Court enumerated PEREZ, J.:
have been given to respondent, it could not be various tests to determine conflict of interests. One
considered a confidential information. The test of inconsistency of interests is whether the Before us for consideration is Resolution No. XVIII-
amendment, repeal or adoption of new by-laws lawyer will be asked to use against his former 2007-1961 of the Board of Governors, Integrated
may be effected by "the board of directors or client any confidential information acquired Bar of the Philippines (IBP), relative to the
trustees, by a majority vote thereof, and the through their connection or previous complaint2 for disbarment filed by Lydia Castro-
owners of at least a majority of the outstanding employment.14 The Court has ruled that what a Justo against Atty. Rodolfo T. Galing.
capital stock, or at least a majority of members of a lawyer owes his former client is to maintain
non-stock corporation."9 It means the stockholders inviolate the client’s confidence or to refrain from
are aware of the proposed amendments to the by- Complainant Justo alleged that sometime in April
doing anything which will injuriously affect him in 2003, she engaged the services of respondent
laws. While the power may be delegated to the any matter in which he previously represented
board of directors or trustees, there is nothing in Atty. Galing in connection with dishonored checks
him.15 issued by Manila City Councilor Arlene W. Koa (Ms.
the records to show that a delegation was made in
the present case. Further, whenever any Koa). After she paid his professional fees, the
amendment or adoption of new by-laws is made, We find no conflict of interest when respondent respondent drafted and sent a letter to Ms. Koa
copies of the amendments or the new by-laws are represented Soledad in a case filed by Comtech. demanding payment of the checks.3 Respondent
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission The case where respondent represents Soledad is advised complainant to wait for the lapse of the
(SEC) and attached to the original articles of an Estafa case filed by Comtech against its former period indicated in the demand letter before filing
incorporation and by-laws.10 The documents are officer. There was nothing in the records that her complaint.
public records and could not be considered would show that respondent used against
confidential.1avvphi1 Comtech any confidential information
 55

On 10 July 2003, complainant filed a criminal existence of a lawyer-client relationship between and daughter while complainants are likewise
complaint against Ms. Koa for estafa and violation him and Ms. Koa and Ms. Torralba. Likewise, his mother and daughter and that these cases arose
of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 before the Office of the appearance in the joint proceedings should only be out from the same transaction. Thus, movants and
City Prosecutor of Manila.4 construed as an effort on his part to assume the complainants will be adducing the same sets of
role of a moderator or arbiter of the parties. evidence and witnesses.
On 27 July 2003, she received a copy of a Motion
for Consolidation5 filed by respondent for and on He insisted that his actions were merely motivated Respondent argued that no lawyer-client
behalf of Ms. Koa, the accused in the criminal by an intention to help the parties achieve an out relationship existed between him and complainant
cases, and the latter’s daughter Karen Torralba of court settlement and possible reconciliation. He because there was no professional fee paid for the
(Ms. Torralba). Further, on 8 August 2003, reported that his efforts proved fruitful insofar as services he rendered. Moreover, he argued that he
respondent appeared as counsel for Ms. Koa before he had caused Ms. Koa to pay complainant the drafted the demand letter only as a personal favor
the prosecutor of Manila. amount of ₱50,000.00 in settlement of one of the to complainant who is a close friend.
two checks subject of I.S. No. 03G-19484-86.
Complainant submits that by representing We are not persuaded. A lawyer-client relationship
conflicting interests, respondent violated the Code Respondent averred that the failure of Ms. Koa and can exist notwithstanding the close friendship
of Professional Responsibility. Ms. Torralba to make good the other checks between complainant and respondent. The
caused a lot of consternation on the part of relationship was established the moment
In his Comment,6 respondent denied the complainant. This allegedly led her to vent her ire complainant sought legal advice from respondent
allegations against him. He admitted that he on respondent and file the instant administrative regarding the dishonored checks. By drafting the
drafted a demand letter for complainant but case for conflict of interest. demand letter respondent further affirmed such
argued that it was made only in deference to their relationship. The fact that the demand letter was
long standing friendship and not by reason of a In a resolution dated 19 October 2007, the Board of not utilized in the criminal complaint filed and that
professional engagement as professed by Governors of the IBP adopted and approved with respondent was not eventually engaged by
complainant. He denied receiving any professional modification the findings of its Investigating complainant to represent her in the criminal cases
fee for the services he rendered. It was allegedly Commissioner. They found respondent guilty of is of no moment. As observed by the Investigating
their understanding that complainant would have violating Canon 15, Rule 15.03 of the Code of Commissioner, by referring to complainant Justo as
to retain the services of another lawyer. He alleged Professional Responsibility by representing "my client" in the demand letter sent to the
that complainant, based on that agreement, conflicting interests and for his daring audacity and defaulting debtor10, respondent admitted the
engaged the services of Atty. Manuel A. Año. for the pronounced malignancy of his act. It was existence of the lawyer-client relationship. Such
recommended that he be suspended from the admission effectively estopped him from claiming
practice of law for one (1) year with a warning that otherwise.
To bolster this claim, respondent pointed out that
the complaint filed by complainant against Ms. Koa a repetition of the same or similar acts will be dealt
for estafa and violation of B.P. Blg. 22 was based with more severely.8 Likewise, the non-payment of professional fee will
not on the demand letter he drafted but on the not exculpate respondent from liability. Absence of
demand letter prepared by Atty. Manuel A. Año. We agree with the Report and Recommendation of monetary consideration does not exempt lawyers
the Investigating Commissioner,9 as adopted by from complying with the prohibition against
the Board of Governors of the IBP. pursuing cases with conflicting interests. The
Respondent contended that he is a close friend of prohibition attaches from the moment the
the opposing parties in the criminal cases. He attorney-client relationship is established and
further contended that complainant Justo and Ms. It was established that in April 2003, respondent extends beyond the duration of the professional
Koa are likewise long time friends, as in fact, they was approached by complainant regarding the relationship.11 We held in Burbe v. Atty.
are "comares" for more than 30 years since dishonored checks issued by Manila City Councilor Magulta12 that it is not necessary that any retainer
complainant is the godmother of Ms. Koa. be paid, promised or charged; neither is it material
Torralba.7 Respondent claimed that it is in this light that the attorney consulted did not afterward
that he accommodated Ms. Koa and her daughter’s It was also established that on 25 July 2003, a handle the case for which his service had been
request that they be represented by him in the Motion for Consolidation was filed by respondent in sought.13
cases filed against them by complainant and I.S. No. 03G-19484-86 entitled "Lydia Justo vs.
complainant’s daughter. He maintained that the Arlene Koa" and I.S. No. 03G-19582-84 entitled
filing of the Motion for Consolidation which is a Under Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of the Code of
"Lani C. Justo vs. Karen Torralba". Respondent Professional Responsibility, "[a] lawyer shall not
non-adversarial pleading does not evidence the stated that the movants in these cases are mother represent conflicting interests except by written
 56

consent of all concerned given after a full loyalty to his client or invite suspicion of We resolve this disbarment complaint against Atty.
disclosure of the facts." Respondent was therefore unfaithfulness or double dealing in the Clemencio Sabitsana, Jr. who is charged of: (1)
bound to refrain from representing parties with performance thereof.21 violating the lawyer’s duty to preserve confidential
conflicting interests in a controversy. By doing so, information received from his client;1 and (2)
without showing any proof that he had obtained The excuse proffered by respondent that it was not violating the prohibition on representing conflicting
the written consent of the conflicting parties, him but Atty. Año who was eventually engaged by interests.2
respondent should be sanctioned. complainant will not exonerate him from the clear
violation of Rule 15.03 of the Code of Professional In her complaint, Josefina M. Aniñon (complainant)
The prohibition against representing conflicting Responsibility. The take- over of a client’s cause of related that she previously engaged the legal
interest is founded on principles of public policy action by another lawyer does not give the former services of Atty. Sabitsana in the preparation and
and good taste.14 In the course of the lawyer-client lawyer the right to represent the opposing party. It execution in her favor of a Deed of Sale over a
relationship, the lawyer learns of the facts is not only malpractice but also constitutes a parcel of land owned by her late common-law
connected with the client’s case, including the violation of the confidence resulting from the husband, Brigido Caneja, Jr. Atty. Sabitsana
weak and strong points of the case. The nature of attorney-client relationship. allegedly violated her confidence when he
the relationship is, therefore, one of trust and subsequently filed a civil case against her for the
confidence of the highest degree.15 Considering that this is respondent’s first annulment of the Deed of Sale in behalf of Zenaida
infraction, the disbarment sought in the complaint L. Cañete, the legal wife of Brigido Caneja, Jr. The
It behooves lawyers not only to keep inviolate the is deemed to be too severe. As recommended by complainant accused Atty. Sabitsana of using the
client’s confidence, but also to avoid the the Board of Governors of the IBP, the suspension confidential information he obtained from her in
appearance of treachery and double-dealing for from the practice of law for one (1) year is filing the civil case.
only then can litigants be encouraged to entrust warranted.
their secrets to their lawyers, which is of Atty. Sabitsana admitted having advised the
paramount importance in the administration of Accordingly, the Court resolved to SUSPEND Atty. complainant in the preparation and execution of
justice.16 Rodolfo T. Galing from the practice of law for one the Deed of Sale. However, he denied having
(1) year, with a WARNING that a repetition of the received any confidential information. Atty.
The case of Hornilla v. Atty. Salunat17 is instructive same or similar offense will warrant a more severe Sabitsana asserted that the present disbarment
on this concept, thus: penalty. Let copies of this Decision be furnished all complaint was instigated by one Atty. Gabino
courts, the Office of the Bar Confidant and the Velasquez, Jr., the notary of the disbarment
Integrated Bar of the Philippines for their complaint who lost a court case against him (Atty.
There is conflict of interest when a lawyer Sabitsana) and had instigated the complaint for
represents inconsistent interests of two or more information and guidance. The Office of the Bar
Confidant is directed to append a copy of this this reason.
opposing parties.1awp++i1 The test is ‘whether or
not in behalf of one client, it is the lawyer’s duty to Decision to respondent’s record as member of the
fight for an issue or claim, but it is his duty to Bar. The Findings of the IBP Investigating Commissioner
oppose it for the other client. In brief, if he argues
for one client, this argument will be opposed by SO ORDERED. In our Resolution dated November 22, 1999, we
him when he argues for the other client.’18 This rule referred the disbarment complaint to the
covers not only cases in which confidential SECOND DIVISION Commission on Bar Discipline of the Integrated Bar
communications have been confided, but also of the Philippines (IBP) for investigation, report and
those in which no confidence has been bestowed or recommendation. In his Report and
will be used.19 Also, there is conflict of interests if A.C. No. 5098               April 11, 2012 Recommendation dated November 28, 2003, IBP
the acceptance of the new retainer will require the Commissioner Pedro A. Magpayo Jr. found Atty.
attorney to perform an act which will injuriously JOSEFINA M. ANIÑON, Complainant, Sabitsana administratively liable for representing
affect his first client in any matter in which he vs. conflicting interests. The IBP Commissioner opined:
represents him and also whether he will be called ATTY. CLEMENCIO SABITSANA,
upon in his new relation to use against his first JR., Respondent. In Bautista vs. Barrios, it was held that a lawyer
client any knowledge acquired through their may not handle a case to nullify a contract which
connection.20 Another test of the inconsistency of DECISION he prepared and thereby take up inconsistent
interests is whether the acceptance of a new positions. Granting that Zenaida L. Cañete,
relation will prevent an attorney from the full respondent’s present client in Civil Case No. B-
discharge of his duty of undivided fidelity and BRION, J.:
 57

1060 did not initially learn about the sale executed Atty. Sabitsana moved to reconsider the above this rule, it is "enough that the opposing parties in
by Bontes in favor of complainant thru the resolution, but the IBP Board of Governors denied one case, one of whom would lose the suit, are
confidences and information divulged by his motion in a resolution dated July 30, 2004. present clients and the nature or conditions of the
complainant to respondent in the course of the lawyer’s respective retainers with each of them
preparation of the said deed of sale, respondent The Issue would affect the performance of the duty of
nonetheless has a duty to decline his current undivided fidelity to both clients."9
employment as counsel of Zenaida Cañete in view
of the rule prohibiting representation of conflicting The issue in this case is whether Atty. Sabitsana is
guilty of misconduct for representing conflicting Jurisprudence has provided three tests in
interests. determining whether a violation of the above rule
interests.
is present in a given case.
In re De la Rosa clearly suggests that a lawyer may
not represent conflicting interests in the absence of The Court’s Ruling
One test is whether a lawyer is duty-bound to fight
the written consent of all parties concerned given for an issue or claim in behalf of one client and, at
after a full disclosure of the facts. In the present After a careful study of the records, we agree with the same time, to oppose that claim for the other
case, no such written consent was secured by the findings and recommendations of the IBP client.http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/
respondent before accepting employment as Mrs. Commissioner and the IBP Board of Governors. aug2005/ac_6708.htm - _ftn Thus, if a lawyer’s
Cañete’s counsel-of-record. x x x argument for one client has to be opposed by that
The relationship between a lawyer and his/her same lawyer in arguing for the other client, there is
xxx client should ideally be imbued with the highest a violation of the rule.
level of trust and confidence. This is the standard
Complainant and respondent’s present client, of confidentiality that must prevail to promote a Another test of inconsistency of interests is
being contending claimants to the same property, full disclosure of the client’s most confidential whether the acceptance of a new relation would
the conflict of interest is obviously present. There information to his/her lawyer for an unhampered prevent the full discharge of the lawyer’s duty of
is said to be inconsistency of interest when on exchange of information between them. Needless undivided fidelity and loyalty to the client or invite
behalf of one client, it is the attorney’s duty to to state, a client can only entrust confidential suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the
contend for that which his duty to another client information to his/her lawyer based on an performance of that
requires him to oppose. In brief, if he argues for expectation from the lawyer of utmost secrecy and duty.http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/
one client this argument will be opposed by him discretion; the lawyer, for his part, is duty-bound to aug2005/ac_6708.htm - _ftn Still another test is
when he argues for the other client. Such is the observe candor, fairness and loyalty in all dealings whether the lawyer would be called upon in the
case with which we are now confronted, and transactions with the client.6 Part of the new relation to use against a former client any
respondent being asked by one client to nullify lawyer’s duty in this regard is to avoid representing confidential information acquired through their
what he had formerly notarized as a true and valid conflicting interests, a matter covered by Rule connection or previous
sale between Bontes and the complainant. 15.03, Canon 15 of the Code of Professional employment.10 http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprude
(footnotes omitted)3 Responsibility quoted below: nce/2005/aug2005/ac_6708.htm - _ftn [emphasis
ours]
The IBP Commissioner recommended that Atty. Rule 15.03. -A lawyer shall not represent conflicting
Sabitsana be suspended from the practice of law interests except by written consent of all On the basis of the attendant facts of the case, we
for a period of one (1) year.4 concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts. find substantial evidence to support Atty.
Sabitsana’s violation of the above rule, as
The Findings of the IBP Board of Governors "The proscription against representation of established by the following circumstances on
conflicting interests applies to a situation where record:
the opposing parties are present clients in the
In a resolution dated February 27, 2004, the IBP same action or in an unrelated action."7 The
Board of Governors resolved to adopt and approve One, his legal services were initially
prohibition also applies even if the "lawyer would engaged by the complainant to protect her
the Report and Recommendation of the IBP not be called upon to contend for one client that
Commissioner after finding it to be fully supported interest over a certain property. The
which the lawyer has to oppose for the other client, records show that upon the legal advice of
by the evidence on record, the applicable laws and or that there would be no occasion to use the
rules.5 The IBP Board of Governors agreed with the Atty. Sabitsana, the Deed of Sale over the
confidential information acquired from one to the property was prepared and executed in the
IBP Commissioner’s recommended penalty. disadvantage of the other as the two actions are complainant’s favor.
wholly unrelated."8 To be held accountable under
 58

Two, Atty. Sabitsana met with Zenaida two clients, as required by Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of between them but complainant ignored it. Neither
Cañete to discuss the latter’s legal interest the Code of Professional Responsibility. did she object to respondent’s handling the case in
over the property subject of the Deed of behalf of Mrs. Cañete on the ground she is now
Sale. At that point, Atty. Sabitsana already Accordingly, we find — as the IBP Board of invoking in her instant complaint. So respondent
had knowledge that Zenaida Cañete’s Governors did — Atty. Sabitsana guilty of felt free to file the complaint against her.14 1âwphi1
interest clashed with the complainant’s misconduct for representing conflicting interests.
interests. We likewise agree with the penalty of suspension We have consistently held that the essence of due
for one (1) year from the practice of law process is simply the opportunity to be informed of
Three, despite the knowledge of the recommended by the IBP Board of Governors. This the charge against oneself and to be heard or, as
clashing interests between his two clients, penalty is consistent with existing jurisprudence on applied to administrative proceedings, the
Atty. Sabitsana accepted the engagement the administrative offense of representing opportunity to explain one’s side or the opportunity
from Zenaida Cañete. conflicting interests.12 to seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling
complained of.15 These opportunities were all
Four, Atty. Sabitsana’s actual knowledge of We note that Atty. Sabitsana takes exception to afforded to Atty. Sabitsana, as shown by the above
the conflicting interests between his two the IBP recommendation on the ground that the circumstances.
clients was demonstrated by his own charge in the complaint was only for his alleged
actions: first, he filed a case against the disclosure of confidential information, not for All told, disciplinary proceedings against lawyers
complainant in behalf of Zenaida Cañete; representation of conflicting interests. To Atty. are sui generis.16 In the exercise of its disciplinary
second, he impleaded the complainant as Sabitsana, finding him liable for the latter offense powers, the Court merely calls upon a member of
the defendant in the case; and third, the is a violation of his due process rights since he only the Bar to account for his actuations as an officer
case he filed was for the annulment of the answered the designated charge. of the Court with the end in view of preserving the
Deed of Sale that he had previously purity of the legal profession. We likewise aim to
prepared and executed for the We find no violation of Atty. Sabitsana’s due ensure the proper and honest administration of
complainant. process rights. Although there was indeed a justice by purging the profession of members who,
specific charge in the complaint, we are not by their misconduct, have proven themselves no
By his acts, not only did Atty. Sabitsana agree to unmindful that the complaint itself contained longer worthy to be entrusted with the duties and
represent one client against another client in the allegations of acts sufficient to constitute a responsibilities of an attorney.17 This is all that we
same action; he also accepted a new engagement violation of the rule on the prohibition against did in this case. Significantly, we did this to a
that entailed him to contend and oppose the representing conflicting interests. As stated in degree very much lesser than what the powers of
interest of his other client in a property in which his paragraph 8 of the complaint: this Court allows it to do in terms of the imposable
legal services had been previously retained. penalty. In this sense, we have already been
lenient towards respondent lawyer.
Atty. Sabitsana, Jr. accepted the commission as a
To be sure, Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of the Code of Lawyer of ZENAIDA CANEJA, now Zenaida Cañete,
Professional Responsibility provides an exception to recover lands from Complainant, including this WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court
to the above prohibition. However, we find no land where lawyer Atty. Sabitsana, Jr. has advised resolves to ADOPT the findings and
reason to apply the exception due to Atty. his client [complainant] to execute the second recommendations of the Commission on Bar
Sabitsana’s failure to comply with the requirements sale[.] Discipline of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
set forth under the rule. Atty. Sabitsana did not Atty. Clemencio C. Sabitsana, Jr. is found GUILTY of
make a full disclosure of facts to the complainant misconduct for representing conflicting interests in
Interestingly, Atty. Sabitsana even admitted these violation of Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of the Code of
and to Zenaida Cañete before he accepted the new allegations in his answer.13 He also averred in his
engagement with Zenaida Cañete. The records Professional Responsibility. He is hereby
Answer that: SUSPENDED for one (1) year from the practice of
likewise show that although Atty. Sabitsana wrote
a letter to the complainant informing her of law.
Zenaida Cañete’s adverse claim to the property 6b. Because the defendant-to-be in the complaint
covered by the Deed of Sale and, urging her to (Civil Case No. B-1060) that he would file on behalf Atty. Sabitsana is DIRECTED to inform the Court of
settle the adverse claim; Atty. Sabitsana however of Zenaida Caneja-Cañete was his former client the date of his receipt of this Decision so that we
did not disclose to the complainant that he was (herein complainant), respondent asked [the] can determine the reckoning point when his
also being engaged as counsel by Zenaida permission of Mrs. Cañete (which she granted) that suspension shall take effect.
Cañete.11 Moreover, the records show that Atty. he would first write a letter (Annex "4") to the
Sabitsana failed to obtain the written consent of his complainant proposing to settle the case amicably
 59

SO ORDERED. Front 1avvphi1

A.C. No. 10583               February 18, 2015

ROBERTO BERNARDINO, Complainant, NICOMEDES TOLENTINO

vs. ATTY. VICTOR REY SANTOS, Respondent.
(emphasis supplied)
LAW OFFFICE
B. Improper advertisement and solicitation of
Hence, this complaint.
business
CONSULTANCY & MARITIME
SERVICES Respondent, in his defense, denied knowing
W/ FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE Labiano and authorizing the printing and
circulation of the said calling card. 7
FIRST DIVISION Fe Marie L. Labiano
Paralegal The complaint was referred to the Commission on
A.C. No. 6672               September 4, 2009 Bar Discipline (CBD) of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP) for investigation, report and
PEDRO L. LINSANGAN, Complainant, Tel: recommendation.8
vs. 362-
ATTY. NICOMEDES TOLENTINO, Respondent. 1st MIJI 7820
Mansion, 2nd Fax: Based on testimonial and documentary evidence,
Flr. Rm. M-01 (632) the CBD, in its report and recommendation, 9 found
RESOLUTION 6th Ave., cor 362- that respondent had encroached on the
M.H. Del Pilar 7821 professional practice of complainant, violating Rule
Grace Park, Cel.: 8.0210 and other canons11 of the Code of
CORONA, J.:
Caloocan City (0926) Professional Responsibility (CPR). Moreover, he
270171 contravened the rule against soliciting cases for
This is a complaint for disbarment1 filed by Pedro gain, personally or through paid agents or brokers
Linsangan of the Linsangan Linsangan & Linsangan 9
as stated in Section 27, Rule 13812 of the Rules of
Law Office against Atty. Nicomedes Tolentino for Court. Hence, the CBD recommended that
solicitation of clients and encroachment of respondent be reprimanded with a stern warning
professional services. Back that any repetition would merit a heavier penalty.

Complainant alleged that respondent, with the help We adopt the findings of the IBP on the unethical
of paralegal Fe Marie Labiano, convinced his conduct of respondent but we modify the
clients2 to transfer legal representation. recommended penalty.
Respondent promised them financial
assistance3 and expeditious collection on their SERVICES OFFERED:
The complaint before us is rooted on the alleged
claims.4 To induce them to hire his services, he
intrusion by respondent into complainant’s
persistently called them and sent them text CONSULTATION AND
professional practice in violation of Rule 8.02 of the
messages. ASSISTANCE
CPR. And the means employed by respondent in
TO OVERSEAS SEAMEN
furtherance of the said misconduct themselves
To support his allegations, complainant presented REPATRIATED DUE TO
constituted distinct violations of ethical rules.
the sworn affidavit5 of James Gregorio attesting ACCIDENT,
that Labiano tried to prevail upon him to sever his INJURY, ILLNESS, SICKNESS,
DEATH Canons of the CPR are rules of conduct all lawyers
lawyer-client relations with complainant and utilize
AND INSURANCE BENEFIT must adhere to, including the manner by which a
respondent’s services instead, in exchange for a
CLAIMS lawyer’s services are to be made known. Thus,
loan of ₱50,000. Complainant also attached
ABROAD. Canon 3 of the CPR provides:
"respondent’s" calling card:6
 60

CANON 3 - A lawyer in making known his legal Although respondent initially denied knowing The rule is intended to safeguard the lawyer’s
services shall use only true, honest, fair, dignified Labiano in his answer, he later admitted it during independence of mind so that the free exercise of
and objective information or statement of facts. the mandatory hearing. his judgment may not be adversely affected. 22 It
seeks to ensure his undivided attention to the case
Time and time again, lawyers are reminded that Through Labiano’s actions, respondent’s law he is handling as well as his entire devotion and
the practice of law is a profession and not a practice was benefited. Hapless seamen were fidelity to the client’s cause. If the lawyer lends
business; lawyers should not advertise their talents enticed to transfer representation on the strength money to the client in connection with the client’s
as merchants advertise their wares.13 To allow a of Labiano’s word that respondent could produce a case, the lawyer in effect acquires an interest in
lawyer to advertise his talent or skill is to more favorable result. the subject matter of the case or an additional
commercialize the practice of law, degrade the stake in its outcome.23 Either of these
profession in the public’s estimation and impair its circumstances may lead the lawyer to consider his
Based on the foregoing, respondent clearly own recovery rather than that of his client, or to
ability to efficiently render that high character of solicited employment violating Rule 2.03, and Rule
service to which every member of the bar is accept a settlement which may take care of his
1.03 and Canon 3 of the CPR and Section 27, Rule interest in the verdict to the prejudice of the client
called.14 138 of the Rules of Court.1avvphi1 in violation of his duty of undivided fidelity to the
client’s cause.24
Rule 2.03 of the CPR provides: With regard to respondent’s violation of Rule 8.02
of the CPR, settled is the rule that a lawyer should As previously mentioned, any act of solicitation
RULE 2.03. A lawyer shall not do or permit to be not steal another lawyer’s client nor induce the constitutes malpractice25 which calls for the
done any act designed primarily to solicit legal latter to retain him by a promise of better service, exercise of the Court’s disciplinary powers.
business. good result or reduced fees for his services. 20 Again Violation of anti-solicitation statutes warrants
the Court notes that respondent never denied serious sanctions for initiating contact with a
Hence, lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases having these seafarers in his client list nor prospective client for the purpose of obtaining
for the purpose of gain, either personally or receiving benefits from Labiano’s "referrals." employment.26 Thus, in this jurisdiction, we adhere
through paid agents or brokers.15 Such actuation Furthermore, he never denied Labiano’s to the rule to protect the public from the
constitutes malpractice, a ground for disbarment. 16 connection to his office.21 Respondent committed Machiavellian machinations of unscrupulous
an unethical, predatory overstep into another’s lawyers and to uphold the nobility of the legal
legal practice. He cannot escape liability under profession.
Rule 2.03 should be read in connection with Rule Rule 8.02 of the CPR.
1.03 of the CPR which provides:
Considering the myriad infractions of respondent
Moreover, by engaging in a money-lending venture (including violation of the prohibition on lending
RULE 1.03. A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt with his clients as borrowers, respondent violated
motive or interest, encourage any suit or money to clients), the sanction recommended by
Rule 16.04: the IBP, a mere reprimand, is a wimpy slap on the
proceeding or delay any man’s cause.
wrist. The proposed penalty is grossly
Rule 16.04 – A lawyer shall not borrow money from incommensurate to its findings.
This rule proscribes "ambulance chasing" (the his client unless the client’s interests are fully
solicitation of almost any kind of legal business by protected by the nature of the case or by
an attorney, personally or through an agent in A final word regarding the calling card presented in
independent advice. Neither shall a lawyer lend evidence by petitioner. A lawyer’s best
order to gain employment)17 as a measure to money to a client except, when in the interest of
protect the community from barratry and advertisement is a well-merited reputation for
justice, he has to advance necessary expenses in a professional capacity and fidelity to trust based on
champerty.18 legal matter he is handling for the client. his character and conduct.27 For this reason,
lawyers are only allowed to announce their
Complainant presented substantial The rule is that a lawyer shall not lend money to services by publication in reputable law lists or use
evidence19 (consisting of the sworn statements of his client. The only exception is, when in the of simple professional cards.
the very same persons coaxed by Labiano and interest of justice, he has to advance necessary
referred to respondent’s office) to prove that expenses (such as filing fees, stenographer’s fees
respondent indeed solicited legal business as well Professional calling cards may only contain the
for transcript of stenographic notes, cash bond or following details:
as profited from referrals’ suits. premium for surety bond, etc.) for a matter that he
is handling for the client.
(a) lawyer’s name;
 61

(b) name of the law firm with which he is In re LUIS B. TAGORDA, that is on the 16th of next month.
connected; Before my induction into office I
Duran & Lim for respondent. should be very glad to hear your
(c) address; Attorney-General Jaranilla and Provincial Fiscal Jose suggestions or recommendations
for the Government. for the good of the province in
general and for your barrio in
(d) telephone number and particular. You can come to my
MALCOLM, J.: house at any time here in Echague,
28
(e) special branch of law practiced. to submit to me any kind of
The respondent, Luis B. Tagorda, a practising suggestion or recommendation as
Labiano’s calling card contained the phrase "with attorney and a member of the provincial board of you may desire.
financial assistance." The phrase was clearly used Isabela, admits that previous to the last general
to entice clients (who already had representation) elections he made use of a card written in Spanish I also inform you that despite my
to change counsels with a promise of loans to and Ilocano, which, in translation, reads as follows: membership in the Board I will
finance their legal actions. Money was dangled to have my residence here in
lure clients away from their original lawyers, LUIS B. TAGORDA Echague. I will attend the session
thereby taking advantage of their financial distress Attorney of the Board of Ilagan, but will
and emotional vulnerability. This crass Notary Public come back home on the following
commercialism degraded the integrity of the bar CANDIDATE FOR THIRD MEMBER day here in Echague to live and
and deserved no place in the legal profession. Province of Isabela serve with you as a lawyer and
However, in the absence of substantial evidence to notary public. Despite my election
prove his culpability, the Court is not prepared to (NOTE. — As notary public, he can as member of the Provincial Board,
rule that respondent was personally and directly execute for you a deed of sale for I will exercise my legal profession
responsible for the printing and distribution of the purchase of land as required by as a lawyer and notary public. In
Labiano’s calling cards. the cadastral office; can renew lost case you cannot see me at home
documents of your animals; can on any week day, I assure you that
WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Nicomedes make your application and final you can always find me there on
Tolentino for violating Rules 1.03, 2.03, 8.02 and requisites for your homestead; and every Sunday. I also inform you
16.04 and Canon 3 of the Code of Professional can execute any kind of affidavit. that I will receive any work
Responsibility and Section 27, Rule 138 of the As a lawyer, he can help you regarding preparations of
Rules of Court is hereby SUSPENDED from the collect your loans although long documents of contract of sales and
practice of law for a period of one overdue, as well as any complaint affidavits to be sworn to before me
year effective immediately from receipt of this for or against you. Come or write to as notary public even on Sundays.
resolution. He is STERNLY WARNED that a him in his town, Echague, Isabela.
repetition of the same or similar acts in the future He offers free consultation, and is I would like you all to be informed
shall be dealt with more severely. willing to help and serve the poor.) of this matter for the reason that
some people are in the belief that
Let a copy of this Resolution be made part of his The respondent further admits that he is the author my residence as member of the
records in the Office of the Bar Confidant, Supreme of a letter addressed to a lieutenant of barrio in his Board will be in Ilagan and that I
Court of the Philippines, and be furnished to the home municipality written in Ilocano, which letter, would then be disqualified to
Integrated Bar of the Philippines and the Office of in translation, reads as follows: exercise my profession as lawyer
the Court Administrator to be circulated to all and as notary public. Such is not
courts. the case and I would make it clear
ECHAGUE, ISABELA, September 18, that I am free to exercise my
1928 profession as formerly and that I
SO ORDERED. will have my residence here in
MY DEAR LIEUTENANT: I would like Echague.
EN BANC to inform you of the approaching
date for our induction into office as I would request you kind favor to
March 23, 1929 member of the Provincial Board, transmit this information to your
 62

barrio people in any of your local custom, and sometimes of immediately to inform thereof to the end
meetings or social gatherings so convenience, is not per se improper. But that the offender may be disbarred.
that they may be informed of my solicitation of business by circulars or
desire to live and to serve with you advertisements, or by personal Common barratry consisting of frequently stirring
in my capacity as lawyer and communications or interview not warranted up suits and quarrels between individuals was a
notary public. If the people in your by personal relations, is unprofessional. It crime at the common law, and one of the penalties
locality have not as yet contracted is equally unprofessional to procure for this offense when committed by an attorney
the services of other lawyers in business by indirection through touters of was disbarment. Statutes intended to reach the
connection with the registration of any kind, whether allied real estate firms or same evil have been provided in a number of
their land titles, I would be willing trust companies advertising to secure the jurisdictions usually at the instance of the bar
to handle the work in court and drawing of deeds or wills or offering itself, and have been upheld as constitutional. The
would charge only three pesos for retainers in exchange for executorships or reason behind statutes of this type is not difficult to
every registration. trusteeships to be influenced by the discover. The law is a profession and not a
lawyer. Indirect advertisement for business business. The lawyer may not seek or obtain
Yours respectfully, by furnishing or inspiring newspaper employment by himself or through others for to do
comments concerning the manner of their so would be unprofessional. (State vs. Rossman
conduct, the magnitude of the interest [1909], 53 Wash., 1; 17 Ann. Cas., 625;
(Sgd.) LUIS TAGORDA involved, the importance of the lawyer's
Attorney People vs. Mac Cabe [1893], 19 L. R. A., 231; 2 R.
position, and all other like self-laudation, C. L., 1097.)
Notary Public. defy the traditions and lower the tone of
our high calling, and are intolerable.
The facts being conceded, it is next in order to It becomes our duty to condemn in no uncertain
write down the applicable legal provisions. Section terms the ugly practice of solicitation of cases by
28. STIRRING UP LITIGATION, DIRECTLY OR lawyers. It is destructive of the honor of a great
21 of the Code of Civil Procedure as originally THROUGH AGENTS. — It is unprofessional
conceived related to disbarments of members of profession. It lowers the standards of that
for a lawyer to volunteer advice to bring a profession. It works against the confidence of the
the bar. In 1919 at the instigation of the Philippine lawsuit, except in rare cases where ties of
Bar Association, said codal section was amended community in the integrity of the members of the
blood, relationship or trust make it his duty bar. It results in needless litigation and in incenting
by Act No. 2828 by adding at the end thereof the to do so. Stirring up strife and litigation is
following: "The practice of soliciting cases at law to strife otherwise peacefully inclined citizens.
not only unprofessional, but it is indictable
for the purpose of gain, either personally or at common law. It is disreputable to hunt
through paid agents or brokers, constitutes up defects in titles or other causes of The solicitation of employment by an attorney is a
malpractice." action and inform thereof in order to the ground for disbarment or suspension. That should
employed to bring suit, or to breed be distinctly understood.
The statute as amended conforms in principle to litigation by seeking out those with claims
the Canons of Professionals Ethics adopted by the for personal injuries or those having any Giving application of the law and the Canons of
American Bar Association in 1908 and by the other grounds of action in order to secure Ethics to the admitted facts, the respondent stands
Philippine Bar Association in 1917. Canons 27 and them as clients, or to employ agents or convicted of having solicited cases in defiance of
28 of the Code of Ethics provide: runners for like purposes, or to pay or the law and those canons. Accordingly, the only
reward directly or indirectly, those who remaining duty of the court is to fix upon the action
27. ADVERTISING, DIRECT OR INDIRECT. — bring or influence the bringing of such which should here be taken. The provincial fiscal of
The most worthy and effective cases to his office, or to remunerate Isabela, with whom joined the representative of the
advertisement possible, even for a young policemen, court or prison officials, Attorney-General in the oral presentation of the
lawyer, and especially with his brother physicians, hospital attaches or others who case, suggests that the respondent be only
lawyers, is the establishment of a well- may succeed, under the guise of giving reprimanded. We think that our action should go
merited reputation for professional disinterested friendly advice, in influencing further than this if only to reflect our attitude
capacity and fidelity to trust. This cannot the criminal, the sick and the injured, the toward cases of this character of which
be forced, but must be the outcome of ignorant or others, to seek his professional unfortunately the respondent's is only one. The
character and conduct. The publication or services. A duty to the public and to the commission of offenses of this nature would amply
circulation of ordinary simple business profession devolves upon every member of justify permanent elimination from the bar. But as
cards, being a matter of personal taste or the bar having knowledge of such practices mitigating, circumstances working in favor of the
upon the part of any practitioner respondent there are, first, his intimation that he
 63

was unaware of the impropriety of his acts, second, THE Please call: 521-0767 LEGAL 5217232, advertising these services should be allowed
his youth and inexperience at the bar, and, third, 5222041 CLINIC, INC. 8:30 am- 6:00 pm 7-Flr. supposedly
his promise not to commit a similar mistake in the Victoria Bldg., UN Ave., Mla. in the light of the case of John R. Bates and Van
future. A modest period of suspension would seem O'Steen vs. State Bar of Arizona, 2reportedly
to fit the case of the erring attorney. But it should Annex B decided by the United States Supreme Court on
be distinctly understood that this result is reached June 7, 1977.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
in view of the considerations which have influenced virtual law library
the court to the relatively lenient in this particular GUAM DIVORCE.
instance and should, therefore, not be taken as Considering the critical implications on the legal
indicating that future convictions of practice of this DON PARKINSONchanrobles virtual law library profession of the issues raised herein, we required
kind will not be dealt with by disbarment. the (1) Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), (2)
an Attorney in Guam, is giving FREE BOOKS on Philippine Bar Association (PBA), (3) Philippine
In view of all the circumstances of this case, the Guam Divorce through The Legal Clinic beginning Lawyers' Association (PLA), (4) U.P. Womens
judgment of the court is that the respondent Luis Monday to Friday during office Lawyers' Circle (WILOCI), (5) Women Lawyers
B. Tagorda be and is hereby suspended from the hours.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual Association of the Philippines (WLAP), and (6)
practice as an attorney-at-law for the period of one law library Federacion International de Abogadas (FIDA) to
month from April 1, 1929, submit their respective position papers on the
Guam divorce. Annulment of Marriage. Immigration controversy and, thereafter, their
EN BANC Problems, Visa Ext. Quota/Non-quota Res. & memoranda. 3The said bar associations readily
Special Retiree's Visa. Declaration of Absence. responded and extended their valuable services
Remarriage to Filipina Fiancees. Adoption. and cooperation of which this Court takes note with
Bar Matter No. 553 June 17, 1993 appreciation and
Investment in the Phil. US/Foreign Visa for Filipina
Spouse/Children. Call Marivic.chanrobles virtual law gratitude.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
MAURICIO C. ULEP, Petitioner, vs. THE LEGAL library virtual law library
CLINIC, INC., Respondent.
THE 7F Victoria Bldg. 429 UN Ave., LEGAL Ermita, The main issues posed for resolution before the
R E SO L U T I O N Manila nr. US Embassy CLINIC, INC. 1 Tel. 521-7232; Court are whether or not the services offered by
521-7251; 522-2041; 521-0767 respondent, The Legal Clinic, Inc., as advertised by
REGALADO, J.: it constitutes practice of law and, in either case,
whether the same can properly be the subject of
It is the submission of petitioner that the the advertisements herein complained
Petitioner prays this Court "to order the respondent advertisements above reproduced are of.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law
to cease and desist from issuing advertisements champterous, unethical, demeaning of the law library
similar to or of the same tenor as that of annexes profession, and destructive of the confidence of the
"A" and "B" (of said petition) and to perpetually community in the integrity of the members of the
prohibit persons or entities from making bar and that, as a member of the legal profession, Before proceeding with an in-depth analysis of the
advertisements pertaining to the exercise of the he is ashamed and offended by the said merits of this case, we deem it proper and
law profession other than those allowed by advertisements, hence the reliefs sought in his enlightening to present hereunder excerpts from
law."chanrobles virtual law library petition as hereinbefore the respective position papers adopted by the
quoted.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles aforementioned bar associations and the
virtual law library memoranda submitted by them on the issues
The advertisements complained of by herein involved in this bar matter.
petitioner are as follows:
In its answer to the petition, respondent admits the
fact of publication of said advertisement at its 1. Integrated Bar of the Philippines:
Annex A
instance, but claims that it is not engaged in the
practice of law but in the rendering of "legal xxx xxx xxxchanrobles virtual law library
SECRET MARRIAGE? support services" through paralegals with the use
P560.00 for a valid marriage. of modern computers and electronic machines.
Info on DIVORCE. ABSENCE. Notwithstanding the subtle manner by which
Respondent further argues that assuming that the respondent endeavored to distinguish the two
ANNULMENT. VISA.chanrobles virtual law library services advertised are legal services, the act of terms, i.e., "legal support services" vis-a-vis "legal
 64

services", common sense would readily dictate that effect that the advertisements have on the reading It may be conceded that, as the respondent claims,
the same are essentially without substantial public.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual the advertisements in question are only meant to
distinction. For who could deny that document law library inform the general public of the services being
search, evidence gathering, assistance to layman offered by it. Said advertisements, however,
in need of basic institutional services from The impression created by the advertisements in emphasize to Guam divorce, and any law student
government or non-government agencies like birth, question can be traced, first of all, to the very ought to know that under the Family Code, there is
marriage, property, or business registration, name being used by respondent - "The Legal Clinic, only one instance when a foreign divorce is
obtaining documents like clearance, passports, Inc." Such a name, it is respectfully submitted recognized, and that is:
local or foreign visas, constitutes practice of law? connotes the rendering of legal services for legal
problems, just like a medical clinic connotes Article 26. . . .chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
xxx xxx xxxchanrobles virtual law library medical services for medical problems. More virtual law library
importantly, the term "Legal Clinic" connotes
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) does not lawyers, as the term medical clinic connotes Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a
wish to make issue with respondent's foreign doctors.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is
citations. Suffice it to state that the IBP has made virtual law library thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien
its position manifest, to wit, that it strongly spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the
opposes the view espoused by respondent (to the Furthermore, the respondent's name, as published Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry
effect that today it is alright to advertise one's in the advertisements subject of the present case, under Philippine Law.
legal appears with (the) scale(s) of justice, which all the
services).chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles more reinforces the impression that it is being It must not be forgotten, too, that the Family Code
virtual law library operated by members of the bar and that it offers (defines) a marriage as follows:
legal services. In addition, the advertisements in
The IBP accordingly declares in no uncertain terms question appear with a picture and name of a
person being represented as a lawyer from Guam, Article 1. Marriage is special contract of permanent
its opposition to respondent's act of establishing a union between a man and woman entered into
"legal clinic" and of concomitantly advertising the and this practically removes whatever doubt may
still remain as to the nature of the service or accordance with law for the establishment of
same through newspaper conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the
publications.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles services being
offered.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles family and an inviolable social institution whose
virtual law library nature, consequences, and incidents are governed
virtual law library
by law and not subject to stipulation, except that
The IBP would therefore invoke the administrative marriage settlements may fix the property relation
supervision of this Honorable Court to perpetually It thus becomes irrelevant whether respondent is during the marriage within the limits provided by
restrain respondent from undertaking highly merely offering "legal support services" as claimed this Code.
unethical activities in the field of law practice as by it, or whether it offers legal services as any
aforedescribed. 4 lawyer actively engaged in law practice does. And
it becomes unnecessary to make a distinction By simply reading the questioned advertisements,
between "legal services" and "legal support it is obvious that the message being conveyed is
xxx xxx xxxchanrobles virtual law library services," as the respondent would have it. The that Filipinos can avoid the legal consequences of a
advertisements in question leave no room for marriage celebrated in accordance with our law, by
A. The use of the name "The Legal Clinic, Inc." doubt in the minds of the reading public that legal simply going to Guam for a divorce. This is not only
gives the impression that respondent corporation is services are being offered by lawyers, whether true misleading, but encourages, or serves to induce,
being operated by lawyers and that it renders legal or not.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual violation of Philippine law. At the very least, this
services.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles law library can be considered "the dark side" of legal practice,
virtual law library where certain defects in Philippine laws are
exploited for the sake of profit. At worst, this is
B. The advertisements in question are meant to outright malpractice.
While the respondent repeatedly denies that it induce the performance of acts contrary to law,
offers legal services to the public, the morals, public order and public
advertisements in question give the impression policy.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual Rule 1.02. - A lawyer shall not counsel or abet
that respondent is offering legal services. The law library activities aimed at defiance of the law or at
Petition in fact simply assumes this to be so, as lessening confidence in the legal system.
earlier mentioned, apparently because this (is) the
 65

In addition, it may also be relevant to point out that advertisements in question, or any other members of the Bench and Bar. Respondent would
advertisements such as that shown in Annex "A" of advertisements similar thereto. It is also submitted then be offering technical assistance, not legal
the Petition, which contains a cartoon of a motor that respondent should be prohibited from further services. Alternatively, the more difficult task of
vehicle with the words "Just Married" on its bumper performing or offering some of the services it carefully distinguishing between which service may
and seems to address those planning a "secret presently offers, or, at the very least, from offering be offered to the public in general and which
marriage," if not suggesting a "secret marriage," such services to the public in should be made available exclusively to members
makes light of the "special contract of permanent general.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles of the Bar may be undertaken. This, however, may
union," the inviolable social institution," which is virtual law library require further proceedings because of the factual
how the Family Code describes marriage, obviously considerations
to emphasize its sanctity and inviolability. Worse, The IBP is aware of the fact that providing involved.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
this particular advertisement appears to encourage computerized legal research, electronic data virtual law library
marriages celebrated in secrecy, which is gathering, storage and retrieval, standardized legal
suggestive of immoral publication of applications forms, investigators for gathering of evidence, and It must be emphasized, however, that some of
for a marriage like services will greatly benefit the legal respondent's services ought to be prohibited
license.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles profession and should not be stifled but instead outright, such as acts which tend to suggest or
virtual law library encouraged. However, when the conduct of such induce celebration abroad of marriages which are
business by non-members of the Bar encroaches bigamous or otherwise illegal and void under
If the article "Rx for Legal Problems" is to be upon the practice of law, there can be no choice Philippine law. While respondent may not be
reviewed, it can readily be concluded that the but to prohibit such prohibited from simply disseminating information
above impressions one may gather from the business.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles regarding such matters, it must be required to
advertisements in question are accurate. The virtual law library include, in the information given, a disclaimer that
Sharon Cuneta-Gabby Concepcion example alone it is not authorized to practice law, that certain
confirms what the advertisements suggest. Here it Admittedly, many of the services involved in the course of action may be illegal under Philippine
can be seen that criminal acts are being case at bar can be better performed by specialists law, that it is not authorized or capable of
encouraged or committed in other fields, such as computer experts, who by rendering a legal opinion, that a lawyer should be
(a bigamous marriage in Hong Kong or Las Vegas) reason of their having devoted time and effort consulted before deciding on which course of
with impunity simply because the jurisdiction of exclusively to such field cannot fulfill the exacting action to take, and that it cannot recommend any
Philippine courts does not extend to the place requirements for admission to the Bar. To prohibit particular lawyer without subjecting itself to
where the crime is them from "encroaching" upon the legal profession possible sanctions for illegal practice of
committed.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles will deny the profession of the great benefits and law.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual
virtual law library advantages of modern technology. Indeed, a law library
lawyer using a computer will be doing better than a
Even if it be assumed, arguendo, (that) the "legal lawyer using a typewriter, even if both are (equal) If respondent is allowed to advertise, advertising
support services" respondent offers do not in skill.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual should be directed exclusively at members of the
constitute legal services as commonly understood, law library Bar, with a clear and unmistakable disclaimer that
the advertisements in question give the impression it is not authorized to practice law or perform legal
that respondent corporation is being operated by Both the Bench and the Bar, however, should be services.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
lawyers and that it offers legal services, as earlier careful not to allow or tolerate the illegal practice virtual law library
discussed. Thus, the only logical consequence is of law in any form, not only for the protection of
that, in the eyes of an ordinary newspaper reader, members of the Bar but also, and more The benefits of being assisted by paralegals cannot
members of the bar themselves are encouraging or importantly, for the protection of the public. be ignored. But nobody should be allowed to
inducing the performance of acts which are Technological development in the profession may represent himself as a "paralegal" for profit,
contrary to law, morals, good customs and the be encouraged without tolerating, but instead without such term being clearly defined by rule or
public good, thereby destroying and demeaning ensuring prevention of illegal regulation, and without any adequate and effective
the integrity of the Bar. practice.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles means of regulating his activities. Also, law
virtual law library practice in a corporate form may prove to be
xxx xxx xxxchanrobles virtual law library advantageous to the legal profession, but before
There might be nothing objectionable if respondent allowance of such practice may be considered, the
It is respectfully submitted that respondent should is allowed to perform all of its services, but only if corporation's Article of Incorporation and By-laws
be enjoined from causing the publication of the such services are made available exclusively to must conform to each and every provision of the
 66

Code of Professional Responsibility and the Rules of Court) is to subject the members to As advertised, it offers the general public its
Court. 5 the discipline of the Supreme Court. Although advisory services on Persons and Family Relations
respondent uses its business name, the persons Law, particularly regarding foreign divorces,
2. Philippine Bar Association: and the lawyers who act for it are subject to court annulment of marriages, secret marriages,
discipline. The practice of law is not a profession absence and adoption; Immigration Laws,
open to all who wish to engage in it nor can it be particularly on visa related problems, immigration
xxx xxx xxx.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles assigned to another (See 5 Am. Jur. 270). It is problems; the Investments Law of the Philippines
virtual law library a personal right limited to persons who have and such other related
qualified themselves under the law. It follows that laws.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual
Respondent asserts that it "is not engaged in the not only respondent but also all the persons who law library
practice of law but engaged in giving legal support are acting for respondent are the persons engaged
services to lawyers and laymen, through in unethical law practice.  6 Its advertised services unmistakably require the
experienced paralegals, with the use of modern application of the aforesaid law, the legal principles
computers and electronic machines" (pars. 2 and 3. Philippine Lawyers' Association:chanrobles and procedures related thereto, the legal advices
3, Comment). This is absurd. Unquestionably, virtual law library based thereon and which activities call for legal
respondent's acts of holding out itself to the public training, knowledge and
under the trade name "The Legal Clinic, Inc.," and experience.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
soliciting employment for its enumerated services The Philippine Lawyers' Association's position, in
answer to the issues stated herein, are wit: virtual law library
fall within the realm of a practice which thus yields
itself to the regulatory powers of the Supreme
Court. For respondent to say that it is merely 1. The Legal Clinic is engaged in the practice of Applying the test laid down by the Court in the
engaged in paralegal work is to stretch credulity. law; aforecited Agrava Case, the activities of
Respondent's own commercial advertisement respondent fall squarely and are embraced in what
which announces a certain Atty. Don Parkinson to lawyers and laymen equally term as "the practice
2. Such practice is unauthorized; of law." 7
be handling the fields of law belies its pretense.
From all indications, respondent "The Legal Clinic,
Inc." is offering and rendering legal 3. The advertisements complained of are not only 4. U.P. Women Lawyers' Circle:chanrobles virtual
services through its reserve of lawyers. It has been unethical, but also misleading and patently law library
held that the practice of law is not limited to the immoral; and
conduct of cases in court, but includes drawing of In resolving, the issues before this Honorable
deeds, incorporation, rendering opinions, and 4. The Honorable Supreme Court has the power to Court, paramount consideration should be given to
advising clients as to their legal right and then take supress and punish the Legal Clinic and its the protection of the general public from the
them to an attorney and ask the latter to look after corporate officers for its unauthorized practice of danger of being exploited by unqualified persons or
their case in court See Martin, Legal and Judicial law and for its unethical, misleading and immoral entities who may be engaged in the practice of
Ethics, 1984 ed., p. advertising. law.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual
39).chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library
law library xxx xxx xxxchanrobles virtual law library
At present, becoming a lawyer requires one to take
It is apt to recall that only natural persons can Respondent posits that is it not engaged in the a rigorous four-year course of study on top of a
engage in the practice of law, and such limitation practice of law. It claims that it merely renders four-year bachelor of arts or sciences course and
cannot be evaded by a corporation employing "legal support services" to answers, litigants and then to take and pass the bar examinations. Only
competent lawyers to practice for it. Obviously, this the general public as enunciated in the Primary then, is a lawyer qualified to practice
is the scheme or device by which respondent "The Purpose Clause of its Article(s) of Incorporation. law.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual
Legal Clinic, Inc." holds out itself to the public and (See pages 2 to 5 of Respondent's Comment). But law library
solicits employment of its legal services. It is its advertised services, as enumerated above,
an odious vehicle for deception, especially so when clearly and convincingly show that it is indeed
the public cannot ventilate any grievance While the use of a paralegal is sanctioned in many
engaged in law practice, albeit outside of jurisdiction as an aid to the administration of
for malpractice against the business conduit. court.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual
Precisely, the limitation of practice of law to justice, there are in those jurisdictions, courses of
law library study and/or standards which would qualify these
persons who have been duly admitted as members
of the Bar (Sec. 1, Rule 138, Revised Rules of paralegals to deal with the general public as such.
 67

While it may now be the opportune time to 5. Women Lawyer's Association of the attempted, and seek advice on divorce, where in
establish these courses of study and/or standards, Philippines:chanrobles virtual law library this country there is none, except under the Code
the fact remains that at present, these do not exist of Muslim Personal Laws in the Philippines. It is also
in the Philippines. In the meantime, this Honorable Annexes "A" and "B" of the petition are clearly against good morals and is deceitful because it
Court may decide to make measures to protect the advertisements to solicit cases for the purpose of falsely represents to the public to be able to do
general public from being exploited by those who gain which, as provided for under the above cited that which by our laws cannot be done (and) by our
may be dealing with the general public in the guise law, (are) illegal and against the Code of Code of Morals should not be
of being "paralegals" without being qualified to do Professional Responsibility of lawyers in this done.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual
so.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law country.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles law library
library virtual law library
In the case (of) In re Taguda, 53 Phil. 37, the
In the same manner, the general public should also Annex "A" of the petition is not only illegal in that it Supreme Court held that solicitation for clients by
be protected from the dangers which may be is an advertisement to solicit cases, but it is illegal an attorney by circulars of advertisements, is
brought about by advertising of legal services. in that in bold letters it announces that the Legal unprofessional, and offenses of this character
While it appears that lawyers are prohibited under Clinic, Inc., could work out/cause the celebration of justify permanent elimination from the Bar. 10
the present Code of Professional Responsibility a secret marriage which is not only illegal but
from advertising, it appears in the instant case that immoral in this country. While it is advertised that 6. Federacion Internacional de Abogados:
legal services are being advertised not by lawyers one has to go to said agency and pay P560 for a
but by an entity staffed by "paralegals." Clearly, valid marriage it is certainly fooling the public for
measures should be taken to protect the general xxx xxx xxxchanrobles virtual law library
valid marriages in the Philippines are solemnized
public from falling prey to those who advertise only by officers authorized to do so under the law.
legal services without being qualified to offer such And to employ an agency for said purpose of 1.7 That entities admittedly not engaged in the
services. 8 contracting marriage is not practice of law, such as management consultancy
necessary.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles firms or travel agencies, whether run by lawyers or
A perusal of the questioned advertisements of virtual law library not, perform the services rendered by Respondent
Respondent, however, seems to give the does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that
impression that information regarding validity of Respondent is not unlawfully practicing law. In the
No amount of reasoning that in the USA, Canada same vein, however, the fact that the business of
marriages, divorce, annulment of marriage, and other countries the trend is towards allowing
immigration, visa extensions, declaration of respondent (assuming it can be engaged in
lawyers to advertise their special skills to enable independently of the practice of law) involves
absence, adoption and foreign investment, which people to obtain from qualified practitioners legal
are in essence, legal matters , will be given to knowledge of the law does not necessarily make
services for their particular needs can justify the respondent guilty of unlawful practice of law.
them if they avail of its services. The Respondent's use of advertisements such as are the subject
name - The Legal Clinic, Inc. - does not help matter of the petition, for one (cannot) justify an
matters. It gives the impression again that illegal act even by whatever merit the illegal act . . . . Of necessity, no one . . . . acting as a
Respondent will or can cure the legal problems may serve. The law has yet to be amended so that consultant can render effective service unless he is
brought to them. Assuming that Respondent is, as such act could become familiar with such statutes and regulations. He
claimed, staffed purely by paralegals, it also gives justifiable.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles must be careful not to suggest a course of conduct
the misleading impression that there are lawyers virtual law library which the law forbids. It seems . . . .clear that (the
involved in The Legal Clinic, Inc., as there are consultant's) knowledge of the law, and his use of
doctors in any medical clinic, when only that knowledge as a factor in determining what
"paralegals" are involved in The Legal Clinic, We submit further that these advertisements that measures he shall recommend, do not constitute
Inc.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual seem to project that secret marriages and divorce the practice of law . . . . It is not only presumed
law library are possible in this country for a fee, when in fact it that all men know the law, but it is a fact that most
is not so, are highly men have considerable acquaintance with broad
reprehensible.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanroble features of the law . . . . Our knowledge of the law -
Respondent's allegations are further belied by the s virtual law library
very admissions of its President and majority accurate or inaccurate - moulds our conduct not
stockholder, Atty. Nogales, who gave an insight on only when we are acting for ourselves, but when
the structure and main purpose of Respondent It would encourage people to consult this clinic we are serving others. Bankers, liquor dealers and
corporation in the aforementioned "Starweek" about how they could go about having a secret laymen generally possess rather precise
article." 9 marriage here, when it cannot nor should ever be knowledge of the laws touching their particular
 68

business or profession. A good example is the The handling of industrial relations is growing into persuade the opposite party to the same opinion,
architect, who must be familiar with zoning, a recognized profession for which appropriate then it may be that only a lawyer can accept the
building and fire prevention codes, factory and courses are offered by our leading universities. The assignment. Or if a controversy between an
tenement house statutes, and who draws plans court should be very cautious about declaring employer and his men grows from differing
and specification in harmony with the law. This is [that] a widespread, well-established method of interpretations of a contract, or of a statute, it is
not practicing conducting business is unlawful, or that the quite likely that defendant should not handle it. But
law.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual considerable class of men who customarily perform I need not reach a definite conclusion here, since
law library a certain function have no right to do so, or that the situation is not presented by the
the technical education given by our schools proofs.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual
But suppose the architect, asked by his client to cannot be used by the graduates in their business. law library
omit a fire tower, replies that it is required by the
statute. Or the industrial relations expert cites, in In determining whether a man is practicing law, we Defendant also appears to represent the employer
support of some measure that he recommends, a should consider his work for any particular client or before administrative agencies of the federal
decision of the National Labor Relations Board. Are customer, as a whole. I can imagine defendant government, especially before trial examiners of
they practicing law? In my opinion, they are not, being engaged primarily to advise as to the law the National Labor Relations Board. An agency of
provided no separate fee is charged for the legal defining his client's obligations to his employees, to the federal government, acting by virtue of an
advice or information, and the legal question is guide his client's obligations to his employees, to authority granted by the Congress, may regulate
subordinate and incidental to a major non-legal guide his client along the path charted by law. This, the representation of parties before such agency.
problem.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles of course, would be the practice of the law. But The State of New Jersey is without power to
virtual law library such is not the fact in the case before me. interfere with such determination or to forbid
Defendant's primarily efforts are along economic representation before the agency by one whom the
It is largely a matter of degree and of and psychological lines. The law only provides the agency admits. The rules of the National Labor
custom.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles frame within which he must work, just as the Relations Board give to a party the right to appear
virtual law library zoning code limits the kind of building the limits in person, or by counsel, or by other
the kind of building the architect may plan. The representative. Rules and Regulations, September
incidental legal advice or information defendant 11th, 1946, S. 203.31. 'Counsel' here means a
If it were usual for one intending to erect a building may give, does not transform his activities into the licensed attorney, and ther representative' one not
on his land to engage a lawyer to advise him and practice of law. Let me add that if, even as a minor a lawyer. In this phase of his work, defendant may
the architect in respect to the building code and feature of his work, he performed services which lawfully do whatever the Labor Board allows, even
the like, then an architect who performed this are customarily reserved to members of the bar, arguing questions purely legal. (Auerbacher v.
function would probably be considered to be he would be practicing law. For instance, if as part Wood, 53 A. 2d 800, cited in Statsky, Introduction
trespassing on territory reserved for licensed of a welfare program, he drew employees' to Paralegalism [1974], at pp. 154-156.).
attorneys. Likewise, if the industrial relations field wills.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual
had been pre-empted by lawyers, or custom placed law library
a lawyer always at the elbow of the lay personnel 1.8 From the foregoing, it can be said that a person
man. But this is not the case. The most important engaged in a lawful calling (which may involve
body of the industrial relations experts are the Another branch of defendant's work is the knowledge of the law) is not engaged in the
officers and business agents of the labor unions representations of the employer in the adjustment practice of law provided that:chanrobles virtual law
and few of them are lawyers. Among the larger of grievances and in collective bargaining, with or library
corporate employers, it has been the practice for without a mediator. This is not per se the practice
some years to delegate special responsibility in of law. Anyone may use an agent for negotiations (a) The legal question is subordinate and incidental
employee matters to a management group chosen and may select an agent particularly skilled in the to a major non-legal
for their practical knowledge and skill in such subject under discussion, and the person appointed problem;.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
matter, and without regard to legal thinking or lack is free to accept the employment whether or not he virtual law library
of it. More recently, consultants like the defendants is a member of the bar. Here, however, there may
have the same service that the larger employers be an exception where the business turns on a
question of law. Most real estate sales are (b) The services performed are not customarily
get from their own specialized reserved to members of the bar;
staff.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual negotiated by brokers who are not lawyers. But if
the value of the land depends on a disputed right- .chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law
law library library
of-way and the principal role of the negotiator is to
assess the probable outcome of the dispute and
 69

(c) No separate fee is charged for the legal advice It is not entirely improbable, however, that aside contacts concerning particular problems which
or from purely giving information, the Legal Clinic's might arise in the preparation and presentation of
information.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles paralegals may apply the law to the particular the purchaser's asserted matrimonial cause of
virtual law library problem of the client, and give legal advice. Such action or pursuit of other legal remedies and
would constitute unauthorized practice of law. assistance in the preparation of necessary
All these must be considered in relation to the work documents (The injunction therefore sought to)
for any particular client as a It cannot be claimed that the publication of a legal enjoin conduct constituting the practice of law,
whole.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual text which publication of a legal text which particularly with reference to the giving of advice
law library purports to say what the law is amount to legal and counsel by the defendant relating to specific
practice. And the mere fact that the principles or problems of particular individuals in connection
rules stated in the text may be accepted by a with a divorce, separation, annulment of separation
1.9. If the person involved is both lawyer and non- agreement sought and should be affirmed. (State
lawyer, the Code of Professional Responsibility particular reader as a solution to his problem does
not affect this. . . . . Apparently it is urged that the v. Winder, 348, NYS 2D 270 [1973], cited in
succintly states the rule of conduct:chanrobles Statsky, supra at p. 101.).
virtual law library conjoining of these two, that is, the text and the
forms, with advice as to how the forms should be
filled out, constitutes the unlawful practice of law. 1.12. Respondent, of course, states that its
Rule 15.08 - A lawyer who is engaged in another But that is the situation with many approved and services are "strictly non-diagnostic, non-advisory.
profession or occupation concurrently with the accepted texts. Dacey's book is sold to the public "It is not controverted, however, that if the services
practice of law shall make clear to his client at large. There is no personal contact or "involve giving legal advice or counselling," such
whether he is acting as a lawyer or in another relationship with a particular individual. Nor does would constitute practice of law (Comment, par.
capacity.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles there exist that relation of confidence and trust so 6.2). It is in this light that FIDA submits that a
virtual law library necessary to the status of attorney and client. THIS factual inquiry may be necessary for the judicious
IS THE ESSENTIAL OF LEGAL PRACTICE - THE disposition of this case.
1.10. In the present case. the Legal Clinic appears REPRESENTATION AND ADVISING OF A
to render wedding services (See Annex "A" PARTICULAR PERSON IN A PARTICULAR xxx xxx xxxchanrobles virtual law library
Petition). Services on routine, straightforward SITUATION. At most the book assumes to offer
marriages, like securing a marriage license, and general advice on common problems, and does not
making arrangements with a priest or a judge, may purport to give personal advice on a specific 2.10. Annex "A" may be ethically objectionable in
not constitute practice of law. However, if the problem peculiar to a designated or readily that it can give the impression (or perpetuate the
problem is as complicated as that described in "Rx identified person. Similarly the defendant's wrong notion) that there is a secret marriage. With
for Legal Problems" on the Sharon Cuneta-Gabby publication does not purport to give personal all the solemnities, formalities and other requisites
Concepcion-Richard Gomez case, then what may advice on a specific problem peculiar to a of marriages (See Articles 2, et seq., Family Code),
be involved is actually the practice of law. If a non- designated or readily identified person in a no Philippine marriage can be
lawyer, such as the Legal Clinic, renders such particular situation - in their publication and sale of secret.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual
services then it is engaged in the unauthorized the kits, such publication and sale did not law library
practice of constitutes the unlawful practice of law . . . . There
law.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual being no legal impediment under the statute to the 2.11. Annex "B" may likewise be ethically
law library sale of the kit, there was no proper basis for the objectionable. The second paragraph thereof
injunction against defendant maintaining an office (which is not necessarily related to the first
1.11. The Legal Clinic also appears to give for the purpose of selling to persons seeking a paragraph) fails to state the limitation that only
information on divorce, absence, annulment of divorce, separation, annulment or separation "paralegal services?" or "legal support services",
marriage and visas (See Annexes "A" and "B" agreement any printed material or writings relating and not legal services, are available." 11chanrobles
Petition). Purely giving informational materials may to matrimonial law or the prohibition in the virtual law library
not constitute of law. The business is similar to that memorandum of modification of the judgment
of a bookstore where the customer buys materials against defendant having an interest in any A prefatory discussion on the meaning of the
on the subject and determines on the subject and publishing house publishing his manuscript on phrase "practice of law" becomes exigent for the
determines by himself what courses of action to divorce and against his having any personal proper determination of the issues raised by the
take.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual contact with any prospective purchaser. The record petition at bar. On this score, we note that the
law library does fully support, however, the finding that for the clause "practice of law" has long been the subject
change of $75 or $100 for the kit, the defendant of judicial construction and interpretation. The
gave legal advice in the course of personal
 70

courts have laid down general principles and In the recent case of Cayetano vs. Monsod, 19after The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of
doctrines explaining the meaning and scope of the citing the doctrines in several cases, we laid down cases or litigation in court; it embraces the
term, some of which we now take into the test to determine whether certain acts preparation of pleadings and other papers incident
account.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles constitute "practice of law," thus: to actions and special proceedings, the
virtual law library management of such actions and proceedings on
Black defines "practice of law" as:chanrobles behalf of clients before judges and courts, and in
Practice of law means any activity, in or out of virtual law library addition, conveying. In general, all advice to
court, which requires the application of law, legal clients, and all action taken for them in matters
procedures, knowledge, training and experience. connected with the law incorporation services,
The rendition of services requiring the knowledge assessment and condemnation services
To engage in the practice of law is to perform those and the application of legal principles and
acts which are characteristic of the profession. contemplating an appearance before a judicial
technique to serve the interest of another with his body, the foreclosure of a mortgage, enforcement
Generally, to practice law is to give advice or consent. It is not limited to appearing in court, or
render any kind of service that involves legal of a creditor's claim in bankruptcy and insolvency
advising and assisting in the conduct of litigation, proceedings, and conducting proceedings in
knowledge or skill. 12chanrobles virtual law library but embraces the preparation of pleadings, and attachment, and in matters or estate and
other papers incident to actions and special guardianship have been held to constitute law
The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of proceedings, conveyancing, the preparation of practice, as do the preparation and drafting of legal
cases in court. It includes legal advice and counsel, legal instruments of all kinds, and the giving of all instruments, where the work done involves the
and the preparation of legal instruments and legal advice to clients. It embraces all advice to determination by the trained legal mind of the
contract by which legal rights are secured, clients and all actions taken for them in matters legal effect of facts and conditions. (5 Am. Jr. p.
although such matter may or may not be pending connected with the law. 262, 263).chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
in a court. 13chanrobles virtual law library virtual law library
The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of
In the practice of his profession, a licensed cases on court.(Land Title Abstract and Trust Co. v. Practice of law under modern conditions consists in
attorney at law generally engages in three Dworken , 129 Ohio St. 23, 193N. E. 650). A person no small part of work performed outside of any
principal types of professional activity: legal advice is also considered to be in the practice of law when court and having no immediate relation to
and instructions to clients to inform them of their he: proceedings in court. It embraces conveyancing,
rights and obligations, preparation for clients of the giving of legal advice on a large variety of
documents requiring knowledge of legal principles . . . . for valuable consideration engages in the subjects and the preparation and execution of legal
not possessed by ordinary layman, and appearance business of advising person, firms, associations or instruments covering an extensive field of business
for clients before public tribunals which possess corporations as to their right under the law, or and trust relations and other affairs. Although
power and authority to determine rights of life, appears in a representative capacity as an these transactions may have no direct connection
liberty, and property according to law, in order to advocate in proceedings, pending or prospective, with court proceedings, they are always subject to
assist in proper interpretation and enforcement of before any court, commissioner, referee, board, become involved in litigation. They require in many
law. 14chanrobles virtual law library body, committee, or commission constituted by law aspects a high degree of legal skill, a wide
or authorized to settle controversies and there, in experience with men and affairs, and great
When a person participates in the a trial and such representative capacity, performs any act or capacity for adaptation to difficult and complex
advertises himself as a lawyer, he is in the practice acts for the purpose of obtaining or defending the situations. These customary functions of an
of law. 15One who confers with clients, advises rights of their clients under the law. Otherwise attorney or counselor at law bear an intimate
them as to their legal rights and then takes the stated, one who, in a representative capacity, relation to the administration of justice by the
business to an attorney and asks the latter to look engages in the business of advising clients as to courts. No valid distinction, so far as concerns the
after the case in court, is also practicing their rights under the law, or while so engaged question set forth in the order, can be drawn
law. 16Giving advice for compensation regarding performs any act or acts either in court or outside between that part of the work of the lawyer which
the legal status and rights of another and the of court for that purpose, is engaged in the practice involves appearance in court and that part which
conduct with respect thereto constitutes a practice of law. (State ex. rel. Mckittrick v. C.S. Dudley and involves advice and drafting of instruments in his
of law. 17One who renders an opinion as to the Co., 102 S. W. 2d 895, 340 Mo. 852). office. It is of importance to the welfare of the
proper interpretation of a statute, and receives pay public that these manifold customary functions be
for it, is, to that extent, practicing law. 18chanrobles This Court, in the case of Philippines Lawyers performed by persons possessed of adequate
virtual law library Association v. Agrava (105 Phil. 173, 176- learning and skill, of sound moral character, and
177),stated: acting at all times under the heavy trust
obligations to clients which rests upon all
 71

attorneys. (Moran, Comments on the Rules o Court, While some of the services being offered by problem, and even if it is as complicated as the
Vol. 3 [1973 ed.], pp. 665-666, citing In Re Opinion respondent corporation merely involve mechanical Cuneta-Concepcion domestic situation, Atty.
of the Justices [Mass], 194 N. E. 313, quoted in and technical knowhow, such as the installation of Nogales and his staff of lawyers, who, like doctors
Rhode Is. Bar Assoc. v. Automobile Service Assoc. computer systems and programs for the efficient are "specialists" in various fields can take care of
[R.I.] 197 A. 139, 144). management of law offices, or the computerization it. The Legal Clinic, Inc. has specialists in taxation
of research aids and materials, these will not and criminal law, medico-legal problems, labor,
The practice of law, therefore, covers a wide range suffice to justify an exception to the general litigation, and family law. These specialist are
of activities in and out of court. Applying the rule.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual backed up by a battery of paralegals, counsellors
aforementioned criteria to the case at bar, we law library and
agree with the perceptive findings and attorneys.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
observations of the aforestated bar associations What is palpably clear is that respondent virtual law library
that the activities of respondent, as advertised, corporation gives out legal information to laymen
constitute "practice of law."chanrobles virtual law and lawyers. Its contention that such function is Atty. Nogales set up The Legal Clinic in 1984.
library non-advisory and non-diagnostic is more apparent Inspired by the trend in the medical field toward
than real. In providing information, for example, specialization, it caters to clients who cannot afford
The contention of respondent that it merely offers about foreign laws on marriage, divorce and the services of the big law
legal support services can neither be seriously adoption, it strains the credulity of this Court that firms.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual
considered nor sustained. Said proposition is belied all the respondent corporation will simply do is look law library
by respondent's own description of the services it for the law, furnish a copy thereof to the client, and
has been offering, to wit: stop there as if it were merely a bookstore. With its The Legal Clinic has regular and walk-in clients.
attorneys and so called paralegals, it will "when they come, we start by analyzing the
necessarily have to explain to the client the problem. That's what doctors do also. They ask you
Legal support services basically consists of giving intricacies of the law and advise him or her on the
ready information by trained paralegals to laymen how you contracted what's bothering you, they
proper course of action to be taken as may be take your temperature, they observe you for the
and lawyers, which are strictly non-diagnostic, non- provided for by said law. That is what its
advisory, through the extensive use of computers symptoms and so on. That's how we operate, too.
advertisements represent and for the which And once the problem has been categorized, then
and modern information technology in the services it will consequently charge and be paid.
gathering, processing, storage, transmission and it's referred to one of our
That activity falls squarely within the specialists.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles
reproduction of information and communication, jurisprudential definition of "practice of law." Such
such as computerized legal research; encoding and virtual law library
a conclusion will not be altered by the fact that
reproduction of documents and pleadings prepared respondent corporation does not represent clients
by laymen or lawyers; document search; evidence in court since law practice, as the weight of There are cases which do not, in medical terms,
gathering; locating parties or witnesses to a case; authority holds, is not limited merely giving legal require surgery or follow-up treatment. These The
fact finding investigations; and assistance to advice, contract drafting and so Legal Clinic disposes of in a matter of minutes.
laymen in need of basic institutional services from forth.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual "Things like preparing a simple deed of sale or an
government or non-government agencies, like law library affidavit of loss can be taken care of by our staff or,
birth, marriage, property, or business registrations; if this were a hospital the residents or the interns.
educational or employment records or We can take care of these matters on a while you
certifications, obtaining documentation like The aforesaid conclusion is further strengthened by wait basis. Again, kung baga sa hospital, out-
clearances, passports, local or foreign visas; giving an article published in the January 13, 1991 issue patient, hindi kailangang ma-confine. It's just like a
information about laws of other countries that they of the Starweek/The Sunday Magazine of the common cold or diarrhea," explains Atty.
may find useful, like foreign divorce, marriage or Philippines Star, entitled "Rx for Legal Problems," Nogales.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
adoption laws that they can avail of preparatory to where an insight into the structure, main purpose virtual law library
emigration to the foreign country, and other and operations of respondent corporation was
matters that do not involve representation of given by its own "proprietor," Atty. Rogelio P.
Nogales: Those cases which requires more extensive
clients in court; designing and installing computer "treatment" are dealt with accordingly. "If you had
systems, programs, or software for the efficient a rich relative who died and named you her sole
management of law offices, corporate legal This is the kind of business that is transacted heir, and you stand to inherit millions of pesos of
departments, courts and other entities engaged in everyday at The Legal Clinic, with offices on the property, we would refer you to a specialist in
dispensing or administering legal seventh floor of the Victoria Building along U. N. taxation. There would be real estate taxes and
services. 20chanrobles virtual law library Avenue in Manila. No matter what the client's arrears which would need to be put in order, and
 72

your relative is even taxed by the state for the public, the court, the client and the bar from the evolved to protect the general public. One of the
right to transfer her property, and only a specialist incompetence or dishonesty of those unlicensed to major standards or guidelines was developed by
in taxation would be properly trained to deal with practice law and not subject to the disciplinary the American Bar Association which set up
the problem. Now, if there were other heirs control of the court. 24chanrobles virtual law library Guidelines for the Approval of Legal Assistant
contesting your rich relatives will, then you would Education Programs (1973). Legislation has even
need a litigator, who knows how to arrange the The same rule is observed in the american been proposed to certify legal assistants. There are
problem for presentation in court, and gather jurisdiction wherefrom respondent would wish to also associations of paralegals in the United States
evidence to support the case. 21chanrobles virtual draw support for his thesis. The doctrines there with their own code of professional ethics, such as
law library also stress that the practice of law is limited to the National Association of Legal Assistants, Inc.
those who meet the requirements for, and have and the American Paralegal
That fact that the corporation employs paralegals been admitted to, the bar, and various statutes or Association. 29chanrobles virtual law library
to carry out its services is not controlling. What is rules specifically so provide. 25The practice of law is
important is that it is engaged in the practice of not a lawful business except for members of the In the Philippines, we still have a restricted concept
law by virtue of the nature of the services it bar who have complied with all the conditions and limited acceptance of what may be considered
renders which thereby brings it within the ambit of required by statute and the rules of court. Only as paralegal service. As pointed out by FIDA, some
the statutory prohibitions against the those persons are allowed to practice law who, by persons not duly licensed to practice law are or
advertisements which it has caused to be reason of attainments previously acquired through have been allowed limited representation in behalf
published and are now assailed in this education and study, have been recognized by the of another or to render legal services, but such
proceeding.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles courts as possessing profound knowledge of legal allowable services are limited in scope and extent
virtual law library science entitling them to advise, counsel with, by the law, rules or regulations granting permission
protect, or defend the rights claims, or liabilities of therefor. 30chanrobles virtual law library
Further, as correctly and appropriately pointed out their clients, with respect to the construction,
by the U.P. WILOCI, said reported facts sufficiently interpretation, operation and effect of law. 26The Accordingly, we have adopted the American
establish that the main purpose of respondent is to justification for excluding from the practice of law judicial policy that, in the absence of constitutional
serve as a one-stop-shop of sorts for various legal those not admitted to the bar is found, not in the or statutory authority, a person who has not been
problems wherein a client may avail of legal protection of the bar from competition, but in the admitted as an attorney cannot practice law for the
services from simple documentation to complex protection of the public from being advised and proper administration of justice cannot be hindered
litigation and corporate undertakings. Most of represented in legal matters by incompetent and by the unwarranted intrusion of an unauthorized
these services are undoubtedly beyond the domain unreliable persons over whom the judicial and unskilled person into the practice of law. 31That
of paralegals, but rather, are exclusive functions of department can exercise little control.  27chanrobles policy should continue to be one of encouraging
lawyers engaged in the practice of virtual law library persons who are unsure of their legal rights and
law. 22chanrobles virtual law library remedies to seek legal assistance only from
We have to necessarily and definitely reject persons licensed to practice law in the
It should be noted that in our jurisdiction the respondent's position that the concept in the state. 32chanrobles virtual law library
services being offered by private respondent which United States of paralegals as an occupation
constitute practice of law cannot be performed by separate from the law profession be adopted in this Anent the issue on the validity of the questioned
paralegals. Only a person duly admitted as a jurisdiction. Whatever may be its merits, advertisements, the Code of Professional
member of the bar, or hereafter admitted as such respondent cannot but be aware that this should Responsibility provides that a lawyer in making
in accordance with the provisions of the Rules of first be a matter for judicial rules or legislative known his legal services shall use only true,
Court, and who is in good and regular standing, is action, and not of unilateral adoption as it has honest, fair, dignified and objective information or
entitled to practice law. 23chanrobles virtual law done.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual statement of facts. 33He is not supposed to use or
library law library permit the use of any false, fraudulent, misleading,
deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or unfair
Public policy requires that the practice of law be Paralegals in the United States are trained statement or claim regarding his qualifications or
limited to those individuals found duly qualified in professionals. As admitted by respondent, there legal services. 34Nor shall he pay or give something
education and character. The permissive right are schools and universities there which offer of value to representatives of the mass media in
conferred on the lawyers is an individual and studies and degrees in paralegal education, while anticipation of, or in return for, publicity to attract
limited privilege subject to withdrawal if he fails to there are none in the Philippines. 28As the concept legal business. 35Prior to the adoption of the code
maintain proper standards of moral and of the "paralegals" or "legal assistant" evolved in of Professional Responsibility, the Canons of
professional conduct. The purpose is to protect the the United States, standards and guidelines also Professional Ethics had also warned that lawyers
 73

should not resort to indirect advertisements for trust. This cannot be forced but must be the The law list must be a reputable law list published
professional employment, such as furnishing or outcome of character and conduct." (Canon 27, primarily for that purpose; it cannot be a mere
inspiring newspaper comments, or procuring his Code of Ethics.). supplemental feature of a paper, magazine, trade
photograph to be published in connection with journal or periodical which is published principally
causes in which the lawyer has been or is engaged We repeat, the canon of the profession tell us that for other purposes. For that reason, a lawyer may
or concerning the manner of their conduct, the the best advertising possible for a lawyer is a well- not properly publish his brief biographical and
magnitude of the interest involved, the importance merited reputation for professional capacity and informative data in a daily paper, magazine, trade
of the lawyer's position, and all other like self- fidelity to trust, which must be earned as the journal or society program. Nor may a lawyer
laudation. 36chanrobles virtual law library outcome of character and conduct. Good and permit his name to be published in a law list the
efficient service to a client as well as to the conduct, management or contents of which are
The standards of the legal profession condemn the community has a way of publicizing itself and calculated or likely to deceive or injure the public
lawyer's advertisement of his talents. A lawyer catching public attention. That publicity is a normal or the bar, or to lower the dignity or standing of the
cannot, without violating the ethics of his by-product of effective service which is right and profession. 43chanrobles virtual law library
profession. advertise his talents or skill as in a proper. A good and reputable lawyer needs no
manner similar to a merchant advertising his artificial stimulus to generate it and to magnify his The use of an ordinary simple professional card is
goods. 37The prescription against advertising of success. He easily sees the difference between a also permitted. The card may contain only a
legal services or solicitation of legal business rests normal by-product of able service and the statement of his name, the name of the law firm
on the fundamental postulate that the that the unwholesome result of propaganda. 40chanrobles which he is connected with, address, telephone
practice of law is a profession. Thus, in the case of virtual law library number and special branch of law practiced. The
The Director of Religious Affairs. vs. Estanislao R. publication of a simple announcement of the
Bayot 38 an advertisement, similar to those of Of course, not all types of advertising or solicitation opening of a law firm or of changes in the
respondent which are involved in the present are prohibited. The canons of the profession partnership, associates, firm name or office
proceeding, 39was held to constitute improper enumerate exceptions to the rule against address, being for the convenience of the
advertising or advertising or solicitation and define the extent to profession, is not objectionable. He may likewise
solicitation.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles which they may be undertaken. The exceptions are have his name listed in a telephone directory but
virtual law library of two broad categories, namely, those which are not under a designation of special branch of
expressly allowed and those which are necessarily law. 44chanrobles virtual law library
The pertinent part of the decision therein reads: implied from the restrictions. 41chanrobles virtual
law library Verily, taking into consideration the nature and
It is undeniable that the advertisement in question contents of the advertisements for which
was a flagrant violation by the respondent of the The first of such exceptions is the publication in respondent is being taken to task, which even
ethics of his profession, it being a brazen reputable law lists, in a manner consistent with the includes a quotation of the fees charged by said
solicitation of business from the public. Section 25 standards of conduct imposed by the canons, of respondent corporation for services rendered, we
of Rule 127 expressly provides among other things brief biographical and informative data. "Such data find and so hold that the same definitely do not
that "the practice of soliciting cases at law for the must not be misleading and may include only a and conclusively cannot fall under any of the
purpose of gain, either personally or thru paid statement of the lawyer's name and the names of above-mentioned
agents or brokers, constitutes malpractice." It is his professional associates; addresses, telephone exceptions.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
highly unethical for an attorney to advertise his numbers, cable addresses; branches of law virtual law library
talents or skill as a merchant advertises his wares. practiced; date and place of birth and admission to
Law is a profession and not a trade. The lawyer the bar; schools attended with dates of graduation, The ruling in the case of Bates, et al. vs. State Bar
degrades himself and his profession who stoops to degrees and other educational distinction; public or of Arizona, 45 which is repeatedly invoked and
and adopts the practices of mercantilism by quasi-public offices; posts of honor; legal constitutes the justification relied upon by
advertising his services or offering them to the authorships; legal teaching positions; membership respondent, is obviously not applicable to the case
public. As a member of the bar, he defiles the and offices in bar associations and committees at bar. Foremost is the fact that the disciplinary
temple of justice with mercenary activities as the thereof, in legal and scientific societies and legal rule involved in said case explicitly allows a lawyer,
money-changers of old defiled the temple of fraternities; the fact of listings in other reputable as an exception to the prohibition against
Jehovah. "The most worthy and effective law lists; the names and addresses of references; advertisements by lawyers, to publish a statement
advertisement possible, even for a young and, with their written consent, the names of of legal fees for an initial consultation or the
lawyer, . . . . is the establishment of a well-merited clients regularly represented." 42chanrobles virtual availability upon request of a written schedule of
reputation for professional capacity and fidelity to law library fees or an estimate of the fee to be charged for the
 74

specific services. No such exception is provided for, stockholder and proprietor of The Legal Clinic, Inc. copies of this resolution be furnished the
expressly or impliedly, whether in our former is a member of the Philippine Bar, he is hereby Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the Office of the
Canons of Professional Ethics or the present Code reprimanded, with a warning that a repetition of Bar Confidant and the Office of the Solicitor
of Professional Responsibility. Besides, even the the same or similar acts which are involved in this General for appropriate action in accordance
disciplinary rule in the Bates case contains a proceeding will be dealt with more herewith.
proviso that the exceptions stated therein are "not severely.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles
applicable in any state unless and until it is virtual law library FIRST DIVISION
implemented by such authority in that
state." 46This goes to show that an exception to the While we deem it necessary that the question as to
general rule, such as that being invoked by herein A.C. No. 5299               August 19, 2003
the legality or illegality of the purpose/s for which
respondent, can be made only if and when the the Legal Clinic, Inc. was created should be passed
canons expressly provide for such an exception. upon and determined, we are constrained to ATTY. ISMAEL G. KHAN, JR., Assistant Court
Otherwise, the prohibition stands, as in the case at refrain from lapsing into an obiter on that aspect Administrator and Chief, Public Information
bar.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual since it is clearly not within the adjudicative Office, Complainant,
law library parameters of the present proceeding which is vs.
merely administrative in nature. It is, of course, ATTY. RIZALINO T. SIMBILLO, Respondent.
It bears mention that in a survey conducted by the imperative that this matter be promptly
American Bar Association after the decision in determined, albeit in a different proceeding and x-----------------------x
Bates, on the attitude of the public about lawyers forum, since, under the present state of our law
after viewing television commercials, it was found and jurisprudence, a corporation cannot be G.R. No. 157053               August 19, 2003
that public opinion dropped significantly 47 with organized for or engage in the practice of law in
respect to these characteristics of lawyers: this country. This interdiction, just like the rule
against unethical advertising, cannot be subverted ATTY. RIZALINO T. SIMBILLO, Petitioner,
by employing some so-called paralegals vs.
Trustworthy from 71% to 14% IBP COMMISSION ON BAR DISCIPLINE and
Professional from 71% to 14% supposedly rendering the alleged support
services.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles ATTY. ISMAEL G. KHAN, JR., in his capacity as
Honest from 65% to 14% Assistant Court Administrator and Chief,
Dignified from 45% to 14% virtual law library
Public Information Office, Respondents.

Secondly, it is our firm belief that with the present The remedy for the apparent breach of this
prohibition by respondent is the concern and RESOLUTION
situation of our legal and judicial systems, to allow
the publication of advertisements of the kind used province of the Solicitor General who can institute
by respondent would only serve to aggravate what the corresponding quo warranto action, 50 after due YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
is already a deteriorating public opinion of the legal ascertainment of the factual background and basis
profession whose integrity has consistently been for the grant of respondent's corporate charter, in This administrative complaint arose from a paid
under attack lately by media and the community in light of the putative misuse thereof. That spin-off advertisement that appeared in the July 5, 2000
general. At this point in time, it is of utmost from the instant bar matter is referred to the issue of the newspaper, Philippine Daily Inquirer,
importance in the face of such negative, even if Solicitor General for such action as may be which reads: "ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE Specialist
unfair, criticisms at times, to adopt and maintain necessary under the 532-4333/521-2667."1
that level of professional conduct which is beyond circumstances.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanroble
reproach, and to exert all efforts to regain the high s virtual law library
Ms. Ma. Theresa B. Espeleta, a staff member of the
esteem formerly accorded to the legal Public Information Office of the Supreme Court,
profession.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles ACCORDINGLY, the Court Resolved to RESTRAIN called up the published telephone number and
virtual law library and ENJOIN herein respondent, The Legal Clinic, pretended to be an interested party. She spoke to
Inc., from issuing or causing the publication or Mrs. Simbillo, who claimed that her husband, Atty.
In sum, it is undoubtedly a misbehavior on the part dissemination of any advertisement in any form Rizalino Simbillo, was an expert in handling
of the lawyer, subject to disciplinary action, to which is of the same or similar tenor and purpose annulment cases and can guarantee a court decree
advertise his services except in allowable as Annexes "A" and "B" of this petition, and from within four to six months, provided the case will
instances 48or to aid a layman in the unauthorized conducting, directly or indirectly, any activity, not involve separation of property or custody of
practice of law. 49Considering that Atty. Rogelio P. operation or transaction proscribed by law or the children. Mrs. Simbillo also said that her husband
Nogales, who is the prime incorporator, major Code of Professional Ethics as indicated herein. Let charges a fee of P48,000.00, half of which is
 75

payable at the time of filing of the case and the In the meantime, respondent filed an Urgent of his conviction of a crime involving moral
other half after a decision thereon has been Motion for Reconsideration,8 which was denied by turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he
rendered. the IBP in Resolution No. XV-2002-606 dated is required to take before the admission to
October 19, 20029 practice, or for a willful disobedience appearing as
Further research by the Office of the Court attorney for a party without authority to do so.
Administrator and the Public Information Office Hence, the instant petition for certiorari, which was
revealed that similar advertisements were docketed as G.R. No. 157053 entitled, "Atty. It has been repeatedly stressed that the practice of
published in the August 2 and 6, 2000 issues of the Rizalino T. Simbillo, Petitioner versus IBP law is not a business.12 It is a profession in which
Manila Bulletin and August 5, 2000 issue of The Commission on Bar Discipline, Atty. Ismael G. duty to public service, not money, is the primary
Philippine Star.2 Khan, Jr., Asst. Court Administrator and Chief, consideration. Lawyering is not primarily meant to
Public Information Office, Respondents." This be a money-making venture, and law advocacy is
On September 1, 2000, Atty. Ismael G. Khan, Jr., in petition was consolidated with A.C. No. 5299 per not a capital that necessarily yields profits.13 The
his capacity as Assistant Court Administrator and the Court’s Resolution dated March 4, 2003. gaining of a livelihood should be a secondary
Chief of the Public Information Office, filed an consideration.14 The duty to public service and to
administrative complaint against Atty. Rizalino T. In a Resolution dated March 26, 2003, the parties the administration of justice should be the primary
Simbillo for improper advertising and solicitation of were required to manifest whether or not they consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate
his legal services, in violation of Rule 2.03 and Rule were willing to submit the case for resolution on their personal interests or what they owe to
3.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the basis of the pleadings.10 Complainant filed his themselves.15 The following elements distinguish
Rule 138, Section 27 of the Rules of Court.3 Manifestation on April 25, 2003, stating that he is the legal profession from a business:
not submitting any additional pleading or evidence
In his answer, respondent admitted the acts and is submitting the case for its early resolution 1. A duty of public service, of which the
imputed to him, but argued that advertising and on the basis of pleadings and records emolument is a by-product, and in which
solicitation per se are not prohibited acts; that the thereof. 11 Respondent, on the other hand, filed a one may attain the highest eminence
time has come to change our views about the Supplemental Memorandum on June 20, 2003. without making much money;
prohibition on advertising and solicitation; that the
interest of the public is not served by the absolute We agree with the IBP’s Resolutions Nos. XV-2002- 2. A relation as an "officer of the court" to
prohibition on lawyer advertising; that the Court 306 and XV-2002-606. the administration of justice involving
can lift the ban on lawyer advertising; and that the thorough sincerity, integrity and reliability;
rationale behind the decades-old prohibition should Rules 2.03 and 3.01 of the Code of Professional
be abandoned. Thus, he prayed that he be Responsibility read: 3. A relation to clients in the highest
exonerated from all the charges against him and degree of fiduciary;
that the Court promulgate a ruling that
advertisement of legal services offered by a lawyer Rule 2.03. – A lawyer shall not do or permit to be
is not contrary to law, public policy and public done any act designed primarily to solicit legal 4. A relation to colleagues at the bar
order as long as it is dignified.4 business. characterized by candor, fairness, and
unwillingness to resort to current business
Rule 3.01. – A lawyer shall not use or permit the methods of advertising and encroachment
The case was referred to the Integrated Bar of the on their practice, or dealing directly with
Philippines for investigation, report and use of any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive,
undignified, self-laudatory or unfair statement or their clients.16
recommendation.5 On June 29, 2002, the IBP
Commission on Bar Discipline passed Resolution claim regarding his qualifications or legal services.
No. XV-2002-306,6 finding respondent guilty of There is no question that respondent committed
violation of Rules 2.03 and 3.01 of the Code of Rule 138, Section 27 of the Rules of Court states: the acts complained of. He himself admits that he
Professional Responsibility and Rule 138, Section caused the publication of the advertisements.
27 of the Rules of Court, and suspended him from While he professes repentance and begs for the
SEC. 27. Disbarment and suspension of attorneys Court’s indulgence, his contrition rings hollow
the practice of law for one (1) year with the by Supreme Court, grounds therefor. – A member
warning that a repetition of similar acts would be considering the fact that he advertised his legal
of the bar may be disbarred or suspended from his services again after he pleaded for compassion and
dealt with more severely. The IBP Resolution was office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any
noted by this Court on November 11, 2002. 7 after claiming that he had no intention to violate
deceit, malpractice or other gross misconduct in the rules. Eight months after filing his answer, he
such office, grossly immoral conduct or by reason again advertised his legal services in the August
 76

14, 2001 issue of the Buy & Sell Free Ads reputable law lists; the names and addresses of EN BANC
Newspaper.17 Ten months later, he caused the references; and, with their written consent, the
same advertisement to be published in the October names of clients regularly represented. A.C. No. 6622               July 10, 2012
5, 2001 issue of Buy & Sell.18 Such acts of
respondent are a deliberate and contemptuous The law list must be a reputable law list published
affront on the Court’s authority. MIGUEL G. VILLATUYA, Complainant,
primarily for that purpose; it cannot be a mere vs.
supplemental feature of a paper, magazine, trade ATTY. BEDE S. TABALINGCOS, Respondent.
What adds to the gravity of respondent’s acts is journal or periodical which is published principally
that in advertising himself as a self-styled for other purposes. For that reason, a lawyer may
"Annulment of Marriage Specialist," he wittingly or not properly publish his brief biographical and DECISION
unwittingly erodes and undermines not only the informative data in a daily paper, magazine, trade
stability but also the sanctity of an institution still journal or society program. Nor may a lawyer PER CURIAM:
considered sacrosanct despite the contemporary permit his name to be published in a law list the
climate of permissiveness in our society. Indeed, in conduct, management, or contents of which are In this Complaint for disbarment filed on 06
assuring prospective clients that an annulment calculated or likely to deceive or injure the public December 2004 with the Office or the Bar
may be obtained in four to six months from the or the bar, or to lower dignity or standing of the Confidant, complainant Manuel G. Villatuya
time of the filing of the case,19 he in fact profession. (complainant) charges Atty. Bcde S. 'L1halingcos
encourages people, who might have otherwise (resrondent) with unlawful solicitation of cases,
been disinclined and would have refrained from The use of an ordinary simple professional card is violation of the ('ode or Professional Responsibility
dissolving their marriage bonds, to do so. also permitted. The card may contain only a for nonpayment of fees to complainant, and gross
statement of his name, the name of the law firm immorality for marrying two other women while
Nonetheless, the solicitation of legal business is not which he is connected with, address, telephone respondent’s first marriage was subsisting.1
altogether proscribed. However, for solicitation to number and special branch of law practiced. The
be proper, it must be compatible with the dignity of publication of a simple announcement of the In a Resolution2 dated 26 January 2005, the Second
the legal profession. If it is made in a modest and opening of a law firm or of changes in the Division of this Court required respondent to file a
decorous manner, it would bring no injury to the partnership, associates, firm name or office Comment, which he did on 21 March 2005. 3 The
lawyer and to the bar.20 Thus, the use of simple address, being for the convenience of the Complaint was referred to the Integrated Bar of the
signs stating the name or names of the lawyers, profession, is not objectionable. He may likewise Philippines (IBP) for investigation, report and
the office and residence address and fields of have his name listed in a telephone directory but recommendation within sixty (60) days from
practice, as well as advertisement in legal not under a designation of special branch of law. receipt of the record.4
periodicals bearing the same brief data, are (emphasis and italics supplied)
permissible. Even the use of calling cards is now
acceptable.21 Publication in reputable law lists, in a On 23 June 2005, the Commission on Bar Discipline
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, of the IBP (Commission) issued a Notice5 setting the
manner consistent with the standards of conduct respondent RIZALINO T. SIMBILLO is found GUILTY
imposed by the canon, of brief biographical and mandatory conference of the administrative case
of violation of Rules 2.03 and 3.01 of the Code of on 05 July 2005. During the conference,
informative data is likewise allowable. As explicitly Professional Responsibility and Rule 138, Section
stated in Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc.:22 complainant appeared, accompanied by his
27 of the Rules of Court. He is SUSPENDED from counsel and respondent. They submitted for
the practice of law for ONE (1) YEAR effective upon resolution three issues to be resolved by the
Such data must not be misleading and may include receipt of this Resolution. He is likewise STERNLY Commission as follows:
only a statement of the lawyer’s name and the WARNED that a repetition of the same or similar
names of his professional associates; addresses, offense will be dealt with more severely.
telephone numbers, cable addresses; branches of 1. Whether respondent violated the Code
law practiced; date and place of birth and of Professional Responsibility by
Let copies of this Resolution be entered in his nonpayment of fees to complainant
admission to the bar; schools attended with dates record as attorney and be furnished the Integrated
of graduation, degrees and other educational Bar of the Philippines and all courts in the country
distinctions; public or quasi-public offices; posts of for their information and guidance. 2. Whether respondent violated the rule
honor; legal authorships; legal teaching positions; against unlawful solicitation, and
membership and offices in bar associations and
committees thereof, in legal and scientific societies SO ORDERED.
3. Whether respondent is guilty of gross
and legal fraternities; the fact of listings in other immoral conduct for having married thrice. 6
 77

The Commission ordered the parties to submit their Statistics Office (NSO) certifying that Bede S. the allegations regarding his alleged bigamous
respective verified Position Papers. Respondent Tabalingcos, herein respondent, contracted marriages with two other women.
filed his verified Position Paper, 7 on 15 July 2005 marriage thrice: first, on 15 July 1980 with Pilar M.
while complainant submitted his on 01 August Lozano, which took place in Dasmarinas, Cavite; On 09 January 2006, complainant filed a Motion to
2005.8 the second time on 28 September 1987 with Ma. Admit Copies of 3 Marriage Contracts.21 To the said
Rowena Garcia Piñon in the City of Manila; and the Motion, he attached the certified true copies of the
Complainant’s Accusations third on 07 September 1989 with Mary Jane Marriage Contracts referred to in the Certification
Elgincolin Paraiso in Ermita, Manila.13 issued by the NSO.22 The appended Marriage
Complainant averred that on February 2002, he Contracts matched the dates, places and names of
was employed by respondent as a financial Respondent’s Defense the contracting parties indicated in the earlier
consultant to assist the latter on technical and submitted NSO Certification of the three marriages
financial matters in the latter’s numerous petitions In his defense, respondent denied the charges entered into by respondent. The first marriage
for corporate rehabilitation filed with different against him. He asserted that complainant was not contract submitted was a marriage that took place
courts. Complainant claimed that they had a verbal an employee of his law firm – Tabalingcos and between respondent and Pilar M. Lozano in
agreement whereby he would be entitled to ₱ Associates Law Office14 – but of Jesi and Jane Dasmarinas, Cavite, on 15 July 1980. 23 The second
50,000 for every Stay Order issued by the court in Management, Inc., where the former is a major marriage contract was between respondent and
the cases they would handle, in addition to ten stockholder.15 Respondent alleged that complainant Ma. Rowena G. Piñon, and it took place at the
percent (10%) of the fees paid by their clients. He was unprofessional and incompetent in performing Metropolitan Trial Court Compound of Manila on 28
alleged that, from February to December 2002, his job as a financial consultant, resulting in the September 1987.24 The third Marriage Contract
respondent was able to rake in millions of pesos latter’s dismissal of many rehabilitation plans they referred to a marriage between respondent and
from the corporate rehabilitation cases they were presented in their court cases.16 Respondent also Mary Jane E. Paraiso, and it took place on 7
working on together. Complainant also claimed alleged that there was no verbal agreement September 1989 in Ermita, Manila. In the second
that he was entitled to the amount of ₱ 900,000 for between them regarding the payment of fees and and third Marriage Contracts, respondent was
the 18 Stay Orders issued by the courts as a result the sharing of professional fees paid by his clients. described as single under the entry for civil status.
of his work with respondent, and a total of ₱ He proffered documents showing that the salary of
4,539,000 from the fees paid by their complainant had been paid.17 On 16 January 2006, respondent submitted his
clients.9 Complainant appended to his Complaint Opposition to the Motion to Admit filed by
several annexes supporting the computation of the As to the charge of unlawful solicitation, complainant, claiming that the document was not
fees he believes are due him. respondent denied committing any. He contended marked during the mandatory conference or
that his law firm had an agreement with Jesi and submitted during the hearing of the case. 25 Thus,
Complainant alleged that respondent engaged in Jane Management, Inc., whereby the firm would respondent was supposedly deprived of the
unlawful solicitation of cases in violation of Section handle the legal aspect of the corporate opportunity to controvert those documents.26 He
27 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. rehabilitation case; and that the latter would disclosed that criminal cases for bigamy were filed
Allegedly respondent set up two financial attend to the financial aspect of the case’ such as against him by the complainant before the Office of
consultancy firms, Jesi and Jane Management, Inc. the preparation of the rehabilitation plans to be the City Prosecutor of Manila. Respondent further
and Christmel Business Link, Inc., and used them presented in court. To support this contention, informed the Commission that he had filed a
as fronts to advertise his legal services and solicit respondent attached to his Position Paper a Joint Petition to Declare Null and Void the Marriage
cases. Complainant supported his allegations by Venture Agreement dated 10 December 2005 Contract with Rowena Piñon at the Regional Trial
attaching to his Position Paper the Articles of entered into by Tabalingcos and Associates Law Court (RTC) of Biñan, Laguna, where it was
Incorporation of Jesi and Jane,10 letter-proposals to Offices and Jesi and Jane Management, Inc.;18 and docketed as Civil Case No. B-3270.27 He also filed
clients signed by respondent on various dates11 and an Affidavit executed by Leoncio Balena, Vice- another Petition for Declaration of Nullity of
proofs of payment made to the latter by their President for Operations of the said company. 19 Marriage Contract with Pilar Lozano at the RTC-
clients.12 Calamba, where it was docketed as Civil Case No.
B-3271.28 In both petitions, he claimed that he had
On the charge of gross immorality, respondent recently discovered that there were Marriage
On the third charge of gross immorality, assailed the Affidavit submitted by William Contracts in the records of the NSO bearing his
complainant accused respondent of committing Genesis, a dismissed messenger of Jesi and Jane name and allegedly executed with Rowena Piñon
two counts of bigamy for having married two other Management, Inc., as having no probative value, and Pilar Lozano on different occasions. He prayed
women while his first marriage was subsisting. He since it had been retracted by the affiant for their annulment, because they were
submitted a Certification dated 13 July 2005 issued himself.20 Respondent did not specifically address purportedly null and void.
by the Office of the Civil Registrar General-National
 78

On 17 September 2007, in view of its been filed with the proper courts since it was only On 26 June 2011, the IBP Board of Governors
reorganization, the Commission scheduled a empowered to determine respondent’s denied the Motions for Reconsideration and
clarificatory hearing on 20 November 2007. 29 While administrative liability. On this matter, complainant affirmed their Resolution dated 15 April 2008
complainant manifested to the Commission that he failed to prove dishonesty on the part of recommending respondent’s disbarment.44
would not attend the hearing,30 respondent respondent.38 On the second charge, the
manifested his willingness to attend and moved for Commission found respondent to have violated the The Court’s Ruling
the suspension of the resolution of the rule on the solicitation of client for having
administrative case against the latter. Respondent advertised his legal services and unlawfully
cited two Petitions he had filed with the RTC, solicited cases. It recommended that he be The Court affirms the recommendations of the IBP.
Laguna, seeking the nullification of the Marriage reprimanded for the violation. It failed, though, to
Contracts he discovered to be bearing his name.31 point out exactly the specific provision he First Charge:
violated.39
On 10 November 2007, complainant submitted to Dishonesty for nonpayment of share in the fees
the Commission duplicate original copies of two (2) As for the third charge, the Commission found
Informations filed with the RTC of Manila against respondent to be guilty of gross immorality for While we affirm the IBP’s dismissal of the first
respondent, entitled "People of the Philippines vs. violating Rules 1.01 and 7.03 of the Code of charge against respondent, we do not concur with
Atty. Bede S. Tabalingcos."32 The first criminal case, Professional Responsibility and Section 27 of Rule the rationale behind it.
docketed as Criminal Case No. 07-257125, was for 138 of the Rules of Court. It found that complainant
bigamy for the marriage contracted by respondent was able to prove through documentary evidence
with Ma. Rowena Garcia Piñon while his marriage that respondent committed bigamy twice by The first charge of complainant against respondent
with Pilar Lozano was still valid.33 The other one, marrying two other women while the latter’s first for the nonpayment of the former’s share in the
docketed as Criminal Case No. 07-257126, charged marriage was subsisting.40 Due to the gravity of the fees, if proven to be true is based on an agreement
respondent with having committed bigamy for acts of respondent, the Commission recommended that is violative of Rule 9.0245 of the Code of
contracting marriage with Mary Jane Elgincolin that he be disbarred, and that his name be stricken Professional Responsibility. A lawyer is proscribed
Paraiso while his marriage with Pilar Lozano was off the roll of attorneys.41 by the Code to divide or agree to divide the fees
still subsisting.34 Each of the Informations for legal services rendered with a person not
recommended bail in the amount of P24,000 for his licensed to practice law. Based on the allegations,
On 15 April 2008, the IBP Board of Governors, respondent had agreed to share with complainant
provisional liberty as accused in the criminal through its Resolution No. XVIII-2008-154, adopted
cases.35 the legal fees paid by clients that complainant
and approved the Report and Recommendation of solicited for the respondent. Complainant,
the Investigating Commissioner.42 On 01 August however, failed to proffer convincing evidence to
On 20 November 2007, only respondent attended 2008, respondent filed a Motion for prove the existence of that agreement.
the clarificatory hearing. In the same proceeding, Reconsideration, arguing that the recommendation
the Commission denied his Motion to suspend the to disbar him was premature. He contends that the
proceedings pending the outcome of the petitions Commission should have suspended the We ruled in Tan Tek Beng v. David46 that an
for nullification he had filed with the RTC–Laguna. disbarment proceedings pending the resolution of agreement between a lawyer and a layperson to
Thus, the Commission resolved that the the separate cases he had filed for the annulment share the fees collected from clients secured by
administrative case against him be submitted for of the marriage contracts bearing his name as the layperson is null and void, and that the lawyer
resolution.36 having entered into those contracts with other involved may be disciplined for unethical conduct.
women. He further contends that the evidence Considering that complainant’s allegations in this
proffered by complainant to establish that the case had not been proven, the IBP correctly
IBP’s Report and Recommendation dismissed the charge against respondent on this
latter committed bigamy was not substantial to
merit the punishment of disbarment. Thus, matter.
On 27 February 2008, the Commission respondent moved for the reconsideration of the
promulgated its Report and resolution to disbar him and likewise moved to Second Charge:
archive the administrative proceedings pending the
Recommendation addressing the specific charges outcome of the Petitions he separately filed with Unlawful solicitation of clients
against respondent.37 The first charge, for the RTC of Laguna for the annulment of Marriage
dishonesty for the nonpayment of certain shares in Contracts.43
the fees, was dismissed for lack of merit. The Complainant charged respondent with unlawfully
Commission ruled that the charge should have soliciting clients and advertising legal services
through various business entities. Complainant
 79

submitted documentary evidence to prove that Jesi President of Jesi & Jane Management, Inc., and not fitness for membership in the Bar. We have so
& Jane Management Inc. and Christmel Business as partner or associate of a law firm. ruled in the past and we see no reason to depart
Link, Inc. were owned and used as fronts by from this ruling. First, admission to the practice of
respondent to advertise the latter’s legal services Rule 15.0850 of the Code mandates that the lawyer law is a component of the administration of justice
and to solicit clients. In its Report, the IBP is mandated to inform the client whether the and is a matter of public interest because it
established the truth of these allegations and ruled former is acting as a lawyer or in another capacity. involves service to the public. The admission
that respondent had violated the rule on the This duty is a must in those occupations related to qualifications are also qualifications for the
solicitation of clients, but it failed to point out the the practice of law. The reason is that certain continued enjoyment of the privilege to practice
specific provision that was breached. ethical considerations governing the attorney-client law. Second, lack of qualifications or the violation
relationship may be operative in one and not in the of the standards for the practice of law, like
A review of the records reveals that respondent other.51 In this case, it is confusing for the client if it criminal cases, is a matter of public concern that
indeed used the business entities mentioned in the is not clear whether respondent is offering the State may inquire into through this Court.
report to solicit clients and to advertise his legal consultancy or legal services.
services, purporting to be specialized in corporate In disbarment proceedings, the burden of proof
rehabilitation cases. Based on the facts of the case, Considering, however, that complainant has not rests upon the complainant.1âwphi1 For the court
he violated Rule 2.0347 of the Code, which prohibits proven the degree of prevalence of this practice by to exercise its disciplinary powers, the case against
lawyers from soliciting cases for the purpose of respondent, we affirm the recommendation to the respondent must be established by convincing
profit. reprimand the latter for violating Rules 2.03 and and satisfactory proof.54 In this case, complainant
15.08 of the Code. submitted NSO-certified true copies to prove that
A lawyer is not prohibited from engaging in respondent entered into two marriages while the
business or other lawful occupation. Impropriety latter’s first marriage was still subsisting. While
Third Charge: respondent denied entering into the second and
arises, though, when the business is of such a
nature or is conducted in such a manner as to be the third marriages, he resorted to vague
inconsistent with the lawyer’s duties as a member Bigamy assertions tantamount to a negative pregnant. He
of the bar. This inconsistency arises when the did not dispute the authenticity of the NSO
business is one that can readily lend itself to the The third charge that respondent committed documents, but denied that he contracted those
procurement of professional employment for the bigamy twice is a serious accusation. To two other marriages. He submitted copies of the
lawyer; or that can be used as a cloak for indirect substantiate this allegation, complainant submitted two Petitions he had filed separately with the RTC
solicitation on the lawyer’s behalf; or is of a nature NSO-certified copies of the Marriage Contracts of Laguna – one in Biñan and the other in Calamba
that, if handled by a lawyer, would be regarded as entered into by respondent with three (3) different – to declare the second and the third Marriage
the practice of law.48 women. The latter objected to the introduction of Contracts null and void.55
these documents, claiming that they were
It is clear from the documentary evidence submitted after the administrative case had been We find him guilty of gross immorality under the
submitted by complainant that Jesi & Jane submitted for resolution, thus giving him no Code.
Management, Inc., which purports to be a financial opportunity to controvert them.52 We are not
and legal consultant, was indeed a vehicle used by persuaded by his argument. We cannot give credence to the defense proffered
respondent as a means to procure professional by respondent. He has not disputed the
employment; specifically for corporate We have consistently held that a disbarment case authenticity or impugned the genuineness of the
rehabilitation cases. Annex "C"49 of the Complaint is is sui generis. Its focus is on the qualification and NSO-certified copies of the Marriage Contracts
a letterhead of Jesi & Jane fitness of a lawyer to continue membership in the presented by complainant to prove the former’s
bar and not the procedural technicalities in filing marriages to two other women aside from his wife.
Management, Inc., which proposed an agreement the case. Thus, we explained in Garrido v. For purposes of this disbarment proceeding, these
for the engagement of legal services. The letter Garrido:53 Marriage Contracts bearing the name of
clearly states that, should the prospective client respondent are competent and convincing
agree to the proposed fees, respondent would Laws dealing with double jeopardy or with evidence proving that he committed bigamy, which
render legal services related to the former’s loan procedure — such as the verification of pleadings renders him unfit to continue as a member of the
obligation with a bank. This circumvention is and prejudicial questions, or in this case, bar. The documents were certified by the NSO,
considered objectionable and violates the Code, prescription of offenses or the filing of affidavits of which is the official repository of civil registry
because the letter is signed by respondent as desistance by the complainant — do not apply in records pertaining to the birth, marriage and death
the determination of a lawyer's qualifications and of a person. Having been issued by a government
 80

agency, the NSO certification is accorded much degree of intellectual and moral competency on his A.C. No. 6593               February 4, 2010
evidentiary weight and carries with it a part so that the courts and clients may rightly
presumption of regularity. In this case, respondent repose confidence in him. MAELOTISEA S. GARRIDO, Complainant,
has not presented any competent evidence to vs.
rebut those documents. Respondent exhibited a deplorable lack of that ATTYS. ANGEL E. GARRIDO and ROMANA P.
degree of morality required of him as a member of VALENCIA, Respondents.
According to the respondent, after the discovery of the bar. He made a mockery of marriage, a sacred
the second and the third marriages, he filed civil institution demanding respect and dignity.57 His DECISION
actions to annul the Marriage Contracts. We acts of committing bigamy twice constituted
perused the attached Petitions for Annulment and grossly immoral conduct and are grounds for
found that his allegations therein treated the disbarment under Section 27, Rule 138 of the PER CURIAM:
second and the third marriage contracts as Revised Rules of Court.58
ordinary agreements, rather than as special Maelotisea Sipin Garrido filed a complaint-
contracts contemplated under the then Civil Code Thus, we adopt the recommendation of the IBP to affidavit1 and a supplemental affidavit2 for
provisions on marriage. He did not invoke any disbar respondent and order that his name be disbarment against the respondents Atty. Angel E.
grounds in the Civil Code provisions on marriage, stricken from the Roll of Attorneys. Garrido (Atty. Garrido) and Atty. Romana
prior to its amendment by the Family Code. P.Valencia (Atty. Valencia) before the Integrated
Respondent’s regard for marriage contracts as Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Committee on Discipline
ordinary agreements indicates either his wanton WHEREFORE, this Court resolves the following charging them with gross immorality. The
disregard of the sanctity of marriage or his gross charges against Atty. Bede S. Tabalingcos as complaint-affidavit states:
ignorance of the law on what course of action to follows:
take to annul a marriage under the old Civil Code 1. That I am the legal wife of Atty. Angel E.
provisions. 1. The charge of dishonesty is DISMISSED Garrido by virtue of our marriage on June
for lack of merit. 23, 1962 at San Marcelino Church, Ermita,
What has been clearly established here is the fact Manila which was solemnized by Msgr.
that respondent entered into marriage twice while 2. Respondent is REPRIMANDED for acts of Daniel Cortes x x x
his first marriage was still subsisting. In illegal advertisement and solicitation.
Bustamante-Alejandro v. Alejandro, 56 we held thus: 2. That our marriage blossomed into
3. Atty. Bede S. Tabalingcos is DISBARRED having us blessed with six (6) children,
We have in a number of cases disciplined members for engaging in bigamy, a grossly immoral namely, Mat Elizabeth, Arnel Angelito,
of the Bar whom we found guilty of misconduct conduct. Madeleine Eloiza, Arnel Angelo, Arnel
which demonstrated a lack of that good moral Victorino and Madonna Angeline, all
character required of them not only as a condition Let a copy of this Decision be attached to the surnamed Garrido;
precedent for their admission to the Bar but, personal records of Atty. Bede S. Tabalingcos in the
likewise, for their continued membership therein. Office of the Bar Confidant, and another copy 3. x x x x
No distinction has been made as to whether the furnished to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
misconduct was committed in the lawyer’s
professional capacity or in his private life. This is 4. That on May, 1991, during my light
because a lawyer may not divide his personality so The Clerk of Court is directed to strike out the moments with our children, one of my
as to be an attorney at one time and a mere citizen name of Bede S. Tabalingcos from the Roll of daughters, Madeleine confided to me that
at another. He is expected to be competent, Attorneys. sometime on the later part of 1987, an
honorable and reliable at all times since he who unknown caller talked with her claiming
cannot apply and abide by the laws in his private SO ORDERED. that the former is a child of my husband. I
affairs, can hardly be expected to do so in his ignored it and dismissed it as a mere joke.
professional dealings nor lead others in doing so. But when May Elizabeth, also one of my
C. Moral issues affecting lawyers daughters told me that sometime on
Professional honesty and honor are not to be
expected as the accompaniment of dishonesty and August 1990, she saw my husband strolling
dishonor in other relations. The administration of at the Robinson’s Department Store at
justice, in which the lawyer plays an important role Ermita, Manila together with a woman and
being an officer of the court, demands a high EN BANC a child who was later identified as Atty.
 81

Ramona Paguida Valencia and Angeli denied that he failed to give financial support to his Court of Quezon City declared the marriage
Ramona Valencia Garrido, respectively x x children with Maelotisea, emphasizing that all his between Atty. Garrido and Maelotisea "an absolute
x six (6) children were educated in private schools; nullity." Since Maelotisea was never the legal wife
all graduated from college except for Arnel of Atty. Garrido, the respondents argued that she
5. x x x x Victorino, who finished a special secondary had no personality to file her complaints against
course.4 Atty. Garrido alleged that Maelotisea had them. The respondents also alleged that they had
not been employed and had not practiced her not committed any immoral act since they married
6. That I did not stop from unearthing the profession for the past ten (10) years. when Atty. Garrido was already a widower, and the
truth until I was able to secure the acts complained of were committed before his
Certificate of Live Birth of the child, stating admission to the bar. The IBP Commission on Bar
among others that the said child is their Atty. Garrido emphasized that all his marriages
were contracted before he became a member of Discipline also denied this motion.9
daughter and that Atty. Angel Escobar
Garrido and Atty. Romana Paguida Valencia the bar on May 11, 1979, with the third marriage
were married at Hongkong sometime on contracted after the death of Constancia on Third, Maelotisea filed a motion for the dismissal of
1978. December 26, 1977. Likewise, his children with the complaints she filed against the respondents,
Maelotisea were born before he became a lawyer. arguing that she wanted to maintain friendly
relations with Atty. Garrido, who is the father of her
7. That on June 1993, my husband left our six (6) children.10 The IBP Commission on Bar
conjugal home and joined Atty. Ramona In her Counter-Affidavit,5 Atty. Valencia denied that
she was the mistress of Atty. Garrido. She Discipline likewise denied this motion.11
Paguida Valencia at their residence x x x
explained that Maelotisea was not the legal wife of
Atty. Garrido since the marriage between them On April 13, 2004, Investigating Commissioner
8. That since he left our conjugal home he was void from the beginning due to the then Milagros V. San Juan (Investigating Commissioner
failed and still failing to give us our needed existing marriage of Atty. Garrido with Constancia. San Juan) submitted her Report and
financial support to the prejudice of our Atty. Valencia claimed that Maelotisea knew of the Recommendation for the respondents’
children who stopped schooling because of romantic relationship between her and Atty. disbarment.12 The Commission on Bar Discipline of
financial constraints. Garrido, as they (Maelotisea and Atty. Valencia) the IBP Board of Governors (IBP Board of
met in 1978. Maelotisea kept silent about her Governors) approved and adopted this
xxxx relationship with Atty. Garrido and had maintained recommendation with modification under
this silence when she (Atty. Valencia) financially Resolution No. XVI-2004-375 dated July 30, 2004.
That I am also filing a disbarment proceedings helped Atty. Garrido build a house for his second This resolution in part states:
against his mistress as alleged in the same family. Atty. Valencia alleged that Maelotisea was
affidavit, Atty. Romana P. Valencia considering that not a proper party to this suit because of her x x x finding the recommendation fully supported
out of their immoral acts I suffered not only mental silence; she kept silent when things were favorable by the evidence on record and the applicable laws
anguish but also besmirch reputation, wounded and beneficial to her. Atty. Valencia also alleged and rules, and considering that Atty. Garrido
feelings and sleepless nights; x x x that Maelotisea had no cause of action against her. exhibited conduct which lacks the degree of
morality required as members of the bar, Atty.
In his Counter-Affidavit,3 Atty. Garrido denied In the course of the hearings, the parties filed the Angel E. Garrido is hereby DISBARRED for gross
Maelotisea’s charges and imputations. By way of following motions before the IBP Commission on immorality. However, the case against Atty.
defense, he alleged that Maelotisea was not his Bar Discipline: Romana P. Valencia is hereby DISMISSED for lack
legal wife, as he was already married to Constancia of merit of the complaint.
David (Constancia) when he married Maelotisea. First, the respondents filed a Motion for Suspension
He claimed he married Maelotisea after he and of Proceedings6 in view of the criminal complaint Atty. Garrido moved to reconsider this resolution,
Constancia parted ways. He further alleged that for concubinage Maelotisea filed against them, and but the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline denied
Maelotisea knew all his escapades and understood the Petition for Declaration of Nullity7 (of marriage) his motion under Resolution No. XVII-2007-038
his "bad boy" image before she married him in Atty. Garrido filed to nullify his marriage to dated January 18, 2007.
1962. As he and Maelotisea grew apart over the Maelotisea. The IBP Commission on Bar Discipline
years due to financial problems, Atty. Garrido met denied this motion for lack of merit.
Atty. Valencia. He became close to Atty. Valencia
to whom he confided his difficulties. Together, they Second, the respondents filed a Motion to
resolved his personal problems and his financial Dismiss8 the complaints after the Regional Trial
difficulties with his second family. Atty. Garrido
 82

Atty. Garrido now seeks relief with this Court continued enjoyment of the privilege to practice In light of the public service character of the
through the present petition for review. He submits law. Second, lack of qualifications or the violation practice of law and the nature of disbarment
that under the circumstances, he did not commit of the standards for the practice of law, like proceedings as a public interest concern,
any gross immorality that would warrant his criminal cases, is a matter of public concern that Maelotisea’s affidavit of desistance cannot have
disbarment. He also argues that the offenses the State may inquire into through this Court. In the effect of discontinuing or abating the
charged have prescribed under the IBP rules. this sense, the complainant in a disbarment case is disbarment proceedings. As we have stated,
not a direct party whose interest in the outcome of Maelotisea is more of a witness than a complainant
Additionally, Atty. Garrido pleads that he be the charge is wholly his or her own;16 effectively, in these proceedings. We note further that she filed
allowed on humanitarian considerations to retain his or her participation is that of a witness who her affidavits of withdrawal only after she had
his profession; he is already in the twilight of his brought the matter to the attention of the Court. presented her evidence; her evidence are now
life, and has kept his promise to lead an upright available for the Court’s examination and
and irreproachable life notwithstanding his As applied to the present case, the time that consideration, and their merits are not affected by
situation. elapsed between the immoral acts charged and the her desistance. We cannot fail to note, too, that
filing of the complaint is not material in considering Mealotisea filed her affidavit of desistance, not to
the qualification of Atty. Garrido when he applied disown or refute the evidence she had submitted,
In compliance with our Resolution dated August 25, but solely becuase of compassion (and, impliedly,
2009, Atty. Alicia A. Risos-Vidal (Atty. Risos-Vidal), for admission to the practice of law, and his
continuing qualification to be a member of the out of concern for her personal financial interest in
Director of the Commission on Bar Discipline, filed continuing friendly relations with Atty. Garrido).
her Comment on the petition. She recommends a legal profession. From this perspective, it is not
modification of the penalty from disbarment to important that the acts complained of were
reprimand, advancing the view that disbarment is committed before Atty. Garrido was admitted to Immoral conduct involves acts that are willful,
very harsh considering that the 77-year old Atty. the practice of law. As we explained in Zaguirre v. flagrant, or shameless, and that show a moral
Garrido took responsibility for his acts and tried to Castillo,17 the possession of good moral character is indifference to the opinion of the upright and
mend his ways by filing a petition for declaration of both a condition precedent and a continuing respectable members of the community.20 Immoral
nullity of his bigamous marriage. Atty. Risos-Vidal requirement to warrant admission to the bar and to conduct is gross when it is so corrupt as to
also notes that no other administrative case has retain membership in the legal profession. constitute a criminal act, or so unprincipled as to
ever been filed against Atty. Garrido. Admission to the bar does not preclude a be reprehensible to a high degree, or when
subsequent judicial inquiry, upon proper complaint, committed under such scandalous or revolting
into any question concerning the mental or moral circumstances as to shock the community’s sense
THE COURT’S RULING fitness of the respondent before he became a of decency.21 We make these distinctions as the
lawyer.18 Admission to the practice only creates the supreme penalty of disbarment arising from
After due consideration, we resolve to adopt the rebuttable presumption that the applicant has all conduct requires grossly immoral, not simply
findings of the IBP Board of Governors against Atty. the qualifications to become a lawyer; this may be immoral, conduct.22
Garrido, and to reject its recommendation with refuted by clear and convincing evidence to the
respect to Atty. Valencia. contrary even after admission to the Bar.19 In several cases, we applied the above standard in
considering lawyers who contracted an unlawful
General Considerations Parenthetically, Article VIII Section 5(5) of the second marriage or multiple marriages.
Constitution recognizes the disciplinary authority of
Laws dealing with double jeopardy or with the Court over the members of the Bar to be In Macarrubo v. Macarrubo,23 the respondent
procedure – such as the verification of pleadings merely incidental to the Court's exclusive power to lawyer entered into multiple marriages and
and prejudicial questions, or in this case, admit applicants to the practice of law. Reinforcing subsequently used legal remedies to sever them.
prescription of offenses or the filing of affidavits of the implementation of this constitutional authority We ruled that the respondent’s pattern of
desistance by the complainant – do not apply in the is Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court which misconduct undermined the institutions of
determination of a lawyer’s qualifications and expressly states that a member of the bar may be marriage and family – institutions that this society
fitness for membership in the Bar.13 We have so disbarred or suspended from his office as attorney looks up to for the rearing of our children, for the
ruled in the past and we see no reason to depart by the Supreme Court for, among others, any development of values essential to the survival and
from this ruling.14 First, admission to the practice of deceit, grossly immoral conduct, or violation of the well-being of our communities, and for the
law is a component of the administration of justice oath that he is required to take before admission to strengthening of our nation as a whole. In this light,
and is a matter of public interest because it the practice of law. no fate other than disbarment awaited the
involves service to the public.15 The admission wayward respondent.
qualifications are also qualifications for the
 83

In Villasanta v. Peralta,24 the respondent lawyer Fourth, Atty. Garrido engaged in an extra-marital Court,29 and Canon 1 of the Code of Professional
married the complainant while his marriage with affair with Atty. Valencia while his two marriages Responsibility,30 all of which commonly require him
his first wife was subsisting. We held that the were in place and without taking into consideration to obey the laws of the land. In marrying
respondent’s act of contracting the second the moral and emotional implications of his actions Maelotisea, he committed the crime of bigamy, as
marriage was contrary to honesty, justice, decency on the two women he took as wives and on his six he entered this second marriage while his first
and morality. The lack of good moral character (6) children by his second marriage. marriage with Constancia was subsisting. He
required by the Rules of Court disqualified the openly admitted his bigamy when he filed his
respondent from admission to the Bar. Fifth, instead of making legal amends to validate petition to nullify his marriage to Maelotisea.
his marriage with Maelotisea upon the death of
Similar to Villasanta was the case of Conjuangco, Constancia, Atty. Garrido married Atty. Valencia He violated ethical rules of the profession,
Jr. v. Palma,25 where the respondent secretly who bore him a daughter. specifically, Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional
contracted a second marriage with the daughter of Responsibility, which commands that he "shall not
his client in Hongkong. We found that the Sixth, Atty. Garrido misused his legal knowledge engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
respondent exhibited a deplorable lack of that and convinced Atty. Valencia (who was not then a conduct"; Canon 7 of the same Code, which
degree of morality required of members of the Bar. lawyer) that he was free to marry, considering that demands that "[a] lawyer shall at all times uphold
In particular, he made a mockery of marriage – a his marriage with Maelotisea was not "valid." the integrity and dignity of the legal profession";
sacred institution that demands respect and Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional
dignity. We also declared his act of contracting a Responsibility, which provides that, "[a] lawyer
second marriage contrary to honesty, justice, Seventh, as the evidence on record implies, Atty. shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects
decency and morality. Garrido married Atty. Valencia in Hongkong in an on his fitness to practice law, nor should he,
apparent attempt to accord legitimacy to a union whether in public or private life, behave in a
entered into while another marriage was in place. scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal
In this case, the undisputed facts gathered from
the evidence and the admissions of Atty. Garrido profession."
established a pattern of gross immoral conduct Eighth, after admission to the practice of law, Atty.
that warrants his disbarment. His conduct was not Garrido simultaneously cohabited and had sexual As a lawyer, his community looked up to Atty.
only corrupt or unprincipled; it was reprehensible relations with two (2) women who at one point Garrido with the expectation and that he would set
to the highest degree. were both his wedded wives. He also led a double a good example in promoting obedience to the
life with two (2) families for a period of more than Constitution and the laws. When he violated the
ten (10) years. law and distorted it to cater to his own personal
First, Atty. Garrido admitted that he left Constancia
to pursue his law studies; thereafter and during the needs and selfish motives, he discredited the legal
marriage, he had romantic relationships with other Lastly, Atty. Garrido petitioned for the nullity of his profession and created the public impression that
women. He had the gall to represent to this Court marriage to Maelotisea. Contrary to the position laws are mere tools of convenience that can be
that the study of law was his reason for leaving his advanced by Atty. Alicia A. Risos-Vidal, this was not used, bended and abused to satisfy personal
wife; marriage and the study of law are not an act of facing up to his responsibility or an act of whims and desires. In this case, he also used the
mutually exclusive. mending his ways. This was an attempt, using his law to free him from unwanted relationships.
legal knowledge, to escape liability for his past
actions by having his second marriage declared The Court has often reminded the members of the
Second, he misrepresented himself to Maelotisea void after the present complaint was filed against
as a bachelor, when in truth he was already bar to live up to the standards and norms expected
him. of the legal profession by upholding the ideals and
married to Constancia.26 This was a
misrepresentation given as an excuse to lure a principles embodied in the Code of Professional
woman into a prohibited relationship. By his actions, Garrido committed multiple Responsibility.31 Lawyers are bound to maintain not
violations relating to the legal profession, only a high standard of legal proficiency, but also
specifically, violations of the bar admission rules, of of morality, including honesty, integrity and fair
Third, Atty. Garrido contracted his second marriage his lawyer’s oath, and of the ethical rules of the dealing.32 Lawyers are at all times subject to the
with Maelotisea notwithstanding the subsistence of profession. watchful public eye and community
his first marriage. This was an open admission, not approbation.33 Needless to state, those whose
only of an illegal liaison, but of the commission of a conduct – both public and private – fail this scrutiny
crime. He did not possess the good moral character
required of a lawyer at the time of his admission to have to be disciplined and, after appropriate
the Bar.27 As a lawyer, he violated his lawyer’s proceedings, accordingly penalized. 34
oath,28 Section 20(a) of Rule 138 of the Rules of
 84

Atty. Valencia support the conclusion that she lacked good moral they wanted to marry in Hongkong for the added
character; even without being a lawyer, a person security of avoiding any charge of bigamy by
We agree with the findings of Investigating possessed of high moral values, whose confidential entering into the subsequent marriage outside
Commissioner San Juan that Atty. Valencia should advice was sought by another with respect to the Philippine jurisdiction. In this regard, we cannot
be administratively liable under the circumstances latter’s family problems, would not aggravate the help but note that Atty. Valencia afterwards opted
for gross immorality: situation by entering into a romantic liaison with to retain and use her surname instead of using the
the person seeking advice, thereby effectively surname of her "husband." Atty. Valencia, too, did
alienating the other person’s feelings and affection not appear to mind that her husband did not live
x x x The contention of respondent that they were from his wife and family. and cohabit with her under one roof, but with his
not yet lawyers in March 27, 1978 when they got second wife and the family of this marriage.
married shall not afford them exemption from Apparently, Atty. Valencia did not mind at all
sanctions, for good moral character is required as a While Atty. Valencia contends that Atty. Garrido’s
marriage with Maelotisea was null and void, the "sharing" her husband with another woman. This,
condition precedent to admission to the Bar. to us, is a clear demonstration of Atty. Valencia’s
Likewise there is no distinction whether the fact remains that he took a man away from a
woman who bore him six (6) children. Ordinary perverse sense of moral values.
misconduct was committed in the lawyer’s
professional capacity or in his private life. Again, decency would have required her to ward off Atty.
the claim that his marriage to complainant was Garrido’s advances, as he was a married man, in Measured against the definition of gross
void ab initio shall not relieve respondents from fact a twice-married man with both marriages immorality, we find Atty. Valencia’s actions grossly
responsibility x x x Although the second marriage subsisting at that time; she should have said no to immoral. Her actions were so corrupt as to
of the respondent was subsequently declared null Atty. Garrido from the very start. Instead, she approximate a criminal act, for she married a man
and void the fact remains that respondents continued her liaison with Atty. Garrido, driving who, in all appearances, was married to another
exhibited conduct which lacks that degree of him, upon the death of Constancia, away from and with whom he has a family. Her actions were
morality required of them as members of the Bar.35 legitimizing his relationship with Maelotisea and also unprincipled and reprehensible to a high
their children. Worse than this, because of Atty. degree; as the confidante of Atty. Garrido, she
Valencia’s presence and willingness, Atty. Garrido preyed on his vulnerability and engaged in a
Moral character is not a subjective term but one even left his second family and six children for a romantic relationship with him during the
that corresponds to objective reality.36 To have third marriage with her. This scenario smacks of subsistence of his two previous marriages. As
good moral character, a person must have the immorality even if viewed outside of the prism of already mentioned, Atty. Valencia’s conduct could
personal characteristics of being good. It is not law.1avvphi1 not but be scandalous and revolting to the point of
enough that he or she has a good reputation, i.e., shocking the community’s sense of decency; while
the opinion generally entertained about a person or she professed to be the lawfully wedded wife, she
the estimate in which he or she is held by the We are not unmindful of Atty. Valencia’s expressed
belief that Atty. Garrido’s second marriage to helped the second family build a house prior to her
public in the place where she is known.37 The marriage to Atty. Garrido, and did not object to
requirement of good moral character has four Maelotisea was invalid; hence, she felt free to
marry Atty. Garrido. While this may be correct in sharing her husband with the woman of his second
general purposes, namely: (1) to protect the public; marriage.
(2) to protect the public image of lawyers; (3) to the strict legal sense and was later on confirmed
protect prospective clients; and (4) to protect by the declaration of the nullity of Atty. Garrido’s
errant lawyers from themselves.38 Each purpose is marriage to Maelotisea, we do not believe at all in We find that Atty. Valencia violated Canon 7 and
as important as the other. the honesty of this expressed belief. Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility, as her behavior demeaned the
The records show that Atty. Valencia consented to dignity of and discredited the legal profession. She
Under the circumstances, we cannot overlook that simply failed in her duty as a lawyer to adhere
prior to becoming a lawyer, Atty. Valencia already be married in Hongkong, not within the country.
Given that this marriage transpired before the unwaveringly to the highest standards of
knew that Atty. Garrido was a married man (either morality.40 In Barrientos v. Daarol,41 we held that
to Constancia or to Maelotisea), and that he declaration of the nullity of Atty. Garrido’s second
marriage, we can only call this Hongkong marriage lawyers, as officers of the court, must not only be
already had a family. As Atty. Garrido’s admitted of good moral character but must also be seen to
confidante, she was under the moral duty to give a clandestine marriage, contrary to the Filipino
tradition of celebrating a marriage together with be of good moral character and must lead lives in
him proper advice; instead, she entered into a accordance with the highest moral standards of the
romantic relationship with him for about six (6) family. Despite Atty. Valencia’s claim that she
agreed to marry Atty. Garrido only after he showed community. Atty. Valencia failed to live up to these
years during the subsistence of his two marriages. standards before she was admitted to the bar and
In 1978, she married Atty. Garrido with the her proof of his capacity to enter into a subsequent
valid marriage, the celebration of their marriage in after she became a member of the legal
knowledge that he had an outstanding second profession.
marriage. These circumstances, to our mind, Hongkong39 leads us to the opposite conclusion;
 85

Conclusion (1) DISBAR Atty. Angel E. Garrido from the practice including the morality it sanctions."4 As we
of law for gross immorality, violation of the explained in Estrada v. Escritor, 5 the requirement
Membership in the Bar is a privilege burdened with Lawyer’s Oath; and violation of Rule 1.01, Canon 7 of an articulable and discernible secular purpose is
conditions. As a privilege bestowed by law through and Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional meant to give flesh to the constitutional policy of
the Supreme Court, membership in the Bar can be Responsibility; and full religious freedom for all, viz.:
withdrawn where circumstances concretely show
the lawyer’s lack of the essential qualifications (2) DISBAR Atty. Romana P. Valencia from the Religion also dictates "how we ought to live" for
required of lawyers. We resolve to withdraw this practice of law for gross immorality, violation of the nature of religion is not just to know, but often,
privilege from Atty. Angel E. Garrido and Atty. Canon 7 and Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional to act in accordance with man's "views of his
Rowena P. Valencia for this reason. Responsibility. relations to His Creator." But the Establishment
Clause puts a negative bar against establishment
In imposing the penalty of disbarment upon the Let a copy of this Decision be attached to the of this morality arising from one religion or the
respondents, we are aware that the power to personal records of Atty. Angel E. Garrido and Atty. other, and implies the affirmative "establishment"
disbar is one to be exercised with great caution Romana P. Valencia in the Office of the Bar of a civil order for the resolution of public moral
and only in clear cases of misconduct that seriously Confidant, and another copy furnished the disputes. This agreement on a secular mechanism
affects the standing and character of the lawyer as Integrated Bar of the Philippines. is the price of ending the "war of all sects against
a legal professional and as an officer of the Court.42 all"; the establishment of a secular public moral
order is the social contract produced by religious
The Clerk of Court is directed to strike out the truce.
We are convinced from the totality of the evidence names of Angel E. Garrido and Rowena P. Valencia
on hand that the present case is one of them. The from the Roll of Attorneys.
records show the parties’ pattern of grave and Thus, when the law speaks of "immorality" in the
immoral misconduct that demonstrates their lack Civil Service Law or "immoral" in the Code of
SO ORDERED. Professional Responsibility for lawyers, or "public
of mental and emotional fitness and moral
character to qualify them for the responsibilities morals" in the Revised Penal Code, or "morals" in
and duties imposed on lawyers as professionals SEPARATE CONCURRING OPINION the New Civil Code, or "moral character" in the
and as officers of the court. Constitution, the distinction between public and
PUNO, C.J.: secular morality on the one hand, and religious
morality, on the other, should be kept in mind. The
While we are keenly aware of Atty. Garrido’s plea morality referred to in the law is public and
for compassion and his act of supporting his I concur with the groundbreaking ponencia of my necessarily secular, not religious as the dissent of
children with Maelotisea after their separation, we esteemed colleague, Mr. Justice Mariano C. del Mr. Justice Carpio holds. "Religious teachings as
cannot grant his plea. The extent of his Castillo. Nonetheless, I respectfully submit this expressed in public debate may influence the civil
demonstrated violations of his oath, the Rules of separate opinion to underscore some points that I public order but public moral disputes may be
Court and of the Code of Professional Responsibility deem significant. resolved only on grounds articulable in secular
overrides what under other circumstances are terms." Otherwise, if government relies upon
commendable traits of character. FIRST. The assailed Resolutions of the Commission religious beliefs in formulating public policies and
on Elections (COMELEC) run afoul of the non- morals, the resulting policies and morals would
In like manner, Atty. Valencia’s behavior over a establishment clause1 of the Constitution. There require conformity to what some might regard as
long period of time unequivocally demonstrates a was cypher effort on the part of the COMELEC to religious programs or agenda. The non-believers
basic and serious flaw in her character, which we couch its reasoning in legal – much less would therefore be compelled to conform to a
cannot simply brush aside without undermining the constitutional – terms, as it denied Ang Ladlad’s standard of conduct buttressed by a religious
dignity of the legal profession and without placing petition for registration as a sectoral party belief, i.e., to a "compelled religion;" anathema to
the integrity of the administration of justice into principally on the ground that it "tolerates religious freedom. Likewise, if government based
question. She was not an on-looker victimized by immorality which offends religious (i.e., its actions upon religious beliefs, it would tacitly
the circumstances, but a willing and knowing full Christian2 and Muslim3) beliefs." To be sure, the approve or endorse that belief and thereby also
participant in a love triangle whose incidents COMELEC’s ruling is completely antithetical to the tacitly disapprove contrary religious or non-
crossed into the illicit. fundamental rule that "[t]he public morality religious views that would not support the policy.
expressed in the law is necessarily secular[,] for in As a result, government will not provide full
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court our constitutional order, the religion clauses religious freedom for all its citizens, or even make
resolves to: prohibit the state from establishing a religion, it appear that those whose beliefs are disapproved
 86

are second-class citizens. Expansive religious and moral principles to which they aspire and schooling threatened their way of life, the Court
freedom therefore requires that government be which thus determine the course of their lives. declared: "There can be no assumption that
neutral in matters of religion; governmental These considerations do not answer the question today's majority is ‘right’ and the Amish and others
reliance upon religious justification is inconsistent before us, however. The issue is whether the like them are ‘wrong.’ A way of life that is odd or
with this policy of neutrality.6 (citations omitted majority may use the power of the State to enforce even erratic but interferes with no rights or
and italics supplied) these views on the whole society through operation interests of others is not to be condemned because
of the … law. "Our obligation is to define the liberty it is different."21 The Court claims that its decision
Consequently, the assailed resolutions of the of all, not to mandate our own moral code."13 today merely refuses to recognize a fundamental
COMELEC are violative of the constitutional right to engage in homosexual sodomy; what the
directive that no religious test shall be required for SECOND. The COMELEC capitalized on Ang Ladlad’s Court really has refused to recognize is the
the exercise of civil or political rights.7 Ang Ladlad’s definition of the term "sexual orientation," 14 as well fundamental interest all individuals have in
right of political participation was unduly infringed as its citation of the number of Filipino men who controlling the nature of their intimate associations
when the COMELEC, swayed by the private biases have sex with men,15 as basis for the declaration with others. (italics supplied)
and personal prejudices of its constituent that the party espouses and advocates sexual
members, arrogated unto itself the role of a immorality. This position, however, would deny It has been said that freedom extends beyond
religious court or worse, a morality police. homosexual and bisexual individuals a spatial bounds.22 Liberty presumes an autonomy of
fundamental element of personal identity and a self that includes freedom of thought, belief,
The COMELEC attempts to disengage itself from legitimate exercise of personal liberty. For, the expression, and certain intimate conduct. 23 These
this "excessive entanglement" 8 with religion by "ability to [independently] define one’s identity matters, involving the most intimate and personal
arguing that we "cannot ignore our strict religious that is central to any concept of liberty" cannot choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices
upbringing, whether Christian or Muslim"9 since the truly be exercised in a vacuum; we all depend on central to personal dignity and autonomy, are
"moral precepts espoused by [these] religions have the "emotional enrichment from close ties with central to the liberty protected by the due process
slipped into society and … are now publicly others."16 As Mr. Justice Blackmun so eloquently clause.24 At the heart of liberty is the right to define
accepted moral norms."10 However, as correctly said in his stinging dissent in Bowers v. one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the
observed by Mr. Justice del Castillo, the Philippines Hardwick17 (overturned by the United States universe, and of the mystery of human
has not seen fit to disparage homosexual conduct Supreme Court seventeen years later in Lawrence life.25 Beliefs about these matters could not define
as to actually criminalize it. Indeed, even if the v. Texas18): the attributes of personhood were they formed
State has legislated to this effect, the law is under compulsion of the State.26 Lawrence v.
vulnerable to constitutional attack on privacy Only the most willful blindness could obscure the Texas27 is again instructive:
grounds.11 These alleged "generally accepted fact that sexual intimacy is "a sensitive, key
public morals" have not, in reality, crossed over relationship of human existence, central to family To say that the issue in Bowers was simply the
from the religious to the secular sphere. life, community welfare, and the development of right to engage in certain sexual conduct demeans
human personality[.]"19 The fact that individuals the claim the individual put forward, just as it
Some people may find homosexuality and define themselves in a significant way through would demean a married couple were it to be said
bisexuality deviant, odious, and offensive. their intimate sexual relationships with others marriage is simply about the right to have sexual
Nevertheless, private discrimination, however suggests, in a Nation as diverse as ours, that there intercourse. The laws involved in Bowers and here
unfounded, cannot be attributed or ascribed to the may be many "right" ways of conducting those are, to be sure, statutes that purport to do no more
State. Mr. Justice Kennedy, speaking for the United relationships, and that much of the richness of a than prohibit a particular sexual act. Their
States (U.S.) Supreme Court in the landmark case relationship will come from the freedom an penalties and purposes, though, have more far-
of Lawrence v. Texas,12 opined: individual has to choose the form and nature of reaching consequences, touching upon the most
these intensely personal bonds.20 private human conduct, sexual behavior, and in the
most private of places, the home. The statutes do
It must be acknowledged, of course, that the Court seek to control a personal relationship that,
in Bowers was making the broader point that for In a variety of circumstances we have recognized
that a necessary corollary of giving individuals whether or not entitled to formal recognition in the
centuries there have been powerful voices to law, is within the liberty of persons to choose
condemn homosexual conduct as immoral. The freedom to choose how to conduct their lives is
acceptance of the fact that different individuals will without being punished as criminals.
condemnation has been shaped by religious
beliefs, conceptions of right and acceptable make different choices. For example, in holding
behavior, and respect for the traditional family. For that the clearly important state interest in public This, as a general rule, should counsel against
many persons these are not trivial concerns but education should give way to a competing claim by attempts by the State, or a court, to define the
profound and deep convictions accepted as ethical the Amish to the effect that extended formal meaning of the relationship or to set its boundaries
 87

absent injury to a person or abuse of an institution vanguard of constitutional guaranties, and require proviso of Section 15(c), Article II of Republic Act
the law protects. It suffices for us to acknowledge a stricter and more exacting adherence to No. 7653, thereby exposing the proviso to more
that adults may choose to enter upon this constitutional limitations. Rational basis should not serious scrutiny. This time, the scrutiny relates to
relationship in the confines of their homes and suffice. (citations omitted and italics supplied) the constitutionality of the classification — albeit
their own private lives and still retain their dignity made indirectly as a consequence of the passage
as free persons. When sexuality finds overt Considering thus that labor enjoys such special and of eight other laws — between the rank-and-file of
expression in intimate conduct with another protected status under our fundamental law, the the BSP and the seven other GFIs. The
person, the conduct can be but one element in a Court ruled in favor of the Central Bank Employees classification must not only be reasonable, but
personal bond that is more enduring. The liberty Association, Inc. in this wise: must also apply equally to all members of the
protected by the Constitution allows homosexual class. The proviso may be fair on its face and
persons the right to make this choice. (italics impartial in appearance but it cannot be grossly
supplied) While R.A. No. 7653 started as a valid measure well discriminatory in its operation, so as practically to
within the legislature's power, we hold that the make unjust distinctions between persons who are
enactment of subsequent laws exempting all rank- without differences.
THIRD. The ponencia of Mr. Justice del Castillo and-file employees of other GFIs leeched all
refused to characterize homosexuals and bisexuals validity out of the challenged proviso.
as a class in themselves for purposes of the equal Stated differently, the second level of inquiry deals
protection clause. Accordingly, it struck down the with the following questions: Given that Congress
assailed Resolutions using the most liberal basis of xxxx chose to exempt other GFIs (aside the BSP) from
judicial scrutiny, the rational basis test, according the coverage of the SSL, can the exclusion of the
to which government need only show that the According to petitioner, the last proviso of Section rank-and-file employees of the BSP stand
challenged classification is rationally related to 15(c), Article II of R.A. No. 7653 is also violative of constitutional scrutiny in the light of the fact that
serving a legitimate state interest. the equal protection clause because after it was Congress did not exclude the rank-and-file
enacted, the charters of the GSIS, LBP, DBP and employees of the other GFIs? Is Congress' power to
I humbly submit, however, that a classification SSS were also amended, but the personnel of the classify so unbridled as to sanction unequal and
based on gender or sexual orientation is a quasi- latter GFIs were all exempted from the coverage of discriminatory treatment, simply because the
suspect classification, as to trigger a heightened the SSL. Thus, within the class of rank-and-file inequity manifested itself, not instantly through a
level of review. personnel of GFIs, the BSP rank-and-file are also single overt act, but gradually and progressively,
discriminated upon. through seven separate acts of Congress? Is the
right to equal protection of the law bounded in time
Preliminarily, in our jurisdiction, the standard and and space that: (a) the right can only be invoked
analysis of equal protection challenges in the main Indeed, we take judicial notice that after the new
BSP charter was enacted in 1993, Congress also against a classification made directly and
have followed the rational basis test, coupled with deliberately, as opposed to a discrimination that
a deferential attitude to legislative classifications undertook the amendment of the charters of the
GSIS, LBP, DBP and SSS, and three other GFIs, from arises indirectly, or as a consequence of several
and a reluctance to invalidate a law unless there is other acts; and (b) is the legal analysis confined to
a showing of a clear and unequivocal breach of the 1995 to 2004, viz.:
determining the validity within the parameters of
Constitution.28 However, Central Bank Employees the statute or ordinance (where the inclusion or
Association, Inc. v. Bangko Sentral ng xxxx exclusion is articulated), thereby proscribing any
Pilipinas,29 carved out an exception to this general evaluation vis-à-vis the grouping, or the lack
rule, such that prejudice to persons accorded It is noteworthy, as petitioner points out, that the thereof, among several similar enactments made
special protection by the Constitution requires subsequent charters of the seven other GFIs share over a period of time?
stricter judicial scrutiny than mere rationality, viz.: this common proviso: a blanket exemption of all
their employees from the coverage of the SSL, In this second level of scrutiny, the inequality of
Congress retains its wide discretion in providing for expressly or impliedly... treatment cannot be justified on the mere
a valid classification, and its policies should be assertion that each exemption (granted to the
accorded recognition and respect by the courts of xxxx seven other GFIs) rests "on a policy determination
justice except when they run afoul of the by the legislature." All legislative enactments
Constitution. The deference stops where the necessarily rest on a policy determination — even
classification violates a fundamental right, or The abovementioned subsequent enactments,
however, constitute significant changes in those that have been declared to contravene the
prejudices persons accorded special protection by Constitution. Verily, if this could serve as a magic
the Constitution. When these violations arise, this circumstance that considerably alter the
reasonability of the continued operation of the last wand to sustain the validity of a statute, then no
Court must discharge its primary role as the
 88

due process and equal protection challenges would Apropos the special protection afforded to labor The Constitution also directs the State to promote
ever prosper. There is nothing inherently under our Constitution and international law, we "equality of employment opportunities for all."
sacrosanct in a policy determination made by held in International School Alliance of Educators v. Similarly, the Labor Code provides that the State
Congress or by the Executive; it cannot run riot and Quisumbing: shall "ensure equal work opportunities regardless
overrun the ramparts of protection of the of sex, race or creed." It would be an affront to
Constitution. That public policy abhors inequality and both the spirit and letter of these provisions if the
discrimination is beyond contention. Our State, in spite of its primordial obligation to
xxxx Constitution and laws reflect the policy against promote and ensure equal employment
these evils. The Constitution in the Article on Social opportunities, closes its eyes to unequal and
Justice and Human Rights exhorts Congress to discriminatory terms and conditions of
In the case at bar, it is precisely the fact that as employment.
regards the exemption from the SSL, there are no "give highest priority to the enactment of
characteristics peculiar only to the seven GFIs or measures that protect and enhance the right of all
their rank-and-file so as to justify the exemption people to human dignity, reduce social, economic, x x x           x x x          x x x
which BSP rank-and-file employees were denied and political inequalities." The very broad Article
(not to mention the anomaly of the SEC getting 19 of the Civil Code requires every person, "in the Notably, the International Covenant on Economic,
one). The distinction made by the law is not only exercise of his rights and in the performance of his Social, and Cultural Rights, in Article 7 thereof,
superficial, but also arbitrary. It is not based on duties, [to] act with justice, give everyone his due, provides:
substantial distinctions that make real differences and observe honesty and good faith."
between the BSP rank-and-file and the seven other The States Parties to the present Covenant
GFIs. International law, which springs from general recognize the right of everyone to the enjoyment
principles of law, likewise proscribes discrimination. of just and [favorable] conditions of work, which
xxxx General principles of law include principles of ensure, in particular:
equity, i.e., the general principles of fairness and
justice, based on the test of what is reasonable.
The disparity of treatment between BSP rank-and- The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the a. Remuneration which provides all workers, as a
file and the rank-and-file of the other seven GFIs International Covenant on Economic, Social, and minimum, with:
definitely bears the unmistakable badge of Cultural Rights, the International Convention on the
invidious discrimination — no one can, with candor Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, i. Fair wages and equal remuneration for work of
and fairness, deny the discriminatory character of the Convention against Discrimination in equal value without distinction of any kind, in
the subsequent blanket and total exemption of the Education, the Convention (No. 111) Concerning particular women being guaranteed conditions of
seven other GFIs from the SSL when such was Discrimination in Respect of Employment and work not inferior to those enjoyed by men, with
withheld from the BSP. Alikes are being treated as Occupation — all embody the general principle equal pay for equal work;
unalikes without any rational basis. against discrimination, the very antithesis of
fairness and justice. The Philippines, through its x x x           x x x          x x x
xxxx Constitution, has incorporated this principle as part
of its national laws.
The foregoing provisions impregnably
Thus, the two-tier analysis made in the case at bar institutionalize in this jurisdiction the long honored
of the challenged provision, and its conclusion of In the workplace, where the relations between legal truism of "equal pay for equal work." Persons
unconstitutionality by subsequent operation, are in capital and labor are often skewed in favor of who work with substantially equal qualifications,
cadence and in consonance with the progressive capital, inequality and discrimination by the skill, effort and responsibility, under similar
trend of other jurisdictions and in international law. employer are all the more reprehensible. conditions, should be paid similar salaries.
There should be no hesitation in using the equal
protection clause as a major cutting edge to The Constitution specifically provides that labor is
eliminate every conceivable irrational xxxx
entitled to "humane conditions of work." These
discrimination in our society. Indeed, the social conditions are not restricted to the physical
justice imperatives in the Constitution, coupled workplace — the factory, the office or the field — Under most circumstances, the Court will exercise
with the special status and protection afforded to but include as well the manner by which employers judicial restraint in deciding questions of
labor, compel this approach. treat their employees. constitutionality, recognizing the broad discretion
given to Congress in exercising its legislative
power. Judicial scrutiny would be based on the
 89

"rational basis" test, and the legislative discretion subject to one of three levels of judicial scrutiny. distinction, if any such grounds exist, on which the
would be given deferential treatment. The level of review, on a sliding scale basis, varies State acted.40
with the type of classification utilized and the
But if the challenge to the statute is premised on nature of the right affected.30 Instead of adopting a rigid formula to determine
the denial of a fundamental right, or the whether certain legislative classifications warrant
perpetuation of prejudice against persons favored If a legislative classification disadvantages a more demanding constitutional analysis, the United
by the Constitution with special protection, judicial "suspect class" or impinges upon the exercise of a States Supreme Court has looked to four
scrutiny ought to be more strict. A weak and "fundamental right," then the courts will employ factors,41 thus:
watered down view would call for the abdication of strict scrutiny and the statute must fall unless the
this Court's solemn duty to strike down any law government can demonstrate that the (1) The history of invidious discrimination
repugnant to the Constitution and the rights it classification has been precisely tailored to serve a against the class burdened by the
enshrines. This is true whether the actor compelling governmental interest.31 Over the legislation;42
committing the unconstitutional act is a private years, the United States Supreme Court has
person or the government itself or one of its determined that suspect classes for equal
instrumentalities. Oppressive acts will be struck protection purposes include classifications based (2) Whether the characteristics that
down regardless of the character or nature of the on race, religion, alienage, national origin, and distinguish the class indicate a typical class
actor. ancestry.32 The underlying rationale of this theory member's ability to contribute to society; 43
is that where legislation affects discrete and insular
In the case at bar, the challenged proviso operates minorities, the presumption of constitutionality (3) Whether the distinguishing
on the basis of the salary grade or officer- fades because traditional political processes may characteristic is "immutable" or beyond the
employee status. It is akin to a distinction based on have broken down.33 In such a case, the State class members' control;44 and
economic class and status, with the higher grades bears a heavy burden of justification, and the
as recipients of a benefit specifically withheld from government action will be closely scrutinized in (4) The political power of the subject
the lower grades. Officers of the BSP now receive light of its asserted purpose.34 class.45
higher compensation packages that are
competitive with the industry, while the poorer, On the other hand, if the classification, while not These factors, it must be emphasized, are not
low-salaried employees are limited to the rates facially invidious, nonetheless gives rise to constitutive essential elements of a suspect or
prescribed by the SSL. The implications are quite recurring constitutional difficulties, or if a quasi-suspect class, as to individually demand a
disturbing: BSP rank-and-file employees are paid classification disadvantages a "quasi-suspect certain weight.46 The U.S. Supreme Court has
the strictly regimented rates of the SSL while class," it will be treated under intermediate or applied the four factors in a flexible manner; it has
employees higher in rank — possessing higher and heightened review.35 To survive intermediate neither required, nor even discussed, every factor
better education and opportunities for career scrutiny, the law must not only further an in every case.47 Indeed, no single talisman can
advancement — are given higher compensation important governmental interest and be define those groups likely to be the target of
packages to entice them to stay. Considering that substantially related to that interest, but the classifications offensive to the equal protection
majority, if not all, the rank-and-file employees justification for the classification must be genuine clause and therefore warranting heightened or
consist of people whose status and rank in life are and must not depend on broad strict scrutiny; experience, not abstract logic, must
less and limited, especially in terms of job generalizations.36 Noteworthy, and of special be the primary guide.48
marketability, it is they — and not the officers — interest to us in this case, quasi-suspect classes
who have the real economic and financial need for include classifications based on gender or
the adjustment. This is in accord with the policy of illegitimacy.37
the Constitution "to free the people from poverty,
provide adequate social services, extend to them a If neither strict nor intermediate scrutiny is
decent standard of living, and improve the quality appropriate, then the statute will be tested for
of life for all." Any act of Congress that runs mere rationality.38 This is a relatively relaxed
counter to this constitutional desideratum deserves standard reflecting the Court’s awareness that the
strict scrutiny by this Court before it can pass drawing of lines which creates distinctions is
muster. (citations omitted and italics supplied) peculiarly a legislative task and an unavoidable
one.39 The presumption is in favor of the
Corollarily, American case law provides that a state classification, of the reasonableness and fairness of
action questioned on equal protection grounds is state action, and of legitimate grounds of
 90

In any event, the first two factors – history of to "cure" them into becoming acknowledged by police as hate
intentional discrimination and relationship of straight women; crimes or violent acts of bigotry.
classifying characteristic to a person's ability to
contribute – have always been present when (c) Effeminate gays and butch 7. In the recent May 2009 US asylum case
heightened scrutiny has been applied. 49 They have lesbians are kicked out of school, of Philip Belarmino, he testified that as a
been critical to the analysis and could be NGOs, and choirs because of their young gay person in the Philippines, he
considered as prerequisites to concluding a group identity; was subjected to a variety of sexual abuse
is a suspect or quasi-suspect class.50 However, the and violence, including repeated rapes[,]
last two factors – immutability of the characteristic which he could not report to [the] police [or
and political powerlessness of the group – are (d) Effeminate youths and
masculine young women are speak of] to his own parents.
considered simply to supplement the analysis as a
means to discern whether a need for heightened refused admission from (sic)
scrutiny exists.51 certain schools, are suspended or Accordingly, this history of discrimination suggests
are automatically put on probation; that any legislative burden placed on lesbian and
gay people as a class is "more likely than others to
Guided by this framework, and considering further reflect deep-seated prejudice rather than
that classifications based on sex or gender – albeit (e) Denial of jobs, promotions,
trainings and other work benefits legislative rationality in pursuit of some legitimate
on a male/female, man/woman basis – have been objective."54
previously held to trigger heightened scrutiny, I once one’s sexual orientation and
respectfully submit that classification on the basis gender identity is (sic) revealed;
of sexual orientation (i.e., homosexuality and/or A second relevant consideration is whether the
bisexuality) is a quasi-suspect classification that (f) Consensual partnerships or character-in-issue is related to the person’s ability
prompts intermediate review. relationships by gays and lesbians to contribute to society.55 Heightened scrutiny is
who are already of age, are broken applied when the classification bears no
up by their parents or guardians relationship to this ability; the existence of this
The first consideration is whether homosexuals factor indicates the classification is likely based on
have suffered a history of purposeful unequal using the [A]nti-kidnapping [L]aw;
irrelevant stereotypes and prejudice. 56 Insofar as
treatment because of their sexual sexual orientation is concerned, it is gainful to
orientation.52 One cannot, in good faith, dispute (g) Pray-overs, exorcisms, and repair to Kerrigan v. Commissioner of Public
that gay and lesbian persons historically have other religious cures are performed Health,57 viz.:
been, and continue to be, the target of purposeful on gays and lesbians to "reform"
and pernicious discrimination due solely to their them;
sexual orientation.53 Paragraphs 6 and 7 of Ang The defendants also concede that sexual
Ladlad’s Petition for Registration for party-list orientation bears no relation to a person's ability to
(h) Young gays and lesbians are participate in or contribute to society, a fact that
accreditation in fact state: forcibly subjected to psychiatric many courts have acknowledged, as well. x x x If
counseling and therapy to cure homosexuals were afflicted with some sort of
6. There have been documented cases of them[,] despite the de-listing (sic) impediment to their ability to perform and to
discrimination and violence perpetuated of homosexuality and lesbianism as contribute to society, the entire phenomenon of
against the LGBT Community, among a mental disorder by the American ‘staying in the [c]loset’ and of ‘coming out’ would
which are: Psychiatric Association; not exist; their impediment would betray their
status. x x x In this critical respect, gay persons
(a) Effeminate or gay youths being (i) Transgenders, or individuals who stand in stark contrast to other groups that have
beaten up by their parents and/or were born mail but who self- been denied suspect or quasi-suspect class
guardians to make them conform identity as women and dress as recognition, despite a history of discrimination,
to standard gender norms of such, are denied entry or services because the distinguishing characteristics of those
behavior; in certain restaurants and groups adversely affect their ability or capacity to
establishments; and perform certain functions or to discharge certain
(b) Fathers and/or guardians who responsibilities in society.58
allow their daughters who are (j) Several murders from the years
butch lesbians to be raped[, so as] 2003-3006 were committed against Unlike the characteristics unique to those groups,
gay men, but were not however, "homosexuality bears no relation at all to
 91

[an] individual's ability to contribute fully to Prescinding from these premises, it is not In this case, the assailed Resolutions of the
society."59 Indeed, because an individual's appropriate to require a person to repudiate or COMELEC unmistakably fail the intermediate level
homosexual orientation "implies no impairment in change his or her sexual orientation in order to of review. Regrettably, they betray no more than
judgment, stability, reliability or general social or avoid discriminatory treatment, because a person's bigotry and intolerance; they raise the inevitable
vocational capabilities";60 the observation of the sexual orientation is so integral an aspect of one's inference that the disadvantage imposed is born of
United States Supreme Court that race, alienage identity.68 Consequently, because sexual animosity toward the class of persons
and national origin -all suspect classes entitled to orientation "may be altered [if at all] only at the affected78 (that is, lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans-
the highest level of constitutional protection- "are expense of significant damage to the individual’s gendered individuals). In our constitutional system,
so seldom relevant to the achievement of any sense of self," classifications based thereon "are no status-based classification undertaken for its own
legitimate state interest that laws grounded in such less entitled to consideration as a suspect or quasi- sake cannot survive.79
considerations are deemed to reflect prejudice and suspect class than any other group that has been
antipathy"61 is no less applicable to gay persons. deemed to exhibit an immutable FOURTH. It has been suggested that the LGBT
(italics supplied) characteristic."69 Stated differently, sexual community cannot participate in the party-list
orientation is not the type of human trait that system because it is not a "marginalized and
Clearly, homosexual orientation is no more allows courts to relax their standard of review underrepresented sector" enumerated either in the
relevant to a person's ability to perform and because the barrier is temporary or susceptible to Constitution80 or Republic Act No. (RA)
contribute to society than is heterosexual self-help.70 7941.81 However, this position is belied by our
orientation.62 ruling in Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v.
The final factor that bears consideration is whether COMELEC,82 where we clearly held that the
A third factor that courts have considered in the group is "a minority or politically enumeration of marginalized and
determining whether the members of a class are powerless."71 However, the political powerlessness underrepresented sectors in RA 7941 is not
entitled to heightened protection for equal factor of the level-of-scrutiny inquiry does not exclusive.
protection purposes is whether the attribute or require a showing of absolute political
characteristic that distinguishes them is immutable powerlessness.72 Rather, the touchstone of the I likewise see no logical or factual obstacle to
or otherwise beyond their control.63 Of course, the analysis should be "whether the group lacks classifying the members of the LGBT community as
characteristic that distinguishes gay persons from sufficient political strength to bring a prompt end marginalized and underrepresented, considering
others and qualifies them for recognition as a to the prejudice and discrimination through their long history (and indeed, ongoing narrative)
distinct and discrete group is the characteristic traditional political means."73 of persecution, discrimination, and pathos. In my
that historically has resulted in their social and humble view, marginalization for purposes of party-
legal ostracism, namely, their attraction to persons Applying this standard, it would not be difficult to list representation encompasses social
of the same sex.64 conclude that gay persons are entitled to marginalization as well. To hold otherwise is
heightened constitutional protection despite some tantamount to trivializing socially marginalized
Immutability is a factor in determining the recent political progress.74 The discrimination that groups as "mere passive recipients of the State’s
appropriate level of scrutiny because the inability they have suffered has been so pervasive and benevolence" and denying them the right to
of a person to change a characteristic that is used severe – even though their sexual orientation has "participate directly [in the mainstream of
to justify different treatment makes the no bearing at all on their ability to contribute to or representative democracy] in the enactment of
discrimination violative of the rather "‘basic perform in society – that it is highly unlikely that laws designed to benefit them."83 The party-list
concept of our system that legal burdens should legislative enactments alone will suffice to system could not have been conceptualized to
bear some relationship to individual eliminate that discrimination.75 Furthermore, perpetuate this injustice.
responsibility.’"65 However, the constitutional insofar as the LGBT community plays a role in the
relevance of the immutability factor is not reserved political process, it is apparent that their numbers Accordingly, I vote to grant the petition.
to those instances in which the trait defining the reflect their status as a small and insular
burdened class is absolutely impossible to minority.76
REYNATO S. PUNO
change.66 That is, the immutability prong of the Chief Justice
suspectness inquiry surely is satisfied when the It is therefore respectfully submitted that any state
identifying trait is "so central to a person's identity action singling lesbians, gays, bisexuals and trans-
that it would be abhorrent for government to genders out for disparate treatment is subject to Imbong vs Ochoa
penalize a person for refusing to change [it]."67 heightened judicial scrutiny to ensure that it is not
the product of historical prejudice and
stereotyping.77
 92

Substantial: Right to Life; Health; Religion; Free

Speech; Privacy; Due Process Clause; Equal
Protection Clause Power of Judicial Review

Procedural: Actual Case; Facial Challenge; Locus Facts: Actual Case or Controversy
Standi; Declaratory Relief; One Subject One Title
Facial Challenge
Rule
Republic Act (R.A.) No. 10354, otherwise known as Locus Standi
the Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive
Declaratory Relief
Health Act of 2012 (RH Law), was enacted by
Congress on December 21, 2012. One Subject/One Title Rule

Challengers from various sectors of society are

IMBONG VS OCHOA questioning the constitutionality of the said Act.
The petitioners are assailing the constitutionality of
RH Law on the following grounds:

G.R. No. 204819 April 8, 2014

Issue/s:
SUBSTANTIAL ISSUES:

JAMES M. IMBONG and LOVELY-ANN C. IMBONG, for

themselves and in behalf of their minor children, SUBSTANTIAL ISSUES:
LUCIA CARLOS IMBONG and BERNADETTE CARLOS The RH Law violates the right to life of the unborn.
IMBONG and MAGNIFICAT CHILD DEVELOPMENT
The RH Law violates the right to health and the
CENTER, INC., Petitioners,
right to protection against hazardous products. Whether or not (WON) RA 10354/Reproductive
vs. Health (RH) Law is unconstitutional for violating
The RH Law violates the right to religious freedom.
the:
HON. PAQUITO N. OCHOA, JR., Executive Secretary,
The RH Law violates the constitutional provision on
HON. FLORENCIO B. ABAD, Secretary, Department
involuntary servitude.
of Budget and Management, HON. ENRIQUE T.
Right to life
ONA, Secretary, Department of Health, HON. The RH Law violates the right to equal protection of
ARMIN A. LUISTRO, Secretary, Department of the law. Right to health
Education, Culture and Sports and HON. MANUELA.
ROXAS II, Secretary, Department of Interior and The RH Law violates the right to free speech. Freedom of religion and right to free speech
Local Government, Respondents.
The RH Law is “void-for-vagueness” in violation of Right to privacy (marital privacy and autonomy)
the due process clause of the Constitution.
Freedom of expression and academic freedom
The RH Law intrudes into the zone of privacy of
one’s family protected by the Constitution Due process clause

Equal protection clause

Prohibition against involuntary servitude

PROCEDURAL: Whether the Court may exercise its

power of judicial review over the controversy.
 93

specific relief through a decree conclusive in Transcendental Importance: the Court leans on the
nature, as distinguished from an opinion advising doctrine that “the rule on standing is a matter of
PROCEDURAL: what the law would be upon a hypothetical state of procedure, hence, can be relaxed for non-
facts. Corollary to the requirement of an actual traditional plaintiffs like ordinary citizens,
case or controversy is the requirement of ripeness. taxpayers, and legislators when the public interest
Whether the Court can exercise its power of judicial A question is ripe for adjudication when the act so requires, such as when the matter is of
review over the controversy. being challenged has had a direct adverse effect transcendental importance, of overreaching
on the individual challenging it. For a case to be significance to society, or of paramount public
considered ripe for adjudication, it is a prerequisite interest.”
that something has then been accomplished or
Actual Case or Controversy
performed by either branch before a court may
Facial Challenge come into the picture, and the petitioner must
One Subject-One Title: The “one title-one subject”
allege the existence of an immediate or threatened
rule does not require the Congress to employ in the
Locus Standi injury to himself as a result of the challenged
title of the enactment language of such precision
action. He must show that he has sustained or is
Declaratory Relief as to mirror, fully index or catalogue all the
immediately in danger of sustaining some direct
contents and the minute details therein. The rule is
One Subject/One Title Rule injury as a result of the act complained of
sufficiently complied with if the title is
comprehensive enough as to include the general
object which the statute seeks to effect, and
Facial Challenge: A facial challenge, also known as where, as here, the persons interested are
a First Amendment Challenge, is one that is informed of the nature, scope and consequences of
Discussions: launched to assail the validity of statutes the proposed law and its operation. Moreover, this
concerning not only protected speech, but also all Court has invariably adopted a liberal rather than
other rights in the First Amendment. These include technical construction of the rule “so as not to
religious freedom, freedom of the press, and the cripple or impede legislation.” The one subject/one
PROCEDURAL right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to title rule expresses the principle that the title of a
petition the Government for a redress of law must not be “so uncertain that the average
grievances. After all, the fundamental right to person reading it would not be informed of the
Judicial Review Jurisprudence is replete with the religious freedom, freedom of the press and purpose of the enactment or put on inquiry as to its
rule that the power of judicial review is limited by peaceful assembly are but component rights of the contents, or which is misleading, either in referring
four exacting requisites: (a) there must be an right to one’s freedom of expression, as they are to or indicating one subject where another or
actual case or controversy; (b) the petitioners must modes which one’s thoughts are externalized. different one is really embraced in the act, or in
possess locus standi; (c) the question of omitting any expression or indication of the real
constitutionality must be raised at the earliest subject or scope of the act.”
opportunity; and (d) the issue of constitutionality Locus Standi: Locus standi or legal standing is
must be the lis mota of the case. defined as a personal and substantial interest in a
case such that the party has sustained or will Declaration of Unconstitutionality: Orthodox view:
sustain direct injury as a result of the challenged An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no
Actual Controversy: An actual case or controversy governmental act. It requires a personal stake in rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no
means an existing case or controversy that is the outcome of the controversy as to assure the protection; it creates no office; it is, in legal
appropriate or ripe for determination, not concrete adverseness which sharpens the contemplation, as inoperative as though it had
conjectural or anticipatory, lest the decision of the presentation of issues upon which the court so never been passed. Modern view: Under this view,
court would amount to an advisory opinion. It must largely depends for illumination of difficult the court in passing upon the question of
concern a real, tangible and not merely a constitutional questions. constitutionality does not annul or repeal the
theoretical question or issue. There ought to be an statute if it finds it in conflict with the Constitution.
actual and substantial controversy admitting of It simply refuses to recognize it and determines the
rights of the parties just as if such statute had no
 94

existence. But certain legal effects of the statute unconstitutional; only those that kill or destroy the RH Law, the DOH must keep in mind the provisions
prior to its declaration of unconstitutionality may fertilized ovum would be prohibited. of RA 4729: the contraceptives it will procure shall
be recognized. Requisites for partial Contraceptives that actually prevent the union of be from a duly licensed drug store or
unconstitutionality: (1) The Legislature must be the male sperm and female ovum, and those that pharmaceutical company and that the actual
willing to retain the valid portion(s), usually shown similarly take action before fertilization should be distribution of these contraceptive drugs and
by the presence of a separability clause in the law; deemed non-abortive, and thus constitutionally devices will be done following a prescription of a
and (2) The valid portion can stand independently permissible. qualified medical practitioner.
as law.
Meanwhile, the requirement of Section 9 of the RH
Law is to be considered “mandatory” only after
The intent of the framers of the Constitution for these devices and materials have been tested,
protecting the life of the unborn child was to evaluated and approved by the FDA. Congress
prevent the Legislature from passing a measure cannot determine that contraceptives are “safe,
Ruling/s: prevent abortion. The Court cannot interpret this legal, non-abortificient and effective”.
otherwise. The RH Law is in line with this intent and
actually prohibits abortion. By using the word “or”
in defining abortifacient (Section 4(a)), the RH Law
SUBSTANTIAL The Court cannot determine whether or not the use
prohibits not only drugs or devices that prevent
implantation but also those that induce abortion of contraceptives or participation in support of
and induce the destruction of a fetus inside the modern RH measures (a) is moral from a religious
Majority of the Members of the Court believe that mother’s womb. The RH Law recognizes that the standpoint; or, (b) right or wrong according to
the question of when life begins is a scientific and fertilized ovum already has life and that the State one’s dogma or belief. However, the Court has the
medical issue that should not be decided, at this has a bounded duty to protect it. authority to determine whether or not the RH Law
stage, without proper hearing and evidence. contravenes the Constitutional guarantee of
However, they agreed that individual Members religious freedom.
could express their own views on this matter.
However, the authors of the IRR gravely abused The State may pursue its legitimate secular
Article II, Section 12 of the Constitution states: their office when they redefined the meaning of objectives without being dictated upon the policies
“The State recognizes the sanctity of family life abortifacient by using the term “primarily”. of any one religion. To allow religious sects to
and shall protect and strengthen the family as a Recognizing as abortifacients only those that dictate policy or restrict other groups would violate
basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally “primarily induce abortion or the destruction of a Article III, Section 5 of the Constitution or the
protect the life of the mother and the life of the fetus inside the mother’s womb or the prevention Establishment Clause. This would cause the State
unborn from conception.” of the fertilized ovum to reach and be implanted in to adhere to a particular religion, and thus,
the mother’s womb” (Sec. 3.01(a) of the IRR) would establishes a state religion. Thus, the State can
pave the way for the approval of contraceptives enhance its population control program through
that may harm or destroy the life of the unborn the RH Law even if the promotion of contraceptive
In its plain and ordinary meaning (a canon in
from conception/fertilization. This violates Section use is contrary to the religious beliefs of e.g. the
statutory construction), the traditional meaning of
12, Article II of the Constitution. For the same petitioners.
“conception” according to reputable dictionaries
reason, the definition of contraceptives under the
cited by the ponente is that life begins at
IRR (Sec 3.01(j)), which also uses the term
fertilization. Medical sources also support the view
“primarily”, must be struck down.
that conception begins at fertilization. Section 23A (2)(i) of the RH Law, which permits RH
procedures even with only the consent of the
spouse undergoing the provision (disregarding
The RH Law does not intend to do away with RA spousal content), intrudes into martial privacy and
The framers of the Constitution also intended for
4729 (1966). With RA 4729 in place, the Court autonomy and goes against the constitutional
(a) “conception” to refer to the moment of
believes adequate safeguards exist to ensure that safeguards for the family as the basic social
“fertilization” and (b) the protection of the unborn
only safe contraceptives are made available to the institution. Particularly, Section 3, Article XV of the
child upon fertilization. In addition, they did not
public. In fulfilling its mandate under Sec. 10 of the Constitution mandates the State to defend: (a) the
intend to ban all contraceptives for being
 95

right of spouses to found a family in accordance formulated a curriculum on age-appropriate

with their religious convictions and the demands of reproductive health education.
responsible parenthood and (b) the right of families The RH Law also defines “incorrect information”.
or family associations to participate in the planning Used together in relation to Section 23 (a)(1), the
and implementation of policies and programs that terms “incorrect” and “knowingly” connote a sense
Section 12, Article II of the Constitution places of malice and ill motive to mislead or misrepresent
affect them. The RH Law cannot infringe upon this
more importance on the role of parents in the the public as to the nature and effect of programs
mutual decision-making, and endanger the
development of their children with the use of the and services on reproductive health.
institutions of marriage and the family.
term “primary”. The right of parents in upbringing
The exclusion of parental consent in cases where a their youth is superior to that of the State.
minor undergoing a procedure is already a parent
To provide that the poor are to be given priority in
or has had a miscarriage (Section 7 of the RH Law)
the government’s RH program is not a violation of
is also anti-family and violates Article II, Section 12 The provisions of Section 14 of the RH Law and the equal protection clause. In fact, it is pursuant
of the Constitution, which states: “The natural and corresponding provisions of the IRR supplement to Section 11, Article XIII of the Constitution, which
primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of (rather than supplant) the right and duties of the states that the State shall prioritize the needs of
the youth for civic efficiency and the development parents in the moral development of their children. the underprivileged, sick elderly, disabled, women,
of moral character shall receive the support of the
and children and that it shall endeavor to provide
Government.” In addition, the portion of Section
medical care to paupers.
23(a)(ii) which reads “in the case of minors, the
By incorporating parent-teacher-community
written consent of parents or legal guardian or, in The RH Law does not only seek to target the poor
associations, school officials, and other interest
their absence, persons exercising parental to reduce their number, since Section 7 of the RH
groups in developing the mandatory RH program, it
authority or next-of-kin shall be required only in Law prioritizes poor and marginalized couples who
could very well be said that the program will be in
elective surgical procedures” is invalid as it denies are suffering from fertility issues and desire to
line with the religious beliefs of the petitioners.
the right of parental authority in cases where what have children. In addition, the RH Law does not
is involved is “non-surgical procedures.” prescribe the number of children a couple may
have and does not impose conditions upon couples
The RH Law does not violate the due process who intend to have children. The RH Law only
clause of the Constitution as the definitions of seeks to provide priority to the poor.
However, a minor may receive information (as
several terms as observed by the petitioners are
opposed to procedures) about family planning
not vague.
services. Parents are not deprived of parental
guidance and control over their minor child in this The definition of “private health care service The exclusion of private educational institutions
situation and may assist her in deciding whether to provider” must be seen in relation to Section 4(n) from the mandatory RH education program under
accept or reject the information received. In of the RH Law which defines a “public health Section 14 is valid. There is a need to recognize the
addition, an exception may be made in life- service provider”. The “private health care academic freedom of private educational
threatening procedures. institution” cited under Section 7 should be seen as institutions especially with respect to religious
synonymous to “private health care service instruction and to consider their sensitivity towards
provider. the teaching of reproductive health education
The Court declined to rule on the constitutionality
of Section 14 of the RH Law, which mandates the
State to provide Age-and Development-Appropriate The terms “service” and “methods” are also broad The requirement under Sec. 17 of the RH Law for
Reproductive Health Education. Although educators enough to include providing of information and private and non-government health care service
might raise their objection to their participation in rendering of medical procedures. Thus, hospitals providers to render 48 hours of pro bonoRH
the RH education program, the Court reserves its operated by religious groups are exempted from services does not amount to involuntary servitude,
judgment should an actual case be filed before it. rendering RH service and modern family planning for two reasons. First, the practice of medicine is
methods (as provided for by Section 7 of the RH undeniably imbued with public interest that it is
Any attack on its constitutionality is premature
Law) as well as from giving RH information and both the power and a duty of the State to control
because the Department of Education has not yet
procedures. and regulate it in order to protect and promote the
 96

public welfare. Second, Section 17 only encourages locus standi is, after all, a procedural technicality
private and non-government RH service providers which the Court has, on more than one occasion,
to render pro bono Besides the PhilHealth In this jurisdiction, the application of doctrines waived or relaxed, thus allowing non-traditional
accreditation, no penalty is imposed should they do originating from the U.S. has been generally plaintiffs, such as concerned citizens, taxpayers,
otherwise. maintained, albeit with some modifications. While voters or legislators, to sue in the public interest,
the Court has withheld the application of facial albeit they may not have been directly injured by
However, conscientious objectors are exempt from challenges to strictly penal statues, it has the operation of a law or any other government
Sec. 17 as long as their religious beliefs do not expanded its scope to cover statutes not only act.
allow them to render RH service, pro bono or regulating free speech, but also those involving
otherwise religious freedom, and other fundamental rights. The present action cannot be properly treated as a
The underlying reason for this modification is petition for prohibition, the transcendental
simple. For unlike its counterpart in the U.S., this importance of the issues involved in this case
Court, under its expanded jurisdiction, is mandated warrants that the Court set aside the technical
by the Fundamental Law not only to settle actual defects and take primary jurisdiction over the
controversies involving rights which are legally petition at bar. One cannot deny that the issues
demandable and enforceable, but also to raised herein have potentially pervasive influence
determine whether or not there has been a grave on the social and moral well being of this nation,
abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of specially the youth; hence, their proper and just
jurisdiction on the part of any branch or determination is an imperative need. This is in
instrumentality of the Government. Verily, the accordance with the well-entrenched principle that
PROCEDURAL framers of Our Constitution envisioned a proactive rules of procedure are not inflexible tools designed
Judiciary, ever vigilant with its duty to maintain the to hinder or delay, but to facilitate and promote the
supremacy of the Constitution. administration of justice. Their strict and rigid
application, which would result in technicalities
Consequently, considering that the foregoing that tend to frustrate, rather than promote
petitions have seriously alleged that the substantial justice, must always be eschewed.
constitutional human rights to life, speech and
In this case, the Court is of the view that an actual religion and other fundamental rights mentioned
case or controversy exists and that the same is above have been violated by the assailed
legislation, the Court has authority to take Most of the petitions are praying for injunctive
ripe for judicial determination. Considering that the
cognizance of these kindred petitions and to reliefs and so the Court would just consider them
RH Law and its implementing rules have already
determine if the RH Law can indeed pass as petitions for prohibition under Rule 65, over
taken effect and that budgetary measures to carry
constitutional scrutiny. To dismiss these petitions which it has original jurisdiction. Where the case
out the law have already been passed, it is evident
on the simple expedient that there exist no actual has far-reaching implications and prays for
that the subject petitions present a justiciable
case or controversy, would diminish this Court as a injunctive reliefs, the Court may consider them as
controversy. As stated earlier, when an action of
reactive branch of government, acting only when petitions for prohibition under Rule 65.
the legislative branch is seriously alleged to have
infringed the Constitution, it not only becomes a the Fundamental Law has been transgressed, to
The RH Law does not violate the one subject/one
right, but also a duty of the Judiciary to settle the the detriment of the Filipino people.
bill rule. In this case, a textual analysis of the
dispute. various provisions of the law shows that both
“reproductive health” and “responsible
Moreover, the petitioners have shown that the case
Even if the constitutionality of the RH Law may not parenthood” are interrelated and germane to the
is so because medical practitioners or medical
be assailed through an “as-applied challenge, still, overriding objective to control the population
providers are in danger of being criminally
the Court has time and again acted liberally on the growth. As expressed in the first paragraph of
prosecuted under the RH Law for vague violations
locus standi requirement. It has accorded certain Section 2 of the RH Law:
thereof, particularly public health officers who are
individuals standing to sue, not otherwise directly
threatened to be dismissed from the service with SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. – The State
injured or with material interest affected by a
forfeiture of retirement and other benefits. They recognizes and guarantees the human rights of all
Government act, provided a constitutional issue of
must, at least, be heard on the matter now. persons including their right to equality and
transcendental importance is invoked. The rule on
 97

nondiscrimination of these rights, the right to reproductive health regardless of his or her 8) Section 3.0l(a) and Section 3.01 G) of the RH-
sustainable human development, the right to religious beliefs. IRR, which added the qualifier “primarily” in
health which includes reproductive health, the right defining abortifacients and contraceptives, as they
to education and information, and the right to are ultra vires and, therefore, null and void for
choose and make decisions for themselves in contravening Section 4(a) of the RH Law and
3) Section 23(a)(2)(i) and the corresponding
accordance with their religious convictions, ethics, violating Section 12, Article II of the Constitution.
provision in the RH-IRR insofar as they allow a
cultural beliefs, and the demands of responsible
married individual, not in an emergency or life-
parenthood.
threatening case, as defined under Republic Act
No. 8344, to undergo reproductive health D. Collection of Attorney’s Fees
procedures without the consent of the spouse;
Considering the close intimacy between
“reproductive health” and “responsible
parenthood” which bears to the attainment of the SECOND DIVISION
4) Section 23(a)(2)(ii) and the corresponding
goal of achieving “sustainable human
provision in the RH-IRR insofar as they limit the
development” as stated under its terms, the Court  
requirement of parental consent only to elective
finds no reason to believe that Congress
surgical procedures.
intentionally sought to deceive the public as to the G.R. No. 111474 August 22, 1994
contents of the assailed legislation.

5) Section 23(a)(3) and the corresponding FIVE J TAXI and/or JUAN S.

ARMAMENTO, petitioners,
provision in the RH-IRR, particularly Section 5.24
Accordingly, the Court declares R.A. No. 10354 as vs.
thereof, insofar as they punish any healthcare
NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL except with respect to NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION,
service provider who fails and/or refuses to refer a DOMINGO MALDIGAN and GILBERTO
the following provisions which are declared
patient not in an emergency or life-threatening SABSALON, respondents.
UNCONSTITUTIONAL:
case, as defined under Republic Act No. 8344, to
another health care service provider within the
Edgardo G. Fernandez for petitioners.
same facility or one which is conveniently
1) Section 7 and the corresponding provision in the accessible regardless of his or her religious beliefs;
R E SO L U T I O N
RH-IRR insofar as they: a) require private health
facilities and non-maternity specialty hospitals and
hospitals owned and operated by a religious group
6) Section 23(b) and the corresponding provision in
to refer patients, not in an emergency or life-
the RH-IRR, particularly Section 5 .24 thereof,
threatening case, as defined under Republic Act REGALADO, J.:
insofar as they punish any public officer who
No. 8344, to another health facility which is
refuses to support reproductive health programs or
conveniently accessible; and b) allow minor- Petitioners Five J Taxi and/or Juan S. Armamento
shall do any act that hinders the full
parents or minors who have suffered a miscarriage filed this special civil action for certiorari to annul
implementation of a reproductive health program,
access to modem methods of family planning the decision 1 of respondent National Labor
regardless of his or her religious beliefs;
without written consent from their parents or Relations Commission (NLRC) ordering petitioners
guardian/s; to pay private respondents Domingo Maldigan and
Gilberto Sabsalon their accumulated deposits and
7) Section 17 and the corresponding prov1s10n in car wash payments, plus interest thereon at the
the RH-IRR regarding the rendering of pro bona legal rate from the date of promulgation of
2) Section 23(a)(l) and the corresponding provision judgment to the date of actual payment, and 10%
reproductive health service in so far as they affect
in the RH-IRR, particularly Section 5 .24 thereof, of the total amount as and for attorney's fees.
the conscientious objector in securing PhilHealth
insofar as they punish any healthcare service
accreditation; and
provider who fails and or refuses to disseminate We have given due course to this petition for, while
information regarding programs and services on to the cynical the de minimis amounts involved
should not impose upon the valuable time of this
 98

Court, we find therein a need to clarify some issues Sometime in 1989, Maldigan requested petitioners jurisdiction is confined to specific matters, are
the resolution of which are important to small wage for the reimbursement of his daily cash deposits for generally accorded not only respect but, at times,
earners such as taxicab drivers. As we have 2 years, but herein petitioners told him that not a finality if such findings are supported by
heretofore repeatedly demonstrated, this Court single centavo was left of his deposits as these substantial evidence. 3 Where, however, such
does not exist only for the rich or the powerful, were not even enough to cover the amount spent conclusions are not supported by the evidence,
with their reputed monumental cases of national for the repairs of the taxi he was driving. This was they must be struck down for being whimsical and
impact. It is also the Court of the poor or the allegedly the practice adopted by petitioners to capricious and, therefore, arrived at with grave
underprivileged, with the actual quotidian recoup the expenses incurred in the repair of their abuse of discretion. 4
problems that beset their individual lives. taxicab units. When Maldigan insisted on the
refund of his deposit, petitioners terminated his Respondent NLRC held that the P15.00 daily
Private respondents Domingo Maldigan and services. Sabsalon, on his part, claimed that his deposits made by respondents to defray any
Gilberto Sabsalon were hired by the petitioners as termination from employment was effected when shortage in their "boundary" is covered by the
taxi drivers 2 and, as such, they worked for 4 days he refused to pay for the washing of his taxi seat general prohibition in Article 114 of the Labor Code
weekly on a 24-hour shifting schedule. Aside from covers. against requiring employees to make deposits, and
the daily "boundary" of P700.00 for air-conditioned that there is no showing that the Secretary of
taxi or P450.00 for non-air-conditioned taxi, they On November 27, 1991, private respondents filed a Labor has recognized the same as a "practice" in
were also required to pay P20.00 for car washing, complaint with the Manila Arbitration Office of the the taxi industry. Consequently, the deposits made
and to further make a P15.00 deposit to answer for National Labor Relations Commission charging were illegal and the respondents must be refunded
any deficiency in their "boundary," for every actual petitioners with illegal dismissal and illegal therefor.
working day. deductions. That complaint was dismissed, the
labor arbiter holding that it took private Article 114 of the Labor Code provides as follows:
In less than 4 months after Maldigan was hired as respondents two years to file the same and such
an extra driver by the petitioners, he already failed unreasonable delay was not consistent with the
natural reaction of a person who claimed to be Art. 114. Deposits for loss or
to report for work for unknown reasons. Later, damage. — No employer shall
petitioners learned that he was working for "Mine unjustly treated, hence the filing of the case could
be interpreted as a mere afterthought. require his worker to make
of Gold" Taxi Company. With respect to Sabsalon, deposits from which deductions
while driving a taxicab of petitioners on September shall be made for the
6, 1983, he was held up by his armed passenger Respondent NLRC concurred in said findings, with reimbursement of loss of or
who took all his money and thereafter stabbed the observation that private respondents failed to damage to tools, materials, or
him. He was hospitalized and after his discharge, controvert the evidence showing that Maldigan was equipment supplied by the
he went to his home province to recuperate. employed by "Mine of Gold" Taxi Company from employer, except when the
February 10, 1987 to December 10, 1990; that employer is engaged in such
In January, 1987, Sabsalon was re-admitted by Sabsalon abandoned his taxicab on September 1, trades, occupations or business
petitioners as a taxi driver under the same terms 1990; and that they voluntarily left their jobs for where the practice of making
and conditions as when he was first employed, but similar employment with other taxi operators. It, deposits is a recognized one, or is
his working schedule was made on an "alternative accordingly, affirmed the ruling of the labor arbiter necessary or desirable as
basis," that is, he drove only every other day. that private respondents' services were not determined by the Secretary of
However, on several occasions, he failed to report illegally terminated. It, however, modified the Labor in appropriate rules and
for work during his schedule. decision of the labor arbiter by ordering petitioners regulations.
to pay private respondents the awards stated at
the beginning of this resolution.
On September 22, 1991, Sabsalon failed to remit It can be deduced therefrom that the said article
his "boundary" of P700.00 for the previous day. provides the rule on deposits for loss or damage to
Also, he abandoned his taxicab in Makati without Petitioners' motion for reconsideration having been tools, materials or equipments supplied by the
fuel refill worth P300.00. Despite repeated requests denied by the NLRC, this petition is now before us employer. Clearly, the same does not apply to or
of petitioners for him to report for work, he imputing grave abuse of discretion on the part of permit deposits to defray any deficiency which the
adamantly refused. Afterwards it was revealed that said public respondent. taxi driver may incur in the remittance of his
he was driving a taxi for "Bulaklak Company." "boundary." Also, when private respondents
This Court has repeatedly declared that the factual stopped working for petitioners, the alleged
findings of quasi-judicial agencies like the NLRC, purpose for which petitioners required such
which have acquired expertise because their unauthorized deposits no longer existed. In other
 99

case, any balance due to private respondents after Consequently, private respondents are not entitled G.R. No. 190957               June 5, 2013
proper accounting must be returned to them with to the refund of the P20.00 car wash payments
legal interest. they made. It will be noted that there was nothing PHILIPPINE NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION
to prevent private respondents from cleaning the CORPORATION, Petitioner,
However, the unrebutted evidence with regard to taxi units themselves, if they wanted to save their vs.
the claim of Sabsalon is as follows: P20.00. Also, as the Solicitor General correctly APAC MARKETING CORPORATION,
noted, car washing after a tour of duty is a practice represented by CESAR M. ONG,
in the taxi industry, and is, in fact, dictated by fair JR., Respondents.
YEAR DEPOSITS SHORTAGES VALES play.
1987 P 1,403.00 P 567.00 P 1,000.00 DECISION
On the last issue of attorney's fees or service fees
1988 720.00 760.00 200.00 for private respondents' authorized representative,
Article 222 of the Labor Code, as amended by SERRENO, CJ.:
1989 686.00 130.00 1,500.00 Section 3 of Presidential Decree No. 1691, states
that non-lawyers may appear before the NLRC or In this Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule
1990 605.00 570.00 any labor arbiter only (1) if they represent 45 of the Revised Rules on Civil Procedures, the
themselves, or (2) if they represent their primordial issue to be resolved is whether the
1991 165.00 2,300.00
organization or the members thereof. While it may Court of Appeals (CA)1 correctly affirmed the court
———— ———— ———— be true that Guillermo H. Pulia was the authorized a quo2 in holding petitioner liable to respondent for
representative of private respondents, he was a attorney’s fees.
P 3,579.00 P 4,327.00 P 2,700.00 non-lawyer who did not fall in either of the
foregoing categories. Hence, by clear mandate of The Antecedent Facts
the law, he is not entitled to attorney's fees.
The foregoing accounting shows that from 1987-
1991, Sabsalon was able to withdraw his deposits Considering that there are no factual issues
through vales or he incurred shortages, such that Furthermore, the statutory rule that an attorney involved, as the Court of Appeals (CA) adopted the
he is even indebted to petitioners in the amount of shall be entitled to have and recover from his client findings of fact of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of
P3,448.00. With respect to Maldigan's deposits, a reasonable compensation for his Quezon City, Branch 96, we hereby adopt the CA’s
nothing was mentioned questioning the same even services 7 necessarily imports the existence of an findings, as follows:
in the present petition. We accordingly agree with attorney-client relationship as a condition for the
the recommendation of the Solicitor General that recovery of attorney's fees, and such relationship
cannot exist unless the client's representative is a The present case involves a simple purchase
since the evidence shows that he had not transaction between defendant-appellant Philippine
withdrawn the same, he should be reimbursed the lawyer. 8
National Construction Corporation (PNCC),
amount of his accumulated cash deposits. 5 represented by defendants-appellants Rogelio
WHEREFORE, the questioned judgment of Espiritu and Rolando Macasaet, and plaintiff-
On the matter of the car wash payments, the labor respondent National Labor Relations Commission is appellee APAC, represented by Cesar M. Ong, Jr.,
arbiter had this to say in his decision: "Anent the hereby MODIFIED by deleting the awards for involving crushed basalt rock delivered by plaintiff-
issue of illegal deductions, there is no dispute that reimbursement of car wash expenses and appellee to defendant-appellant PNCC.
as a matter of practice in the taxi industry, after a attorney's fees and directing said public
tour of duty, it is incumbent upon the driver to respondent to order and effect the computation
and payment by petitioners of the refund for On August 17, 1999, plaintiff-appellee filed with the
restore the unit he has driven to the same clean trial court a complaint against defendants-
condition when he took it out, and as claimed by private respondent Domingo Maldigan's deposits,
plus legal interest thereon from the date of finality appellees for collection of sum of money with
the respondents (petitioners in the present case), damages, alleging that (i) in March 1998,
complainant(s) (private respondents herein) were of this resolution up to the date of actual payment
thereof. defendants-appellants engaged the services of
made to shoulder the expenses for washing, the plaintiff-appellee by buying aggregates materials
amount doled out was paid directly to the person from plaintiff-appellee, for which the latter had
who washed the unit, thus we find nothing illegal in SO ORDERED. delivered and supplied good quality crushed basalt
this practice, much more (sic) to consider the rock; (ii) the parties had initially agreed on the
amount paid by the driver as illegal deduction in FIRST DIVISION terms of payment, whereby defendants-appellants
the context of the law." 6 (Words in parentheses would issue the check corresponding to the value
added.)
 100

of the materials to be delivered, or "Check Before 2. ₱50,000.00 as attorney’s fees, plus THE RULING OF THE COURT OF APPEALS
Delivery," but prior to the implementation of the ₱3,000.00 per court appearance;
said payment agreement, defendants-appellants On 9 July 2009, the Special Fourth Division of the
requested from plaintiff-appellee a 30-day term 3. Cost of suit. CA promulgated a Decision3 in CA-G.R. CV No.
from the delivery date within which to pay, which 88827, affirming with modification the assailed
plaintiff-appellee accepted; and (iii) after making Decision of the court a quo. The dispositive portion
deliveries pursuant to the purchase orders and SO ORDERED.
of the CA Decision reads as follows:
despite demands by plaintiff-appellee, defendants
appellants failed and refused to pay and settle Defendants-appellants filed a motion for
their overdue accounts. The complaint prayed for reconsideration, alleging that during the pendency WHEREFORE, the appealed Order dated October 6,
payment of the amount of ₱782,296.80 "plus legal of the case, the principal obligation was fully paid 2006 is affirmed, subject to the modification that
interest at the rate of not less than 6% monthly, to and hence, the award by the trial court of actual defendant-appellant PNCC is ordered to pay legal
start in April, 1999 until the full obligation is damages in the amount of ₱782,269.80 was interest at six per cent (6%) per annum on the
completely settled and paid," among others. without factual and legal bases. principal obligation, computed from January 8,
1999 until its full payment in January 2001.
Defendants-appellants Rogelio Espiritu and
On November 16, 1999, defendants-appellants In an Order dated October 6, 2006, the trial court Rolando Macasaet are absolved from liability. The
filed a motion to dismiss, alleging that the considered defendants-appellants’ claim of full Order dated October 6, 2006 is affirmed in all other
complaint was premature considering that payment of the principal obligation, but still it respects.
defendant-appellant PNCC had been faithfully ordered them to pay legal interest of twelve per
paying its obligations to plaintiff-appellee, as can cent (12%) per annum. Thus:
be seen from the substantial reduction of its On 29 July 2009, herein petitioner filed a Motion for
overdue account as of August 1999. Reconsideration, which raised the lone issue of the
"WHEREFORE, the decision dated July 10, 2006 is propriety of the award of attorney’s fees in favor of
hereby modified, by ordering defendants jointly respondent.4 It should be noted that in said motion,
In an Order dated January 17, 2000, the trial court and solidarily to pay plaintiff as follows, to wit: petitioner fully agreed with the CA Decision
denied the motion to dismiss. Thus, defendants- imposing 6% legal interest per annum on the
appellants filed their answer, alleging that the 1. ₱220,234.083 principal obligation and absolving Rogelio Espiritu
obligation of defendant-appellant PNCC was only and Rolando Macasaet from any liability as
with respect to the balance of the principal members of the board of directors of PNCC. Thus,
obligation that had not been fully paid which, 2. ₱50,000.00 as attorney’s fees, plus
₱3,000.00 per court appearance; the main focus of the Motion for Reconsideration
based on the latest liquidation report, amounted to was on the CA’s affirmation of the court a quo’s
only ₱474,095.92. Decision awarding attorney’s fees in favor of
3. Cost of Suit. respondent. However, the appellate court’s Former
After the submission of the respective pre-trial Special Fourth Division denied petitioner’s Motion
briefs of the parties, trial was held. However, only SO ORDERED." for Reconsideration in a Resolution dated 18
plaintiff-appellee presented its evidence. For their January 2010.6
repeated failure to attend the hearings, Defendants-appellants filed the present appeal
defendants-appellants were deemed to have which is premised on the following assignment of THE SOLE ISSUE
waived the presentation of their evidence. errors:
Aggrieved, petitioner now assails before us the 9
On July 10, 2006, the trial court rendered a I. THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN July 2009 Decision of the CA by raising the sole
Decision, the dispositive portion of which reads: AWARDING INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 12% PER issue of whether the CA gravely erred in awarding
ANNUM AMOUNTING TO ₱220,234.083 AND attorney’s fees to respondent.
WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered in favor ATTORNEY’S FEES IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF-
of the plaintiff, ordering defendants jointly and APPELLEE. THE COURT’S RULING
solidarily to pay:
II. THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN The Petition is impressed with merit.
1. ₱782,296.80 as actual damages; HOLDING DEFENDANTS ROGELIO ESPIRITU AND
ROLANDO MACASAET JOINTLY AND SOLIDARILY
LIABLE WITH DEFENDANT PNCC.
 101

Article 2208 of the New Civil Code of the (11) In any other case where the court lawyer by his client for the legal services he has
Philippines states the policy that should guide the deems it just and equitable that attorney's rendered to the latter; while in its extraordinary
courts when awarding attorney’s fees to a litigant. fees and expenses of litigation should be concept, they may be awarded by the court as
As a general rule, the parties may stipulate the recovered. indemnity for damages to be paid by the losing
recovery of attorney’s fees. In the absence on such party to the prevailing party. Attorney's fees as
stipulation, this article restrictively enumerates the In all cases, the attorney's fees and expenses of part of damages are awarded only in the instances
instances when these fees may be recovered, to litigation must be reasonable. specified in Article 2208 of the Civil Code. As such,
wit: it is necessary for the court to make findings of fact
and law that would bring the case within the ambit
In ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. v. CA,7 this Court of these enumerated instances to justify the grant
Art. 2208. In the absence of stipulation, attorney's had the occasion to expound on the policy behind
fees and expenses of litigation, other than judicial of such award, and in all cases it must be
the grant of attorney’s fees as actual or reasonable.
costs, cannot be recovered, except: compensatory damages:

(1) When exemplary damages are We can glean from the above ruling that attorney’s
(T)he law is clear that in the absence of stipulation, fees are not awarded as a matter of course every
awarded; attorney’s fees may be recovered as actual or time a party wins. We do not put a premium on the
compensatory damages under any of the right to litigate. On occasions that those fees are
(2) When the defendant's act or omission circumstances provided for in Article 2208 of the awarded, the basis for the grant must be clearly
has compelled the plaintiff to litigate with Civil Code. expressed in the decision of the court.1âwphi1
third persons or to incur expenses to
protect his interest; The general rule is that attorney’s fees cannot be Petitioner contends that the RTC’s Decision has no
recovered as part of damages because of the finding that would fall under any of the exceptions
(3) In criminal cases of malicious policy that no premium should be placed on the enumerated in Article 2208 of the new Civil Code.
prosecution against the plaintiff; right to litigate. They are not to be awarded every Further, it alleges that the court a quo has not
time a party wins a suit. The power of the court to given any factual, legal, or equitable justification
(4) In case of a clearly unfounded civil award attorney’s fees under Article 2208 demands for applying paragraph 11 of Article 2208 as basis
action or proceeding against the plaintiff; factual, legal, and equitable justification. Even the latter’s exercise of discretion in holding
when a claimant is compelled to litigate with third petitioner liable for attorney’s fees.9
persons or to incur expenses to protect his rights,
(5) Where the defendant acted in gross and still attorney’s fees may not be awarded where no
evident bad faith in refusing to satisfy the sufficient showing of bad faith could be reflected in We agree with petitioner on these points.
plaintiff's plainly valid, just and a party’s persistence in a case other than an
demandable claim; erroneous conviction of the righteousness of his We have consistently held that an award of
cause. attorney’s fees under Article 2208 demands
(6) In actions for legal support; factual, legal, and equitable justification to avoid
In Benedicto v. Villaflores,8 we explained the speculation and conjecture surrounding the grant
(7) In actions for the recovery of wages of reason behind the need for the courts to arrive thereof.10 Due to the special nature of the award of
household helpers, laborers and skilled upon an actual finding to serve as basis for a grant attorney’s fees, a rigid standard is imposed on the
workers; of attorney’s fees, considering the dual concept of courts before these fees could be granted. Hence,
these fees as ordinary and extraordinary: it is imperative that they clearly and distinctly set
forth in their decisions the basis for the award
(8) In actions for indemnity under thereof. It is not enough that they merely state the
workmen's compensation and employer's It is settled that the award of attorney's fees is the amount of the grant in the dispositive portion of
liability laws; exception rather than the general rule; counsel's their decisions.11 It bears reiteration that the award
fees are not awarded every time a party prevails in of attorney’s fees is an exception rather than the
(9) In a separate civil action to recover civil a suit because of the policy that no premium general rule; thus, there must be compelling legal
liability arising from a crime; should be placed on the right to litigate. Attorney's reason to bring the case within the exceptions
fees, as part of damages, are not necessarily provided under Article 2208 of the Civil Code to
equated to the amount paid by a litigant to a justify the award.12
(10) When at least double judicial costs are lawyer. In the ordinary sense, attorney's fees
awarded; represent the reasonable compensation paid to a
 102

We have perused the assailed CA’s Decision, but G.R. No. 173188               January 15, 2014 The present controversy arose when the spouses
cannot find any factual, legal, or equitable Cadavedo filed an action5 before the RTC(then
justification for the award of attorney’s fees in THE CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP OF THE Court of First Instance) of Zamboanga City against
favor of respondent. The appellate court simply SPOUSES VICENTE CADAVEDO AND BENITA the spouses Ames for sum of money and/or voiding
quoted the portion of the RTC Decision that ARCOY-CADAVEDO (both deceased), of contract of sale of homestead after the latter
granted the award as basis for the affirmation substituted by their heirs, namely: HERMINA, failed to pay the balance of the purchase price. The
thereof. There was no elaboration on the basis. PASTORA, Heirs of FRUCTUOSA, Heirs of spouses Cadavedo initially engaged the services of
There is therefore an absence of an independent RAQUEL, EVANGELINE, VICENTE, JR., and Atty. Rosendo Bandal who, for health reasons, later
CA finding of the factual circumstances and legal or ARMANDO, all surnamed withdrew from the case; he was substituted by
equitable basis to justify the grant of attorney’s CADAVEDO, Petitioners, Atty. Lacaya.
fees. The CA merely adopted the RTC’s rational for vs.
the award, which in this case we find to be sorely VICTORINO (VIC) T. LACAYA, married to Rosa On February 24, 1969, Atty. Lacaya amended the
inadequate. Legados, Respondents. complaint to assert the nullity of the sale and the
issuance of TCT No. T-4792 in the names of the
The RTC found as follows: DECISION spouses Ames as gross violation of the public land
law. The amended complaint stated that the
x x x since it is clear that plaintiff was compelled to spouses Cadavedo hired Atty. Lacaya on a
BRION, J.: contingency fee basis. The contingency fee
hire the services of a counsel, to litigate and to
protect his interest by reason of an unjustified act stipulation specifically reads:
of the other party, plaintiff is entitled to recover We solve in this Rule 45 petition for review on
attorney’s fees in the amount of ₱50,000.00 which certiorari1 the challenge to the October 11, 2005 10. That due to the above circumstances, the
it paid as acceptance fee and ₱3,000.00 as decision2 and the May 9, 2006 resolution3 of the plaintiffs were forced to hire a lawyer on contingent
appearance fee.13 Court of Appeals (CA) inPetitioners, CA-G.R. CV No. basis and if they become the prevailing parties in
56948. The CA reversed and set aside the the case at bar, they will pay the sum of ₱2,000.00
September 17, 1996 decision4 of the Regional Trial for attorney’s fees.6
The only discernible reason proffered by the trial Court (RTC), Branch 10, of Dipolog City in Civil
court in granting the award was that respondent, Case No. 4038, granting in part the complaint for
as complainant in the civil case, was forced to recovery of possession of property filed by the In a decision dated February 1, 1972, the RTC
litigate to protect the latter’s interest. Thus, we petitioners, the Conjugal Partnership of the upheld the sale of the subject lot to the spouses
find that there is an obvious lack of a compelling Spouses Vicente Cadavedo and Benita Arcoy- Ames. The spouses Cadavedo, thru Atty. Lacaya,
legal reason to consider the present case as one Cadavedo against Atty. Victorino (Vic) T. Lacaya, appealed the case to the CA.
that falls within the exception provided under married to Rosa Legados (collectively, the
Article 2208 of the Civil Code. Absent such finding, respondents). On September 18, 1975, and while the appeal
we hold that the award of attorney’s fees by the before the CAin Civil Case No. 1721was pending,
court a quo, as sustained by the appellate court, the spouses Ames sold the subject lot to their
was improper and must be deleted. The Factual Antecedents
children. The spouses Ames’ TCT No. T-4792 was
subsequently cancelled and TCT No. T-25984was
WHEREFORE, the foregoing Petition is GRANTED. The Spouses Vicente Cadavedo and Benita Arcoy- issued in their children’s names. On October 11,
The assailed Decision dated 9 July 2009 of the Cadavedo (collectively, the spouses Cadavedo) 1976, the spouses Ames mortgaged the subject lot
Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 88827 is acquired a homestead grant over a 230,765-square with the Development Bank of the Philippines
MODIFIED, in that the award of attorney’s fees in meter parcel of land known as Lot 5415 (subject (DBP) in the names of their children.
the amount of ₱50,000 as acceptance fee and lot) located in Gumay, Piñan, Zamboanga del
₱3,000 as appearance fee, in favor of respondent Norte. They were issued Homestead Patent No. V-
15414 on March 13, 1953andOriginal Certificate of On August 13, 1980, the CA issued itsdecision in
APAC Marketing Incorporated, is hereby DELETED. Civil Case No. 1721,reversing the decision of the
Title No. P-376 on July 2, 1953.On April30, 1955,
the spouses Cadavedo sold the subject lot to the RTC and declaring the deed of sale, transfer of
No pronouncement as to costs. spouses Vicente Ames and Martha Fernandez (the rights, claims and interest to the spouses Ames null
spouses Ames) Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) and void ab initio. It directed the spouses
SO ORDERED. No. T-4792 was subsequently issued in the name of Cadavedo to return the initial payment and ordered
the spouses Ames. the Register of Deeds to cancel the spouses Ames’
TCT No. T-4792 and to reissue another title in the
SECOND DIVISION
 103

name of the spouses Cadavedo. The case 215. This incident occurred while Civil Case No. The Ruling of the RTC
eventually reached this Court via the spouses 3352was pending.
Ames’ petition for review on certiorari which this In the September 17, 1996 decision10 in Civil Case
Court dismissed for lack of merit. On May 13, 1982, Vicente andAtty. Lacaya entered No. 4038, the RTC declared the contingent fee of
into an amicable settlement (compromise 10.5383 hectares as excessive and
Meanwhile, the spouses Ames defaulted in their agreement)8 in Civil Case No. 215 (the ejectment unconscionable. The RTC reduced the land area to
obligation with the DBP. Thus, the DBP caused the case), re-adjusting the area and portion obtained 5.2691 hectares and ordered the respondents to
publication of a notice of foreclosure sale of the by each. Atty. Lacaya acquired 10.5383 hectares vacate and restore the remaining 5.2692hectares
subject lot as covered by TCT No. T-25984(under pursuant to the agreement. The MTC approved the to the spouses Cadavedo.
the name of the spouses Ames’ children). Atty. compromise agreementin a decision dated June 10,
Lacaya immediately informed the spouses 1982. The RTC noted that, as stated in the amended
Cadavedo of the foreclosure sale and filed an complaint filed by Atty. Lacaya, the agreed
Affidavit of Third Party Claim with the Office of the Meanwhile, on May 21, 1982, the spouses attorney’s fee on contingent basis was ₱2,000.00.
Provincial Sheriff on September 14, 1981. Cadavedo filed before the RTC an action against Nevertheless, the RTC also pointed out that the
the DBP for Injunction; it was docketed as Civil parties novated this agreement when they
With the finality of the judgment in Civil Case No. Case No. 3443 (Cadavedo v. DBP).The RTC executed the compromise agreement in Civil Case
1721,Atty. Lacaya filed on September 21, 1981 a subsequently denied the petition, prompting the No. 215 (ejectment case), thereby giving Atty.
motion for the issuance of a writ of execution. spouses Cadavedo to elevate the case to the CAvia Lacaya one-half of the subject lot. The RTC added
a petition for certiorari. The CA dismissed the that Vicente’s decision to give Atty. Lacaya one-
On September 23, 1981,and pending the RTC’s petition in its decision of January 31, 1984. half of the subject lot, sans approval of Benita, was
resolution of the motion for the issuance of a writ a valid act of administration and binds the conjugal
of execution, the spouses Ames filed a The records do not clearly disclose the proceedings partnership. The RTC reasoned out that the
complaint7 before the RTC against the spouses subsequent to the CA decision in Civil Case No. disposition redounded to the benefit of the
Cadavedo for Quieting of Title or Enforcement of 3443. However, on August 18, 1988, TCT No. conjugal partnership as it was done precisely to
Civil Rights due Planters in Good Faith with prayer 41051was issued in the name of the spouses remunerate Atty. Lacaya for his services to recover
for Preliminary Injunction. The spouses Cadavedo, Cadavedo concerning the subject lot. the property itself.
thru Atty. Lacaya, filed a motion to dismiss on the
ground of res judicata and to cancel TCT No. T- On August 9, 1988, the spouses Cadavedo filed These considerations notwithstanding, the RTC
25984 (under the name of the spouses Ames’ before the RTC an action9 against the respondents, considered the one-half portion of the subject lot,
children). assailing the MTC-approved compromise as Atty. Lacaya’s contingent fee,excessive,
agreement. The case was docketed as Civil Case unreasonable and unconscionable. The RTC was
On October 16, 1981, the RTC granted the motion No. 4038 and is the root of the present case. The convinced that the issues involved in Civil Case No.
for the issuance of a writ of execution in Civil Case spouses Cadavedo prayed, among others, that the 1721were not sufficiently difficult and complicated
No. 1721,andthe spouses Cadavedo were placed in respondents be ejected from their one-half portion to command such an excessive award; neither did
possession of the subject lot on October 24, 1981. of the subject lot; that they be ordered to render it require Atty. Lacaya to devote much of his time
Atty. Lacaya asked for one-half of the subject lot as an accounting of the produce of this one-half or skill, or to perform extensive research.
attorney’s fees. He caused the subdivision of the portion from 1981;and that the RTC fix the
subject lot into two equal portions, based on area, attorney’s fees on a quantum meruit basis, with Finally, the RTC deemed the respondents’
and selected the more valuable and productive half due consideration of the expenses that Atty. possession, prior to the judgment, of the excess
for himself; and assigned the other half to the Lacaya incurred while handling the civil cases. portion of their share in the subject lot to be in
spouses Cadavedo. good faith. The respondents were thus entitled to
During the pendency of Civil Case No. 4038, the receive its fruits.
Unsatisfied with the division, Vicente and his sons- spouses Cadavedo executed a Deed of Partition of
in-law entered the portion assigned to the Estate in favor of their eight children. On the spouses Cadavedo’s motion for
respondents and ejected them. The latter Consequently, TCT No. 41051 was cancelled and reconsideration, the RTC modified the decision in
responded by filing a counter-suit for forcible entry TCT No. 41690 was issued in the names of the its resolution11 dated December 27, 1996. The RTC
before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC); the latter. The records are not clear on the proceedings ordered the respondents to account for and deliver
ejectment case was docketed as Civil Case No. and status of Civil Case No. 3352. the produce and income, valued at ₱7,500.00 per
annum, of the 5.2692hectares that the RTC
 104

ordered the spouses Amesto restore to the spouses The Petition separate agreements on the expenses and costs
Cadavedo, from October 10, 1988 until final for each of these subsequent cases, and that Atty.
restoration of the premises. In the present petition, the petitioners essentially Lacaya did not even record any attorney’s lien in
argue that the CA erred in: (1) granting the the spouses Cadavedo’s TCT covering the subject
The respondents appealed the case before the CA. attorney’s fee consisting of one-half or 10.5383 lot.
hectares of the subject lot to Atty. Lacaya, instead
The Ruling of the CA of confirming the agreed contingent attorney’s fees The petitioners further direct the Court’s attention
of ₱2,000.00; (2) not holding the respondents to the fact that Atty. Lacaya,in taking over the case
accountable for the produce, harvests and income from Atty. Bandal, agreed to defray all of the
In its decision12 dated October 11, 2005, the CA of the 10.5383-hectare portion (that they obtained litigation expenses in exchange for one-half of the
reversed and set aside the RTC’s September 17, from the spouses Cadavedo) from 1988 up to the subject lot should they win the case. They insist
1996 decision and maintained the partition and present; and (3) upholding the validity of the that this agreement is a champertous contract that
distribution of the subject lot under the purported oral contract between the spouses is contrary to public policy, prohibited by law for
compromise agreement. In so ruling, the CA noted Cadavedo and Atty. Lacaya when it was violation of the fiduciary relationship between a
the following facts: (1) Atty. Lacaya served as the champertous and dealt with property then still lawyer and a client.
spouses Cadavedo’s counsel from 1969 until subject of Civil Case No. 1721. 13
1988,when the latter filed the present case against
Atty. Lacaya; (2) during the nineteen (19) years of Finally, the petitioners maintain that the
their attorney-client relationship, Atty. Lacaya The petitioners argue that stipulations on a compromise agreement in Civil Case No. 215
represented the spouses Cadavedo in three civil lawyer’s compensation for professional services, (ejectment case) did not novate their original
cases –Civil Case No. 1721, Civil Case No. 3352, especially those contained in the pleadings filed in stipulated agreement on the attorney’s fees. They
and Civil Case No. 3443; (3) the first civil case courts, control the amount of the attorney’s fees to reason that Civil Case No. 215 did not decide the
lasted for twelve years and even reached this which the lawyer shall be entitled and should issue of attorney’s fees between the spouses
Court, the second civil case lasted for seven years, prevail over oral agreements. In this case, the Cadavedo and Atty. Lacaya for the latter’s services
while the third civil case lasted for six years and spouses Cadavedo and Atty. Lacaya agreed that in Civil Case No. 1721.
went all the way to the CA;(4) the spouses the latter’s contingent attorney’s fee was
Cadavedo and Atty. Lacaya entered into a ₱2,000.00 in cash, not one-half of the subject lot. The Case for the Respondents
compromise agreement concerning the division of This agreement was clearly stipulated in the
the subject lot where Atty. Lacaya ultimately amended complaint filed in Civil Case No. 1721.
Thus, Atty. Lacaya is bound by the expressly In their defense,14 the respondents counter that the
agreed to acquire a smaller portion; (5) the MTC attorney’s fee stipulated in the amended complaint
approved the compromise agreement; (6) Atty. stipulated fee and cannot insist on unilaterally
changing its terms without violating their contract. was not the agreed fee of Atty. Lacaya for his legal
Lacaya defrayed all of the litigation expenses in services. They argue that the questioned
Civil Case No. 1721; and (7) the spouses Cadavedo stipulation for attorney’s fees was in the nature of
expressly recognized that Atty. Lacaya served The petitioners add that the one-half portion of the a penalty that, if granted, would inure to the
them in several cases. subject lot as Atty. Lacaya’s contingent attorney’s spouses Cadavedo and not to Atty. Lacaya.
fee is excessive and unreasonable. They highlight
Considering these established facts and consistent the RTC’s observations and argue that the issues
involved in Civil Case No. 1721, pursuant to which The respondents point out that: (1) both Vicente
with Canon 20.01 of the Code of Professional and Atty. Lacaya caused the survey and
Responsibility (enumerating the factors that should the alleged contingent fee of one-half of the
subject lot was agreed by the parties, were not subdivision of the subject lot immediately after the
guide the determination of the lawyer’s fees), the spouses Cadavedo reacquired its possession with
CA ruled that the time spent and the extent of the novel and did not involve difficult questions of law;
neither did the case require much of Atty. Lacaya’s the RTC’s approval of their motion for execution of
services Atty. Lacaya rendered for the spouses judgment in Civil Case No. 1721; (2) Vicente
Cadavedo in the three cases, the probability of him time, skill and effort in research. They point out
that the two subsequent civil cases should not be expressly ratified and confirmed the agreement on
losing other employment resulting from his the contingent attorney’s fee consisting of one-half
engagement, the benefits resulting to the spouses considered in determining the reasonable
contingent fee to which Atty. Lacaya should be of the subject lot; (3) the MTC in Civil Case No. 215
Cadavedo, and the contingency of his fees justified (ejectment case) approved the compromise
the compromise agreement and rendered the entitled for his services in Civil Case No. 1721,as
those cases had not yet been instituted at that agreement; (4) Vicente is the legally designated
agreed fee under the compromise agreement administrator of the conjugal partnership, hence
reasonable. time. Thus, these cases should not be considered
in fixing the attorney’s fees. The petitioners also the compromise agreement ratifying the transfer
claim that the spouses Cadavedo concluded bound the partnership and could not have been
 105

invalidated by the absence of Benita’s Civil Case No. 4038 –petitioners v. respondents providing for the former’s compensation, is subject
acquiescence; and (5) the compromise agreement (the present case). to the ordinary rules governing contracts in
merely inscribed and ratified the earlier oral general. As the rules stand, controversies involving
agreement between the spouses Cadavedo and The agreement on attorney’s fee written and oral agreements on attorney’s fees
Atty. Lacaya which is not contrary to law, morals, consisting of one-half of the subject shall be resolved in favor of the former.17 Hence,
good customs, public order and public policy. lot is void; the petitioners are entitled the contingency fee of ₱2,000.00 stipulated in the
to recover possession amended complaint prevails over the alleged oral
While the case is pending before this Court, Atty. contingency fee agreement of one-half of the
Lacaya died.15 He was substituted by his wife -Rosa subject lot.
The core issue for our resolution is whether the
-and their children –Victoriano D.L. Lacaya, Jr., attorney’s fee consisting of one-half of the subject
Rosevic Lacaya-Ocampo, Reymar L. Lacaya, lot is valid and reasonable, and binds the B. The contingent fee agreement between
Marcelito L. Lacaya, Raymundito L. Lacaya, Laila petitioners. We rule in the NEGATIVE for the the spouses Cadavedo and Atty. Lacaya,
Lacaya-Matabalan, Marivic Lacaya-Barba, Rosalie L. reasons discussed below. awarding the latter one-half of the subject
Lacaya and Ma. Vic-Vic Lacaya-Camaongay.16 lot, is champertous
A. The written agreement providing for
The Court’s Ruling a contingent fee of ₱2,000.00 should prevail Granting arguendo that the spouses Cadavedo and
over the oral agreement providing for one- Atty. Lacaya indeed entered into an oral contingent
We resolve to GRANT the petition. half of the subject lot fee agreement securing to the latter one-half of the
subject lot, the agreement is nevertheless void.
The subject lot was the core of four successive and The spouses Cadavedo and Atty. Lacaya agreed on
overlapping cases prior to the present controversy. a contingent fee of ₱2,000.00 and not, as asserted In their account, the respondents insist that Atty.
In three of these cases, Atty. Lacaya stood as the by the latter, one-half of the subject lot. The Lacaya agreed to represent the spouses Cadavedo
spouses Cadavedo’s counsel. For ease of stipulation contained in the amended complaint in Civil Case No. 1721 and assumed the litigation
discussion, we summarize these cases (including filed by Atty. Lacaya clearly stated that the expenses, without providing for reimbursement, in
the dates and proceedings pertinent to each) as spouses Cadavedo hired the former on a exchange for a contingency fee consisting of one-
follows: contingency basis; the Spouses Cadavedo half of the subject lot. This agreement is
undertook to pay their lawyer ₱2,000.00 as champertous and is contrary to public policy.18
Civil Case No. 1721 – Cadavedo v. Ames (Sum of attorney’s fees should the case be decided in their
money and/or voiding of contract of sale of favor. Champerty, along with maintenance (of which
homestead), filed on January 10, 1967. The writ of champerty is an aggravated form), is a common
execution was granted on October 16, 1981. Contrary to the respondents’ contention, this law doctrine that traces its origin to the medieval
stipulation is not in the nature of a penalty that the period.19 The doctrine of maintenance was directed
court would award the winning party, to be paid by "against wanton and in officious intermeddling in
Civil Case No. 3352 – Ames v. Cadavedo (Quieting the disputes of others in which the intermeddler
of Title and/or Enforcement of Civil Rights due the losing party. The stipulation is a representation
to the court concerning the agreement between has no interest whatever, and where the assistance
Planters in Good Faith with Application for rendered is without justification or
Preliminary injunction), filed on September 23, the spouses Cadavedo and Atty. Lacaya, on the
latter’s compensation for his services in the case; it excuse."20 Champerty, on the other hand, is
1981. characterized by "the receipt of a share of the
is not the attorney’s fees in the nature of damages
which the former prays from the court as an proceeds of the litigation by the
Civil Case No. 3443 – Cadavedo v. DBP (Action for incident to the main action. intermeddler."21 Some common law court
Injunction with Preliminary Injunction), filed on May decisions, however, add a second factor in
21, 1982. determining champertous contracts, namely, that
At this point, we highlight that as observed by both the lawyer must also, "at his own expense
the RTC and the CA and agreed as well by both maintain, and take all the risks of, the litigation."22
Civil Case No. 215 –Atty. Lacaya v. Vicente parties, the alleged contingent fee agreement
Cadavedo, et. al. (Ejectment Case), filed between consisting of one-half of the subject lot was not
the latter part of 1981 and early part of 1982. The reduced to writing prior to or, at most, at the start The doctrines of champerty and maintenance were
parties executed the compromise agreement on of Atty. Lacaya’s engagement as the spouses created in response "to medieval practice of
May 13, 1982. Cadavedo’s counsel in Civil Case No. 1721.An assigning doubtful or fraudulent claims to persons
agreement between the lawyer and his client, of wealth and influence in the expectation that
 106

such individuals would enjoy greater success in Responsibility.30 Under Rule 42 of the Canons of property that has been the subject of litigation in
prosecuting those claims in court, in exchange for Professional Ethics, a lawyer may not properly which they have taken part by virtue of their
which they would receive an entitlement to the agree with a client that the lawyer shall pay or beat profession.32 The same proscription is provided
spoils of the litigation."23 "In order to safeguard the the expense of litigation.31 The same reasons under Rule 10 of the Canons of Professional
administration of justice, instances of champerty discussed above underlie this rule. Ethics.33
and maintenance were made subject to criminal
and tortuous liability and a common law rule was C. The attorney’s fee consisting of A thing is in litigation if there is a contest or
developed, striking down champertous agreements one-half of the subject lot is excessive litigation over it in court or when it is subject of the
and contracts of maintenance as being and unconscionable judicial action.34 Following this definition, we find
unenforceable on the grounds of public policy."24 that the subject lot was still in litigation when Atty.
We likewise strike down the questioned attorney’s Lacaya acquired the disputed one-half portion. We
In this jurisdiction, we maintain the rules on fee and declare it void for being excessive and note in this regard the following established facts:
champerty, as adopted from American decisions, unconscionable.1âwphi1 The contingent fee of one- (1)on September 21, 1981, Atty. Lacaya filed a
for public policy considerations. 25 As matters half of the subject lot was allegedly agreed to motion for the issuance of a writ of execution in
currently stand, any agreement by a lawyer to secure the services of Atty. Lacaya in Civil Case No. Civil Case No. 1721; (2) on September 23, 1981,
"conduct the litigation in his own account, to pay 1721.Plainly, it was intended for only one action as the spouses Ames filed Civil Case No. 3352 against
the expenses thereof or to save his client the two other civil cases had not yet been the spouses Cadavedo; (3)on October 16, 1981,
therefrom and to receive as his fee a portion of the instituted at that time. While Civil Case No. 1721 the RTC granted the motion filed for the issuance
proceeds of the judgment is obnoxious to the took twelve years to be finally resolved, that period of a writ of execution in Civil Case No. 1721 and
law."26 The rule of the profession that forbids a of time, as matters then stood, was not a sufficient the spouses Cadavedo took possession of the
lawyer from contracting with his client for part of reason to justify a large fee in the absence of any subject lot on October 24, 1981; (4) soon after, the
the thing in litigation in exchange for conducting showing that special skills and additional work had subject lot was surveyed and subdivided into two
the case at the lawyer’s expense is designed to been involved. The issue involved in that case, as equal portions, and Atty. Lacaya took possession of
prevent the lawyer from acquiring an interest observed by the RTC(and with which we agree), one of the subdivided portions; and (5) on May 13,
between him and his client. To permit these was simple and did not require of Atty. Lacaya 1982, Vicente and Atty. Lacaya executed the
arrangements is to enable the lawyer to "acquire extensive skill, effort and research. The issue compromise agreement.
additional stake in the outcome of the action which simply dealt with the prohibition against the sale of
might lead him to consider his own recovery rather a homestead lot within five years from its From these timelines, whether by virtue of the
than that of his client or to accept a settlement acquisition. alleged oral contingent fee agreement or an
which might take care of his interest in the verdict agreement subsequently entered into, Atty. Lacaya
to the sacrifice of that of his client in violation of acquired the disputed one-half portion (which was
his duty of undivided fidelity to his client’s That Atty. Lacaya also served as the spouses
Cadavedo’s counsel in the two subsequent cases after October 24, 1981) while Civil Case No. 3352
cause."27 and the motion for the issuance of a writ of
did not and could not otherwise justify an
attorney’s fee of one-half of the subject lot. As execution in Civil Case No. 1721were already
In Bautista v. Atty. Gonzales, 28 the Court struck assertedby the petitioners, the spouses Cadavedo pending before the lower courts. Similarly, the
down the contingent fee agreement between and Atty. Lacaya made separate arrangements for compromise agreement, including the subsequent
therein respondent Atty. Ramon A. Gonzales and the costs and expenses foreach of these two cases. judicial approval, was effected during the pendency
his client for being contrary to public policy. There, Thus, the expenses for the two subsequent cases of Civil Case No. 3352. In all of these, the
the Court held that an reimbursement of litigation had been considered and taken cared of Based on relationship of a lawyer and a client still existed
expenses paid by the former is against public these considerations, we therefore find one-half of between Atty. Lacaya and the spouses Cadavedo.
policy, especially if the lawyer has agreed to carry the subject lot as attorney’s fee excessive and
on the action at his expense in consideration of unreasonable.
some bargain to have a part of the thing in dispute.
It violates the fiduciary relationship between the
lawyer and his client.29 D. Atty. Lacaya’s acquisition of
the one-half portion contravenes
Article 1491 (5) of the Civil Code
In addition to its champertous character, the
contingent fee arrangement in this case expressly
transgresses the Canons of Professional Ethics and, Article 1491 (5) of the Civil Code forbids lawyers
impliedly, the Code of Professional from acquiring, by purchase or assignment, the
 107

Thus, whether we consider these transactions –the Notably, Atty. Lacaya, in undertaking the spouses possession of the disputed one-half portion and for
transfer of the disputed one-half portion and the Cadavedo’s cause pursuant to the terms of the judicial determination of the reasonable fees due
compromise agreement –independently of each alleged oral contingent fee agreement, in effect, Atty. Lacaya for his services –were not barred by
other or resulting from one another, we find them became a co-proprietor having an equal, if not the compromise agreement.
to be prohibited and void35 by reason of public more, stake as the spouses Cadavedo. Again, this
policy.36 Under Article 1409 of the Civil Code, is void by reason of public policy; it undermines the Atty. Lacaya is entitled to receive attorney’s fees
contracts which are contrary to public policy and fiduciary relationship between him and his clients. 42 on a quantum meruit basis
those expressly prohibited or declared void by law
are considered in existent and void from the E.The compromise agreement could not
beginning.37 In view of their respective assertions and defenses,
validate the void oral contingent fee the parties, in effect, impliedly set aside any
agreement; neither did it supersede the express stipulation on the attorney’s fees, and the
What did not escape this Court’s attention is the written contingent fee agreement petitioners, by express contention, submit the
CA’s failure to note that the transfer violated the reasonableness of such fees to the court’s
provisions of Article 1491(5) of the Civil Code, The compromise agreement entered into between discretion. We thus have to fix the attorney’s fees
although it recognized the concurrence of the Vicente and Atty. Lacaya in Civil Case No. 215 on a quantum meruit basis.
transfer and the execution of the compromise (ejectment case) was intended to ratify and
agreement with the pendency of the two civil cases confirm Atty. Lacaya’s acquisition and possession
subsequent to Civil Case No. 1721. 38 In reversing "Quantum meruit—meaning ‘as much as he
of the disputed one-half portion which were made deserves’—is used as basis for determining a
the RTC ruling, the CA gave weight to the in violation of Article 1491 (5) of the Civil Code. As
compromise agreement and in so doing, found lawyer’s professional fees in the absence of a
earlier discussed, such acquisition is void; the contract x x x taking into account certain factors in
justification in the unproved oral contingent fee compromise agreement, which had for its object a
agreement. fixing the amount of legal fees."47 "Its essential
void transaction, should be void. requisite is the acceptance of the benefits by one
sought to be charged for the services rendered
While contingent fee agreements are indeed A contract whose cause, object or purpose is under circumstances as reasonably to notify him
recognized in this jurisdiction as a valid exception contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order that the lawyer performing the task was expecting
to the prohibitions under Article 1491(5) of the Civil or public policy is in existent and void from the to be paid compensation"48 for it. The doctrine of
Code,39 contrary to the CA’s position, however, this beginning.43 It can never be ratified44 nor the action quantum meruit is a device to prevent undue
recognition does not apply to the present case. A or defense for the declaration of the in existence of enrichment based on the equitable postulate that it
contingent fee contract is an agreement in writing the contract prescribe;45 and any contract directly is unjust for a person to retain benefit without
where the fee, often a fixed percentage of what resulting from such illegal contract is likewise void paying for it.49
may be recovered in the action, is made to depend and in existent.46
upon the success of the litigation. 40 The payment of
the contingent fee is not made during the Under Section 24, Rule 138 of the Rules of
pendency of the litigation involving the client’s Consequently, the compromise agreement did not Court50 and Canon 20 of the Code of Professional
property but only after the judgment has been supersede the written contingent fee agreement Responsibility,51 factors such as the importance of
rendered in the case handled by the lawyer.41 providing for attorney’s fee of ₱2,000.00; neither the subject matter of the controversy, the time
did it preclude the petitioners from questioning its spent and the extent of the services rendered, the
validity even though Vicente might have knowingly customary charges for similar services, the amount
In the present case, we reiterate that the transfer and voluntarily acquiesced thereto and although involved in the controversy and the benefits
or assignment of the disputed one-half portion to the MTC approved it in its June 10, 1982 decision in resulting to the client from the service, to name a
Atty. Lacaya took place while the subject lot was the ejectment case. The MTC could not have few, are considered in determining the
still under litigation and the lawyer-client acquired jurisdiction over the subject matter of the reasonableness of the fees to which a lawyer is
relationship still existed between him and the void compromise agreement; its judgment in the entitled.
spouses Cadavedo. Thus, the general prohibition ejectment case could not have attained finality and
provided under Article 1491 of the Civil Code, can thus be attacked at any time. Moreover, an
rather than the exception provided in In the present case, the following considerations
ejectment case concerns itself only with the issue guide this Court in considering and setting Atty.
jurisprudence, applies. The CA seriously erred in of possession de facto; it will not preclude the filing
upholding the compromise agreement on the basis Lacaya’s fees based on quantum meruit: (1) the
of a separate action for recovery of possession questions involved in these civil cases were not
of the unproved oral contingent fee agreement. founded on ownership. Hence, contrary to the CA’s novel and did not require of Atty. Lacaya
position, the petitioners–in filing the present action considerable effort in terms of time, skill or the
and praying for, among others, the recovery of
 108

performance of extensive research; (2) Atty. subject lot) as attorney’s fees. The fruits that the 2. Separation Pay .........................
Lacaya rendered legal services for the Spouses respondents previously received from the disputed 24,000.00
Cadavedo in three civil cases beginning in 1969 one-half portion shall also form part of the
until 1988 when the petitioners filed the instant attorney’s fees. We hereby ORDER the respondents 3. Service Incentive Leave Pay ......... .
case; (3) the first of these civil cases (Cadavedo v. to return to the petitioners the remainder of the 1,538.46
Ames) lasted for twelve years and reaching up to 10.5383-hectare portion of the subject lot that
this Court; the second (Ames v. Cadavedo) lasted Atty. Vicente Lacaya acquired pursuant to the
for seven years; and the third (Cadavedo and compromise agreement. 4. Attorney's Fees ........................ .
Lacaya v. DBP) lasted for six years, reaching up to 17,226.51
the CA; and (4) the property subject of these civil SO ORDERED.
cases is of a considerable size of 230,765 square or a total amount of One Hundred Eighty Nine
meters or 23.0765 hectares. Thousand Fom Hw1dred Ninety One Pesos &
SECOND DIVISION 64/100 (Pl89,491.60) [sic] to be deposited with the
All things considered, we hold as fair and equitable Cashier of this Office, wjthin ten (10) days from
the RTC’s considerations in appreciating the A.C. No. 7337               September 29, 2014 receipt hereof
character of the services that Atty. Lacaya
rendered in the three cases, subject to modification ROLANDO VIRAY, Complainant, All other claims are hereby denied for lack of merit.
on valuation. We believe and so hold that the vs.
respondents are entitled to two (2) hectares (or ATTY. EUGENIO T. SANICAS, Respondent. SO ORDERED.3
approximately one-tenth [1/10] of the subject lot),
with the fruits previously received from the RESOLUTION
disputed one-half portion, as attorney’s fees. They Subsequently, an Alias Writ of Execution 4 was
shall return to the petitioners the remainder of the issued relative to aforesaid decision. During the
disputed one-half portion. DEL CASTILLO, J.: implementation of said writ, however, complainant
discovered that respondent had already collected
This is a verified Complaint for Disbarment/Gross the total amount of ₱95,000.00 from spouses
The allotted portion of the subject lot properly Lopez. Respondent received said amount in the
recognizes that litigation should be for the benefit Immoral Conduct1 filed with this Court on
September 18, 2006 by complainant Rolando Viray following manner:
of the client, not the lawyer, particularly in a legal
situation when the law itself holds clear and (complainant) against respondent Atty. Eugenio T.
express protection to the rights of the client to the Sanicas (respondent). Voucher
Date Amount Purpose
disputed property (a homestead lot). Premium No.
consideration, in other words, is on the rights of Factual Antecedents
the owner, not on the lawyer who only helped the 0210512 7802 ₱20,000. Attorney's fees
owner protect his rights. Matters cannot be the 004 00
Complainant alleges that he engaged the services
other way around; otherwise, the lawyer does of respondent relative to a labor case2 he filed 02/13/20 7833 10,000.0 Partial payment
indeed effectively acquire a property right over the against Ester Lopez and Teodoro Lopez III (spouses 04 0 for judgment
disputed property. If at all, due recognition of Lopez). On February 26, 2001, the Labor Arbiter
parity between a lawyer and a client should be on ruled in favor of complainant and disposed of the 0212612 7848 10,000.0 Partial payment
the fruits of the disputed property, which in this case as follows: 004 0 for judgment
case, the Court properly accords.
03/12/20 7894 20,000.0 Partial payment
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is 04 0 for judgment
WHEREFORE, in view of these considerations, we hereby rendered ordering respondents Ester Lopez
hereby GRANT the petition. We AFFIRM the and Teodoro Lopez III to pay complainant Rolando 0410212 7932 5,000.00 Partial payment
decision dated September 17, 1996 and the Viray of the following, to wit: 004 for judgment
resolution dated December 27, 1996of the
Regional Trial Court of Dipolog City, Branch 10,in 0410612 7941 5,000.00 Partial payment
Civil Case No. 4038, with the MODIFICATION that 1. Backwages ........................... 004 for judgment
the respondents, the spouses Victorino (Vic) T. ₱146,726.67
Lacaya and Rosa Legados, are entitled to two (2) 04/13/20 7944 5,000.00 Partial payment
hectares (or approximately one-tenth [1/10] of the 04 for judgment
 109

04/16/20 7954 10,000.0 Partial payment Respondent asserts that, in any event, complainant relationship."13 Specifically, Rule 16.01 of the Code
04 0 for judgment will still be receiving a sum greater than what he imposes upon the lawyer the duty to "account for
expects to receive. He avers that complainant is all money or property collected or received for or
0413012 7977 10,000.0 Partial payment still entitled to receive from spouses Lopez the sum from the client." Rule 16.03 thereof, on the other
004 0 for judgment of ₱93,491.60. Adding the Pl 7,000.00 respondent hand, mandates that "[a] lawyer shall deliver the
previously remitted to complainant, the latter will funds xx x of his client when due or upon demand."
get a total amount of ₱110,491.60. This amount,
Total Amount: ₱95,000. according to respondent, exceeds the amount of In this case, respondent on nine separate
00 ₱100,000.00 complainant agreed to and expected occasions from February 5, 2004 to April 30, 2004
to receive. received payments for attorney's fees and partial
Complainant also discovered that respondent payments for monetary awards on behalf of
misrepresented to spouses Lopez that he is IBP's Report and Recommendation complainant from spouses Lopez. But despite the
authorized to receive payments on his behalf, number of times over close to three months he had
when in truth and in fact he is not. Consequently, On February 26, 2007,8 we referred this case to the been receiving payment, respondent neither
complainant made several verbal demands to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for informed the complainant of such fact nor
respondent to remit to him the amount of investigation, report and recommendation. On rendered an accounting thereon. It was only when
₱95,000.00, less his attorney's fees of ₱20,000.00. January 31, 2011, the Investigating Commissioner an Alias Writ of Execution was issued and being
But respondent did not budge. Thus, complainant issued his Report and Recommendation9 with the implemented when complainant discovered that
lodged a complaint before the Office of the Punong following recommendation: spouses Lopez had already given respondent the
Barangay of Brgy. Felisa, Bacolod City. total amount of ₱95,000.00 as partial payment for
Respondent, however, ignored the summons to the monetary awards granted to him by the labor
In view of the foregoing, it is respectfully tribunal.
attend a conference before the barangay to resolve recommended that the respondent be meted the
the issues. penalty of two (2) years suspension. Respondent is
also ordered to return, in restitution all the To make matters worse, respondent withheld and
In his Comment,5 respondent admits that he amounts in his possession which are due to refused to deliver to the complainant said amount,
received ₱95,000.00 from spouses Lopez on complainant, less his rightful attorney's fees.10 On which he merely received on behalf of his client,
installments, but denies that he was not authorized October 28, 2011, the IBP Board of Governors even after demand. Complainant brought the
to accept it. He explains that complainant agreed adopted Resolution No. XX-2011-139,11 which matter before the barangay, but respondent simply
to pay him additional attorney's fees equivalent to approved the Report and Recommendation of the ignored the same. Such failure and inordinate
25o/o of the total monetary award, on top of the Investigating Commissioner suspending refusal on the part of the respondent to render an
attorney's fees that may be awarded by the labor respondent from the practice of law for two years, accounting and return the money after demand
tribunal, and to refund all expenses respondent but with the modification that respondent should raises the presumption that he converted it to his
incurred relative to the case. Thus, from the total restitute the sum of ₱85,500.0012 to the own use.14 His unjustified withholding of the funds
award of ₱189,491.60, the sum of ₱17,226.57 complainant. also warrants the imposition of disciplinary action
representing respondent's professional fees has to against him.15
be deducted, leaving a balance of Issue
₱172,275.13.6 Then from said amount, complainant Respondent justifies his action by asserting that
proposed that he will get ₱100,000.00 and the complainant authorized him to receive payment.
balance of ₱72,275.13 shall belong to respondent The essential issue in this case is whether the He implies that he is also authorized to apply the
as and for his additional 25o/o attorney's fees and respondent is guilty of gross misconduct for his sum of money he received from spouses Lopez to
reimbursement for all expenses he incurred while failure to promptly account to his client the funds his additional 25o/o attorney's fees and
handling the case. However, after receiving the received in the course of his professional reimbursement for all expenses he incurred for the
amount of ₱95,000.00 and deducting therefrom the engagement and return the same upon demand. case, in the total amount of ₱72,275.13. However,
amounts of ₱20,000.007 attorney's fees, after deducting from the amount of ₱95,000.00 the
₱17,000.00 earlier given to complainant, and The Court's Ruling amounts of ₱20,000.00, ₱17,000.00, and
₱2,000.00 paid to the sheriff, what was left to ₱2,000.00, what was left to respondent, to his
respondent was only ₱56,000.00. Respondent "The Code of Professional Responsibility demands dismay was only ₱56,000.00.
whines that this amount is way below the promised the utmost degree of fidelity and good faith in
25o/o attorney's fees and refund of expenses in the dealing with the moneys entrusted to lawyers The Court is not impressed. As aptly observed by
total amount of ₱72,275.13. because of their fiduciary the Investigating Commissioner, other than his self-
 110

serving statements, there is nothing in the records Eugenio T. Sanicas GUILTY of gross misconduct and In a Decision2 dated December 4, 2009, this Court
which would support respondent's claim that he accordingly SUSPENDS him from the practice of law disbarred the respondent from the practice of law
was authorized to receive the payments. Neither is for one (1) year upon the finality of this Resolution, on the following grounds: abuse of court
there proof that complainant agreed to pay him with a warning that a repetition of the same or procedures and processes; filing of multiple actions
additional 25% attorney's fees and reimburse him similar act or offense shall be dealt with more and forum-shopping; willful, intentional and
for all expenses he allegedly incurred in connection severly. deliberate resort to falsehood and deception before
with the case. Respondent did not present any the courts; maligning the name of his fellow
document, retainer's agreement, or itemized Atty. Sanicas is ordered to return to complainant, lawyer; and fraudulent and unauthorized
breakdown of the amount to be reimbursed to within 90 days from finality of this Resolution, the appearances in court.
support his claim.1âwphi1 In any event, even net amount of ₱85,500.00 with interest at the rate
assuming that respondent was authorized to of 6% per annum from finality of this Resolution The material portions of the subject Decision
receive payments, the same does not exempt him until the full amount is returned. Failure to comply provide:
from his duty of promptly informing his client of the with the foregoing directive will warrant the
amounts he received in the course of his imposition of a more severe penalty.
professional employment. "The fiduciary nature of Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the
the relationship between counsel and client respondent committed various acts of professional
imposes on a lawyer the duty to account for the Let copies of this Resolution be furnished the Office misconduct and thereby failed to live up to the
money or property collected or received for or from of the Bar Confidant and noted in Atty. Sanicas' exacting ethical standards imposed on members of
the client. He is obliged to render a prompt record as a member of the Bar. the Bar. We cannot, agree, however, that only a
accounting of all the property and money he has penalty of one-year suspension from the practice of
collected for his client."16 "The fact that a lawyer SO ORDERED. law should be imposed. Neither should we limit
has a lien for his attorney's fees on the money in ourselves to the originally recommendedpenalty of
his hands collected for his client does not relieve suspension for two (2) years.
E. Readmission to the Bar
him from the obligation to make a prompt 1. Lawyers suspended, disbarred,
accounting."17 Moreover, a lawyer has no right "to disciplined Given the respondent’s multiple violations, his past
unilaterally appropriate his client's money for record as previously discussed, and the nature of
himself by the mere fact alone that the client owes these violations which shows the readiness to
him attorney's fees."18 disregard court rules and to gloss over concerns for
the orderly administration of justice,we believe and
In sum, "[r]espondent's failure to immediately EN BANC so hold that the appropriate action of this Court is
account for and return the money when due and to disbar the respondent to keep him away from
upon demand violated the trust reposed in him, A.C. No.7054               November 11, 2014 the law profession and from any significant role in
demonstrated his lack of integrity and moral the administration of justice which he has
soundness, and warrants the imposition of disgraced. He is a continuing risk, too, to the public
CONRADO N. QUE, Complainant, that the legal profession serves. Not even his ardor
disciplinary action."19 vs. and overzealousness in defending the interests of
ATTY. ANASTACIO E. REVILLA, JR., Respondent. his client can save him. Such traits at the expense
The Penalty of everything else, particularly the integrity of the
RESOLUTION profession and the orderly administration of justice,
"The penalty for gross misconduct consisting in the this Court cannot accept nor tolerate.
failure or refusal despite demand of a lawyer to PER CURIAM:
account for and to return money or property Additionally, disbarment is merited because this is
belonging to a client has been suspension from the not the respondent’s first ethical infraction of the
practice of law for two years."20 Thus, the IBP Board For the Court's consideration is the Profound
Appeal for Judicial Clemency 1 filed by Atty. same nature. We penalized him in Plus Builders,
of Governors did not err in recommending the Inc. and Edgardo Garcia versus Atty. Anastacio E.
imposable penalty. Considering, however, that this Anastacio E. Revilla, Jr. (respondent), who seeks to
be reinstated as a member of the Philippine Bar. Revilla for his willful and intentional falsehood
is respondent's first offense and he is already a before the court; for misuse of court procedures
nonagenarian,21 the Court, in the exercise of its and processes to delay the execution of a
compassionate judicial discretion, finds that a Factual Background judgment; and for collaborating with non-lawyers in
penalty of one year suspension is sufficient. the illegal practice of law. We showed leniency
WHEREFORE, the Court finds respondent Atty. then by reducing his penalty to suspension for six
 111

(6) months. We cannot similarly treat the The respondent again wrote the Court on July 13, letter15 pleading the Court to revisit his
respondent this time; it is clear that he did not 2011, reiterating his pleas for the Court’s previousrequests for reinstatement.
learn any lesson from his past experience and compassion and mercy.6 He sought the Court’s
since then has exhibited traits of incorrigibility. It is forgiveness stating that he has learned his lesson; Treating his letter as a motion for the
time to put a finis to the respondent’s professional but at the same time, questioning the Court’s reconsideration of the resolutions dated August 2,
legal career for the sake of the public, the finding for lackof factual support. He appended to 2011, July3, 2012, and October 9, 2012, the Court,
profession and the interest of justice. his appeal proofs of his updated payment of IBP on June 4, 2013 deniedthe motion with
membership dues,7 MCLE compliance,8 and a letter finality.16 On July 18, 2014, the respondent filed a
WHEREFORE, premises considered, we hereby from the Bishop of Marinduque.9 His appeal, Profound Appeal for Judicial Clemency17 reiterating
AFFIRM Resolution No. XVII-2005-164 dated however, was denied by a Resolution10 dated his apologies to the Court. He stressed that the
December 17, 2005 and Resolution No. XVII-2008- August 2, 2011. penalty of disbarment has already taken its toll on
657 dated December 11, 2008 of the Board of his health; he has now become most frail and
Governors of the IBP Committee on Bar Discipline On May 17, 2012, the respondent sent a weak; and he had been diagnosed with chronic
insofar as respondent Atty. Anastacio Revilla, Jr. is letter11 addressed to the Members of the Court En kidney disease at stage five (5) and undergoing
found liable for professional misconduct for Banc once again reiterating his prayer to lift the dialysis thrice weekly. He also stressed that in the
violations of the Lawyer’s Oath; Canon 8; Rules order of disbarment. He alleged among others that years that he had been excluded from the practice
10.01 and 10.03, Canon 10; Rules 12.02 and 12.04, for more than three years that he has been of law, he devoted his time to Christian and charity
Canon 12; and Rule 19.01, Canon 19 of the Code of disbarred in the practice of law, he has never been pursuits serving with all humility as a Lay Minister
Professional Responsibility;and Sections 20(d), 21 involved in any immoral or illegal activities, has and a regular lecturer on Legal Aspect of Marriage
and 27 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court. However, devoted himself in the services of St. Peter Parish at St. Peter Church, Quezon City.
we modify the penalty the IBP imposed, and hold and Shrine, CommonwealthAvenue as Eucharistic
that the respondent should be DISBARREDfrom the Minister leader, has conducted regular monthly The respondent also pleads for clemency, not
practice of law. lectures on the subject of marriage at the Diocese because he intends to practice law again, but to be
of Novaliches, and has participated as monthly made whole, to recover from being shattered, and
SO ORDERED. financial contributor to Mr. Carmel Church, Lucena to finally have peace of mind. Heexpressed his
City. He also begged the Court to no longer prolong sincere repentance and deep remorse by taking full
his penalty since it had already served its purpose. responsibility for his misdemeanor. He also prayed
On July 8, 2010, the respondent filed a Petition for The plea was also denied on July 3, 2012.12
Judicial Clemency and Compassion3 praying that that his disbarment be lifted and that he be
his license to practice law be restored based on reinstated as a member of the Philippine bar. As
humanitarian considerations, but the Court En On August 30, 2012, the respondent once more part of his petition, he submitted a Medical
Bancresolved to deny the petition for lack of merit. prayed for his reinstatement professing repentance Abstract18 evidencing his diagnosis for chronic
and remorse for what he did.13 He pleaded for the kidney disease, and a certification19 from St. Peter
Court’s consideration, and vowed that he will no Parish, Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City,
The respondent subsequently filed on January 11, longer misuse the rules of procedure but instead, proving that he and his family are dedicated
2011, an Appeal for Grace, Succor, and devote his time and energy for its proper parishioners.
Mercy4 asking the Court to take a second look at observance and implementation. He also stated
the penalty imposed upon him. He maintained that that for almost three years of being disbarred from
Conrado N. Que (complainant) failed to establish The Court's Ruling
the practice of law, he has never been involved in
by clear and convincing evidence that he any unlawful, dishonest, and immoral activities. He
committed grossly immoral conduct meriting the promised to maintain at all times a high degree of We deny the present appeal.
severe penalty of disbarment. He also attempted to legal proficiency, morality, integrity, and fair
pass the blame on another individual (a certain dealings to the courts, clients, and the legal Membership in the Bar is a privilege burdened with
Gerolin Piedad, General Manager of Kalayaan profession in accordance with the values and conditions.20 It is not a natural, absolute or
Development Corporation) to free himself from morals embodied in the Code of Professional constitutional right granted to everyone who
liability by claiming that one of the charges leading Responsibility. demands it, but rather, a special privilege granted
to his disbarment was not of his own doing. and continued only to those who demonstrate
In a Resolution14 dated October 9, 2012, the Court special fitness inintellectual attainment and in
In a Resolution5 dated February 8, 2011, the Court denied his petition for lack of merit. Aggrieved, the moral character.21 The same reasoning applies to
denied the appeal. respondent filed on March 27, 2013 a reinstatement of a disbarred lawyer. When
exercising its inherent power to grant
 112

reinstatement, the Court should see to it that only In his present appeal for judicial clemency, the Mejia committed no other transgressions since he
those who establish their present moral fitness and respondent acknowledged his indiscretions and was disbarred.
knowledge of the law will be readmitted to the Bar. claimed to have taken full responsibility for his
Thus, though the doors to the practice of law are misdemeanor. Unlike in his previous Similarly in Adez Realty, Inc. v. Court of
never permanently closed on a disbarred attorney, petitions/appeal for judicial clemency, the Appeals,27 the Court granted the reinstatement of
the Court owes a duty to the legal profession as respondent no longerquestioned the Court’s the disbarred lawyer (found to be guilty of
well as to the general public to ensure that if the decision. According to him, he has long expressed intercalating a material fact in a CA decision) and
doors are opened,it is done so only as a matter of deep remorse and genuine repentance. considered the period of three (3) years as
justice.22 sufficient time to do soul-searching and to prove
The respondent also claimed that the long period that he is worthy to practice law. In that case, the
The basic inquiry in a petition for reinstatementto of his disbarment gave him sufficient time to Court took into consideration the disbarred
the practice of law is whether the lawyer has reflect on his professional conduct, to show lawyer’s sincere admission of guilt and repeated
sufficiently rehabilitated himself or herself in remorse and repentance, and to realize the gravity pleas for compassion.
conduct and character.23 Whether the applicant of his mistakes. After his disbarment, the
shall be reinstated in the Roll of Attorneys rests to respondent continued lending assistance, and Also in Valencia v. Antiniw,28 the Court reinstated
a great extent on the sound discretion of the deviated his time and effort in pursuing civic and Atty. Antiniw (who was found guilty of malpractice
Court.24 The lawyer has to demonstrate and prove religious work that significantly contributed to his in falsifying a notarized deed of sale and
by clear and convincing evidence that he or she is character reformation.He professed that during his subsequently introducing the document in court)
again worthy of membership in the Bar. The Court almost five (5) years of disbarment, he has been after considering the long period of his disbarment
will take into consideration his or her character and an active member of the Couples for Christ, (almost 15 years). The Court considered that
standing prior to the disbarment, the nature and Marriage Encounter, and Knights of Columbus; and during Atty. Antiniw’s disbarment, he has been
character of the charge/s for which he or she was through his affiliations with these groups, he had persistent in reiterating his apologies to the Court,
disbarred, his or her conduct subsequent to the served in the ecclesial affairs in his parish as an has engaged inhumanitarian and civic services,
disbarment, and the time that has elapsed in Extraordinary Minister for Holy Communion and a and retained an unblemished record as an elected
between the disbarment and the application for lecturer on Legal Aspect of Marriage Pre-Cana and public servant, as shown by the testimonials of the
reinstatement.25 Marriage Preparation Seminar at the Parish Church numerous civic and professional organizations,
of St. Peter in Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon government institutions, and members of the
In the present case, we note that before his City. judiciary.
admission to the Bar, the respondent had
demonstrated an active involvement and Although the Court believes that the respondent is In all these cases, the Court considered the
participation in community and church activities by not inherently lacking in moral fiber as shown by conduct of the disbarred attorney before and after
joining Youth For Christ, Catechism, and Bible his conduct prior to his disbarment, we are not his disbarment, the time that had elapsed from the
Study and Sharing. Likewise, upon admission to the convinced that he had sufficiently achieved moral disbarment and the application for reinstatement,
Bar, the respondent worked as Municipal Attorney reformation. and more importantly, the disbarred attorneys’
in Sta. Cruz, Marinduque rendering free legal sincere realization and acknowledgement of guilt.
assistance to his townmates who were inneed of In Rodolfo M. Bernardo v. Atty. Ismael F.
legal service. Thereafter, the respondentwas Mejia,26 the Court, in deciding whether or not to
appointed as a Municipal Administrator and had In the present case, we are not fully convinced that
reinstate Atty. Mejia, considered that 15 years had the passage of more than four (4) years is
continued extending assistance to the indigent already elapsed from the time hewas disbarred,
residents. sufficient to enable the respondent to reflect and to
which gave him sufficient time to acknowledge his realize his professional transgressions.
infractions and to repent. The Court also took into
The respondent also actively engaged and account the fact that Atty. Mejiais already of
participated in various community projects, advanced years, has long repented, and suffered We emphasize that this is the second timethat the
through the Marinduque Jaycees, where he served enough. The Court also notedthat he had made a respondent was accused and was found guilty of
as President from 1980 to 1981, and the Integrated significant contribution by putting up the Mejia Law gross misconduct.1âwphi1 The respondent, in an
Bar of the Philippines Marinduque Chapter, where Journal containing his religious and social writings; earlier case of Plus Builders, Inc. v. Atty. Anastacio
he served as a member, Director, and President and the religious organization named "El Cristo E. Revilla,Jr.,29 was likewise found guilty of gross
from 1982 to 1987. Movement and Crusade on Miracle of the Heart and misconduct for committing willful and intentional
Mind." Furthermore, the Court considered that Atty. falsehood before the court; misusing court
procedure and processes to delay the execution of
 113

a judgment; and collaborating with nonlawyers in WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Profound Complaint),[5] which Fuji filed with the Board of
the illegal practice of law – mostly the same Appeal for Judicial Clemency filed by Atty. Commissioners of the Bureau of Immigration, and
grounds on which the Decision dated December 4, Anastacio E. Revilla, Jr. is hereby DENIED. prayed that the same be treated as their verified
2009 (2nd disbarment) was based. In Plus Builders, complaint. Complainants further informed this
we granted the respondent’s motion for SO ORDERED. Court that they had difficulty obtaining certified
reconsideration and reduced the penalty of true copies of the November 21, 2013 Order of the
suspension from the practice of law from two (2) Board of Commissioners, which granted Fuji's
years to six (6) months out of compassion to the Efren Diaz v. Atty. Rodhelyn Del Mundo, AC No. Section 9(g) visa, Summary Deportation Order
respondent. 11579 June 4, 2018 dated June 17, 2015, and Warrant of Deportation
from the Bureau of Immigration personnel who just
Considering the respondent’s earlier disbarment Fuji v. Dela Cruz AC 11043 June 27 2018 gave them the "run[-]around."[6] They alleged that
case(and subsequent reduction of the penalty the Bureau of Immigration personnel were not
imposed as an act of clemency), and another particularly helpful, and did not treat Fuji's case
disbarment case against him still pending review SECOND DIVISION with urgency.[7]
by the Court, we are not fully and convincingly
satisfied that the respondent has already reformed. [ A.C. No. 11043, March 08, 2017 ] The facts of this case show that in a Summary
The period of five (5) years is likewise not Deportation Order[8] dated June 17, 2015, Fuji, a
LIANG FUJI, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. GEMMA Chinese national, was ordered deported for
considerably long considering the nature and ARMI M. DELA CRUZ, RESPONDENT. overstaying. From the Order, it appears that
perversityof the respondent’s misdeeds. We
believe that it is still early for the Court to consider Special Prosecutor Dela Cruz was the special
RESOLUTION prosecutor who brought the formal charge against
the respondent’s reinstatement. LEONEN, J.: Fuji and another person upon her finding that Fuji's
Failure to exercise utmost prudence in reviewing work visa had expired on May 8, 2013, with
Furthermore, we are not persuaded by the the immigration records of an alien, which resulted extension expired on December 6, 2013. [9] Special
respondent's sincerity in acknowledging his in the alien's wrongful detention, opens the special Prosecutor Dela Cruz found that Fuji had
guilt.1âwphi1 While he expressly stated in his prosecutor in the Bureau of Immigration to overstayed for one (1) year and six (6) months in
appeal that he had taken full responsibility of his administrative liability. violation of Commonwealth Act No. 613, Section
misdemeanor, his previous inclination to pass the 37(a)(7).[10] Her investigation was triggered by a
blame to other individuals, to invoke self-denial, Before this Court is an administrative complaint-affidavit dated April 30, 2015 of a
and to make alibis for his wrongdoings, complaint[1] dated November 23, 2015 filed by certain Virgilio Manalo alleging that Fuji and
contradicted his assertion. The respondent also Liang Fuji (Fuji) and his family, against Bureau of another person had defrauded him.[11]
failed to submit proof satisfactorily showing his Immigration Special Prosecutor Gemma Armi M.
contrition. He failed to establish by clear and Dela Cruz (Special Prosecutor Dela Cruz) for gross On June 29, 2015, Fuji filed his Motion for
convincing evidence that he is again worthy of misconduct and gross ignorance of the law in Reconsideration.[12]
membership in the legal profession. We thus relation to her issuance of a Charge Sheet against
entertain serious doubts that the respondent had Fuji for overstaying. On July 28, 2015, the Bureau of Immigration
completely reformed. Intelligence Division served Fuji's Warrant of
Through a letter[2] dated December 8, 2015, Deportation, and thereafter arrested him at Brgy.
As a final word, while the Court sympathizes with Deputy Clerk of Court and Bar Confidant Atty. Ma. Maloma, San Felipe, Zambales with the assistance
the respondent's unfortunate physical condition, Cristina B. Layusa directed the complainants to file from local police.[13] Fuji was brought to and
we stress that in considering his application for a verified complaint "with supporting documents detained at the Bureau of Immigration Detention
reinstatement to the practice of law, the duty of duly authenticated and/or affidavits of persons Facility, National Capital Region Police Office,
the Court is to determine whether he has having personal knowledge of the facts Taguig City.[14]
established moral reformation and rehabilitation, alleged"[3] in the complaint.
disregarding its feeling of sympathy or pity. Surely On October 9, 2015, the Board of Commissioners
at this point, this requirement was not met. Until Complainants replied[4] by furnishing this Court with denied Fuji's Motion for Reconsideration. [15]
such time when the respondent can demonstrate copies of the Verified Petition to Reopen S.D. O. No.
to the Court that he has completely rehabilitated BOC-2015-357 (B.L.O. No. SBM-15-420) and for On November 23, 2015, Fuji filed his Verified
himself and deserves to resume his membership in Relief of Judgment with Urgent Prayer for Petition and Administrative Complaint.
the Bar, Our decision to disbar him from the Immediate Consideration, and Administrative [16]
 Subsequently, on March 10, 2016, Fuji filed an
practice of law stands. Complaint (Verified Petition and Administrative Omnibus Motion to Reopen and Lift S.D.O. BOC-
 114

2015-357, and Release on Bail through counsel.[17] complainant's charges against her.[30] She added
that Fuji stated in his March 29, 2016 Affidavit of This case is an exception. Unlike the circumstances
On March 22, 2016, the Board of Commissioners Desistance that he had mistakenly signed some in Spouses Buffe and Alicias, Jr., the records here
issued a Resolution dismissing the deportation documents including the administrative complaint. show that the Office of the Ombudsman had
[31]
charge against Fuji on the ground that "[t]he previously dismissed Fuji's administrative
records show that Liang has a working visa valid complaint due to the pendency of his Verified
until 30 April 2016 under Jiang Tuo Mining We find respondent administratively liable Petition and Administrative Complaint before the
Philippines, Inc. as Marketing Liason."[18] Fuji was for her negligence in her failure to ascertain Bureau of Immigration, and considered the case
directed to be released from Bureau of the facts before levying the formal charge closed.[38]
Immigration-Warden's Facility on March 23, 2016. against Fuji for overstaying.
[19]
The Bureau of Immigration subsequently granted
I Fuji's petition to reopen his case and ordered his
In his administrative complaint, Fuji alleged that his release. However, it was silent as to the culpability
rights to due process were violated since he was Generally, this Court defers from taking cognizance of respondent on the charges levelled by Fuji.
not afforded any hearing or summary deportation of disbarment complaints against lawyers in
proceedings before the deportation order was government service arising from their Thus, with the termination of the administrative
issued against him.[20] Fuji further alleged that administrative duties, and refers the complaint first proceedings before the Office of the Ombudsman
Special Prosecutor Dela Cruz failed miserably in either to the proper administrative body that has and the apparent inaction of the Bureau of
discharging her duties because a simple initial disciplinary authority over the erring public official Immigration on complainant's administrative
review of the Bureau of Immigration records would or employee or the Ombudsman.[32] complaint, this Court considers it proper to take
have revealed that he was not overstaying because cognizance of this case, and to determine whether
his Section 9(g) work visa was valid until April 30, For instance, in Spouses Buffe v. Gonzales,[33] this there is sufficient ground to discipline respondent
2016.[21] Court dismissed the disbarment complaint against under its "plenary disciplinary authority"[39] over
former Secretary of Justice Raul M. Gonzalez, members of the legal profession.[40]
In her August 25, 2016 Comment, [22] respondent former Undersecretary of Justice Fidel J. Exconde,
Special Prosecutor Dela Cruz denied that she Jr., and former Congressman Eleandro Jesus F. Contrary to respondent's stance, Fuji's purported
committed any grave misconduct.[23] She claimed Madrona, holding that the respondents were public Affidavit of Desistance is not sufficient cause to
that Fuji was accorded due process during the officials being charged for actions involving their dismiss this administrative complaint. This Court
summary deportation proceedings.[24] He was official functions during their tenure, which should has previously held that proceedings of this nature
directed, through an Order dated May 14, 2015 of be resolved by the Office of the Ombudsman.[34] In cannot be "interrupted or terminated by reason of
the Legal Division, to submit his Counter- that case, one (1) of the respondents sought to desistance, settlement, compromise, restitution,
Affidavit/Memorandum, which he failed to do. dismiss the complaint on the ground of forum- withdrawal of the charges or failure of the
[25]
 Fuji was also able to file his motion for shopping because he allegedly received an order complainant to prosecute the same."[41] The
reconsideration and verified petition to reopen the from the Office of the Ombudsman directing him to primary object of disciplinary proceedings is to
case.[26] file a counter-affidavit based on the same determine the fitness of a member to remain in the
administrative complaint filed before the Office of Bar. It is conducted solely for the public welfare,
[42]
Respondent further claimed that the Memorandum the Bar Confidant.[35]  and the desistance of the complainant is
dated June 4, 2015 of the Bureau of Immigration - irrelevant. What will be decisive are the facts borne
Management Information System (BI-MIS) Again, in the fairly recent case of Alicias, Jr. v. out by the evidence presented by the parties.
constituted a substantial evidence of Fuji's Macatangay,[36] the Court dismissed the complaint In Rayos-Ombac v. Rayos:[43]
overstay in the country, hence, her formal charge against respondents - government lawyers in the A case of suspension or disbarment may proceed
had legal basis.[27] Civil Service Commission. The Court held that the regardless of interest or lack of interest of the
acts or omissions alleged in the complaint were complainant. What matters is whether, on the basis
Respondent added that as a civil servant, she "connected with their . . . official functions in the of the facts borne out by the record, the charge of
enjoyed the presumption of regularity in the [Civil Service Commission] and within the deceit and grossly immoral conduct has been duly
performance of her duties.[28] She had no intention administrative disciplinary jurisdiction of their proven. This rule is premised on the nature of
to violate any law and did not commit any flagrant superior or the Office of the Ombudsman."[37] It disciplinary proceedings. A proceeding for
disregard of the rules, or unlawfully used her would seem that the complainant directly suspension or disbarment is not in any sense a civil
station to procure some benefit for herself or for instituted a disbarment complaint with this Court action where the complainant is a plaintiff and the
other persons.[29] Respondent pointed out that the instead of filing an administrative complaint before respondent lawyer is a defendant. Disciplinary
Ombudsman had in fact dismissed the the proper administrative body. proceedings involve no private interest and afford
 115

no redress for private grievance. They are follows: 06- NA

undertaken and prosecuted solely for the public 11:5 CZ3 PARAN ALLOW
JANUAR 9A IA  
welfare. They are undertaken for the purpose of .... 1PM 77 GUE ED
Y-2012 1
preserving courts of justice from the official 22-
ministration of persons unfit to practice in them. Result NA
: 1. LIANG FUJI SEPTEM 11:2 CZ3 ALLOW
The attorney is called to answer to the court for his /s 9A IA NUNEZ  
BER- 5PM 77 ED[49]
conduct as an officer of the court. The complainant 1
2011
or the person who called the attention of the court    - Derogatory Record Not Found
Fuji's travel records as of June 4, 2015, show his
to the attorney's alleged misconduct is in no sense - Latest Travel Record Found (Please see the arrival in the Philippines on February 10, 2014
a party, and has generally no interest in the    attached files for your ready reference. under a work visa immigration status.[50] Simple
outcome except as all good citizens may have in NOTE: DOB: 18 October 1991) prudence dictates that respondent Atty. Dela Cruz
the proper administration of justice. [44]
should have verified whether or not the July 15,
II    - Immigration Status Found
2013 application for change of status had been
- Latest Payment Record Found in BI-Main approved by the Bureau of Immigration
Respondent Dela Cruz claimed that she issued the
   (Please see the attached files for your ready Commissioners, especially since she had complete
formal charge against Fuji for overstaying on the
reference. NOTE: DOB: 18 October 1991) [48] and easy access to the immigration records.
basis of the Memorandum dated June 4, 2015 of
the BI-MIS.[45] A copy of the Memorandum with
.... Respondent failed in the performance of her basic
attachments was attached to respondent's
The Memorandum merely transmitted copies of duties. Special prosecutors in the Bureau of
Comment.[46]
immigration records showing details of filing of Immigration should exercise such degree of
applications, such as official receipts, - and travel vigilance and attention in reviewing the
However, nowhere in the Memorandum was it
record of Fuji. It was respondent Dela Cruz who immigration records, whenever the legal status and
stated that Fuji "overstayed" or that "Liang's
made the determination that Fuji overstayed on documentation of an alien are at issue. For while a
working visa expired on 8 May 2013 and his TVV
the basis of the'documents transmitted to her by deportation proceeding does not partake of the
expired on 6 December 2013"[47] as respondent
the BI-MIS. nature of a criminal action, it is however, a harsh
claims. Relevant portions of the Memorandum
and extraordinary administrative proceeding
read:
Among the documents transmitted by the BI-MIS affecting the freedom and liberty of a person.[51]
For :ATTY. GEMMA ARMI M. DELA CRUZ were computer print-outs showing details of official
receipts dated June 14, 2013, August 7, 2013, and Respondent was expected to be reasonably
Fro November 19, 2013 for temporary visitor visa thorough in her review of the documents
:ACTING CHIEF, MIS DIVISION
m extension and official receipt dated July 15, 2013 transmitted to her by the BI-MIS, especially as it
REQUEST FOR IMMIGRATION STATUS; VISA for an application for change of immigration status. may ultimately result in the deprivation of liberty of
Re :EXTENSION PAYMENT, LATEST TRAVEL AND Also, the travel records of Fuji show the following the prospective deportee. She should not have
DEROGATORY OF THE FOLLOWING: details: simply relied on the handwritten note by a
  1. MR./MS. LIANG FUJI Date & personnel from the BI-MIS at the bottom portion of
:4 June 2015 3:05 PM the receipt dated November 19, 2013 for 9A visa
Time
extension stating "Valid until: 06-Dec-2013." Had
  2. MR./MS. CHEN XIANG HE Verifier :DIMARUCOT J she inquired further, she would have discovered
that Fuji's application dated July 15, 2013 for
  3. MR./MS. JACKY CHANG HE Databa
:TRAVEL - ARRIVAL conversion from temporary visitor visa (9A) to work
se
Dat visa (9G) was approved by the Board of
:04 June 2015 Commissioners on November 21, 2013 — or one
e IMMI
TRAV FLIG (1) year and seven (7) months earlier - with validity
TRAVEL G PO OFFIC3 REMA until April 30, 2016. Thus, even if Fuji's temporary
------------------------------------------------------------------------ EL HT ACTION
DATE STA RT ER RKS visitor (9A) visa had expired on December 6, 2013
------------------------------------------------------------------------ TIME NO
TUS his stay in the country was still valid under the 9G
-----
10- work visa.
NA
FEBRUA 11:3 CZ3 MIJARE ALLOW
Further to your request for verification of 9G IA  
RY- 4PM 77 S ED Generally, a lawyer who holds a government office
Immigration Status; Visa Extension Payment and 1
2014 may not be disciplined as a member of the Bar for
TRAVEL RECORD/S, please find the result/s as
 116

misconduct in the discharge of her duties as a penalty for simple neglect of duty is suspension for A.M. No. MTJ-15-1851, February 11, 2015
government official.[52] However, if said misconduct one (1) month and one (1) day to six (6) months. In
as a government official also constitutes a violation previous cases,[59] this Court imposed the penalty CHUA KENG SIN, Petitioner, v. JUDGE JOB M.
of her oath as a lawyer and the Code of of suspension of three (3) months to six (6) months MANGENTE, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT,
Professional Responsibility,[53] then she may be for erring lawyers, who were negligent in handling BRANCH 54, NAVOTAS CITY, Respondents.
subject to disciplinary sanction by this Court. cases for their clients. We find appropriate the
penalty of suspension of three (3) months
Atty. Dela Cruz failed to observe Rule 18.03 of the considering the consequence of respondent's DECISION
Code of the Professional Responsibility, which negligence. This suspension includes her
mandates that "a lawyer shall not neglect a legal desistance from performing her functions as a LEONEN, J.:
matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in special prosecutor in the Bureau of Immigration.
connection therewith shall render him liable." As a This is a Complaint1 filed by Chua Keng Sin against
special prosecutor in the Bureau of Immigration, WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Gemma Armi M. Metropolitan Trial Court Judge Job M. Mangente for
she is the representative, not of any private party, Dela Cruz is SUSPENDED from the practice of law gross ignorance of the law and gross inefficiency
but of the State. Her task was to investigate and for three (3) months. relative to a criminal case for slight physical
verify facts to determine whether a ground for injuries docketed as Criminal Case No. 10-13570,
deportation exists, and if further administrative The respondent, upon receipt of this Resolution, entitled “People of the Philippines v. Chua Keng
action — in the form of a formal charge — should shall immediately serve her suspension. She shall Sin.”2cralawlawlibrary
be taken against an alien. formally manifest to this Court that her suspension
has started, and copy furnish all courts and quasi- On April 9, 2013, complainant Chua Keng Sin
Had respondent carefully reviewed the records of judicial bodies where she has entered her executed a Complaint-Affidavit stating that
Fuji, she would have found out about the approval appearance, within five (5) days upon receipt of respondent Judge Job M. Mangente’s violation of
of Fuji's application, which would negate her this Resolution. Respondent shall also serve copies the Local Government Code’s provisions
finding of overstaying. Because of her negligence, of her manifestation on all adverse parties in all the on Katarungang Pambarangay, Section 18 of the
Fuji was deprived of his liberty for almost eight (8) cases she entered her formal appearance. 1991 Revised Rules on Summary Procedure, 3 and
months, until his release on March 23, 2016. Rule 37, Section 4 of the Revised Rules of
Let a copy of this Resolution be furnished the Court4 denied him of his right to the speedy
Simple neglect of duty is defined as a failure to Office of the Bar Confidant to be attached to Atty. disposition of his case.5  Complainant asserts that
give attention to a task due to carelessness or Gemma Armi M. Dela Cruz's personal record. the laws and rules that respondent failed to apply
indifference. [54] In this case, respondent's Copies of this Resolution should also be served on are so basic and elementary, their violation
negligence shows her indifference to the the Integrated Bar of the Philippines for its proper constituted gross ignorance of the law and gross
fundamental right of every person, including aliens, disposition, and the Office of the Court inefficiency.6cralawlawlibrary
to due process and to the consequences of her Administrator for circulation to all courts in the
actions. country. Complainant alleged that he and his brother,
Victorio Chua (Victorio), “separately filed their
Lawyers in government service should be more SO ORDERED. complaints for slight physical injuries against each
conscientious with their professional obligations other before the Lupon of Barangay
consistent with the time-honored principle of public Mercibel Anderson v. Atty. Jose Ma. Saavedra AC Bangkulasi, Navotas City.”7  Complainant filed his
office being a public trust.[55] The ethical standards no. 6054 August 29, 2018 Complaint earlier than Victorio.8  When Victorio
under the Code of Professional Responsibility are learned that his Complaint would be considered as
rendered even more exacting as to government a counterclaim, he decided not to attend the
lawyers because they have the added duty to Josie Ramos v. Atty. Teresita Marbibi AC no. 9857,
September 2018 scheduled hearings set by the Lupon.9  Instead,
abide by the policy of the State to promote a high Victorio filed “a [C]omplaint for attempted murder
standard of ethics, competence, and against complainant before the Office of the City
professionalism in public service. [56] In this case, F. Judges and Court Personnel and the use of Prosecutor of Navotas City.”10cralawlawlibrary
respondent's negligence evinces a failure to cope Social Media
with the strict demands and high standards of
public service and the legal profession. “Due to Victorio’s failure to appear,
the Lupon issued (1) a Certification to File Action
The appropriate sanction is discretionary upon this dated March 3, 2009 in favor of complainant
Court.[57] Under the Civil Service Rules,[58] the SECOND DIVISION
allowing him to file his [C]omplaint [for slight
 117

physical injuries] before the Office of the City November 2010[,] without waiting for the Summary Procedure or apply his own
Prosecutor of Navotas City; and (2) a Certification expiration of complainant’s period to file interpretation of the rule.”32  He explained that the
to Bar Action/Counterclaim . . . against Victorio due [R]eply[.]”24cralawlawlibrary inadvertence “was mainly because of the bulk of
to his failure or refusal to appear in the work that he had to attend to, as [the case was
hearing.”11cralawlawlibrary On November 23, 2010, respondent denied brought to him] barely a year since he was
complainant’s Motion for determination of probable appointed [as] judge[.]”33  He admitted that “he
The respective Complaints for slight physical cause for lack of merit.25cralawlawlibrary erroneously thought that the certification to file
injuries and attempted murder were jointly heard action was for Criminal Case No. 10-13570 [and not
by Navotas Assistant City Prosecutor Lemuel R. Complainant argued that respondent’s refusal to Criminal Case 10-13569].”34cralawlawlibrary
Nobleza.12  It was “recommended that both grant his Motion to Dismiss was “violative of
brothers be charged with slight physical injuries.” 13  Section 412 of the Local Government Code of Respondent argued, however, that “when the
Informations for the Complaints were filed and 1991[,] which prohibits the filing or institution of a information [against complainant] was amended
docketed as Criminal Case No. 10-13569 (People v. complaint, petition, action or proceeding involving from slight physical injuries to attempted homicide,
Victorio Chua) and Criminal Case No. 10-13570 any matter within the authority of prior referral to the Lupon was no longer necessary
(People v. Chua Keng Sin).14cralawlawlibrary the Lupon directly in court of any other since [the latter] is an offense punishable by
government office for adjudication unless there has imprisonment exceeding one (1) year[,] and
Criminal Case No. 10-13570 was raffled to Branch been a confrontation between the parties before the Barangay Lupon has no jurisdiction for offenses
54 of the Metropolitan Trial Court, Navotas City the Lupon, and that no conciliation or settlement punishable by imprisonment exceeding one (1)
presided by respondent.  Complainant filed a has been reached as certified by the Lupon.”26  year.”35cralawlawlibrary
Motion to Dismiss Case No. 10-13570 on the Contrary to respondent’s interpretation, the
ground that “Victorio’s [C]omplaint was filed in certification to file action issued by the Lupon was As for the hurried Resolution of the Motion to
court without the required certification to file in favor of complainant, not his brother Victorio.  determine probable cause, he explained that he
action.”15  Furthermore, the Lupon had issued a The certification did not authorize Victorio to had done so “on the honest belief that the Motion
certification to bar action/counterclaim against pursue his own action.27cralawlawlibrary was already due for resolution.”36  However, he
Victorio.16  Respondent denied complainant’s argued that “[h]e did not violate complainant’s
Motion to Dismiss in the Order dated September He further argued that respondent’s denial was right to due process because [complainant’s]
15, 201017 “on the ground that it was a prohibited also violative of “Section 18 of the 1991 Revised motion was set for hearing and was duly
pleading . . . under the Rule on Summary Rules on Summary Procedure[,] [which] provides heard.”37cralawlawlibrary
Procedure.”18cralawlawlibrary for the dismissal of cases requiring referral to
the Lupon for conciliation where there is no Respondent further claimed that “complainant
Complainant sought the reconsideration of the showing of compliance with such requirement.” 28  cannot . . . put the blame on him for the delay in
Order.19  After almost two (2) years, respondent Complainant also averred that the delay in resolving the [M]otions.”38  He was of the opinion
denied the Motion for Reconsideration in the Order resolving the Motion was in violation of Rule 37, that complainant and his counsel had the
dated October 16, 2012 on the ground that Section 4 of the Revised Rules of Court.  It was responsibility of following up the status of his
the Lupon had issued a certificate to file action. 20  decided two (2) years after the prosecution filed its case.39cralawlawlibrary
During the intervening period, “complainant filed a Comment, instead of resolving it within 30 days
[M]otion for determination of probable cause from the time it was submitted for Findings of the Office of the Court
assailing the [R]esolution of the reviewing resolution.29cralawlawlibrary Administrator
prosecutor[,] upgrading the offense of slight
physical injuries complainant was charged with to As to the denial of his Motion to determine In the Report40 dated July 23, 2014, the Office of
attempted homicide[.]”21cralawlawlibrary probable cause, complainant averred that the Court Administrator recommended that
respondent violated his right to due process when respondent be held administratively liable for gross
On November 3, 2010, the Motion for the Motion was resolved “before the expiration of ignorance of the law and delay in resolving the
determination of probable cause was heard, the period given to him to file his Motion for Reconsideration dated September 30,
“giving Victorio fifteen (15) days . . . to file his [R]eply[.]”30cralawlawlibrary 2010 and Motion to Admit Amended Information
comment/opposition to the [M]otion[,] while dated October 7, 2010.41cralawlawlibrary
complainant was given ten (10) days from receipt In his Comment dated June 25, 2013, respondent
of the [C]omment to file his [R]eply.”22  Victorio’s admitted and apologized for his mistake, The Office of the Court Administrator found
Comment was filed on November 17, 2010.23  “attributing it to pure oversight and “[respondent’s] handling of Criminal Case No. 10-
Respondent declared complainant’s Motion for inadvertence.”31  He said that “[h]e had no 13570 injudicious.”42  While his inadvertence was
determination “submitted for resolution on 22 intention to disregard the Revised Rule on mainly due to the bulk of his work and his being a
 118

newly appointed judge, it cannot be used as an for gross ignorance of the law and delay. judge in discharging his official duties.
excuse, “considering the extent of his experience
as public attorney for nine (9) years and as Due to the procedural carelessness exhibited by Judges are to be reminded that it is the height of
prosecutor for twelve (12) years.”43  The rules he respondent in Criminal Case No. 10-13570, the incompetence to dispense cases callously and in
failed to observe were basic and elementary that penalty imposed should be increased to suspension utter disregard of procedural rules.  Whether the
he should have been aware of their well-settled of six (6) months. resort to shortcuts is borne out of ignorance or
doctrines.44cralawlawlibrary convenience is immaterial.  Judges took an oath to
In Re: Anonymous letter dated August 12, 2010, dispense their duties with competence and
As for the delay, respondent should have made a complaining against Judge Ofelia T. integrity; to fall short would be a disservice not
formal request to this court for extension.  This Pinto:49cralawlawlibrary only to the entire judicial system, but more
court almost always grants requests of such nature importantly, to the public.  Respondent’s failure
in consideration of the numerous difficulties faced “To be able to render substantial justice and must not be brushed aside.  We find the imposition
by judges in the timely disposition of maintain public confidence in the legal system, of suspension for six (6) months to be justified.
cases.45cralawlawlibrary judges should be embodiments of competence,
integrity and independence.”  Judges are also WHEREFORE, premises considered, Judge Job M.
“Under Section 8(9), Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, “expected to exhibit more than just a cursory Mangente, Presiding Judge of Branch 54 of the
gross ignorance of the law or procedure is a serious acquaintance with statutes and procedural rules Metropolitan Trial Court, Navotas City, is guilty of
charge[.]”46  However, the Office of the Court and to apply them properly in all good faith.”  gross ignorance of the law and is
Administrator gave due consideration of the fact Judges are “likewise expected to demonstrate hereby SUSPENDED FROM SERVICE FOR SIX
that it is respondent’s first administrative offense, mastery of the principles of law, keep abreast of (6) MONTHS, with a warning that a repetition
and that “he has expressed remorse and conveyed prevailing jurisprudence, and discharge their duties of the same or similar act shall be dealt with
his apology, promising to be more mindful of his in accordance therewith.” . . . more severely.
duties in the future, not to mention his court’s
heavy caseload of over one thousand (1,000) .... SO ORDERED.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
cases.”47  In view of these circumstances, the
Office of the Court Administrator recommended We have previously held that when a law or a rule
that:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary is basic, judges owe it to their office to simply
apply the law.  “Anything less is gross ignorance of
V. Financial Management/ Wellness for Lawyers
(1) the instant administrative complaint be RE- the law.”  There is gross ignorance of the law when
DOCKETED as a regular administrative matter an error committed by the judge was “gross or
against [respondent Judge Mangente]; and patent, deliberate or malicious.” It may also be EN BANC
committed when a judge ignores, contradicts or
(2) respondent Judge be FINED . . . FIVE fails to apply settled law and jurisprudence A.C. No. 8391               November 23, 2010
THOUSAND PESOS (P5,000.00) for gross ignorance because of bad faith, fraud, dishonesty or [Formerly CBD Case No. 06-1631]
of the law or procedure and undue delay in corruption.  Gross ignorance of the law or
rendering his orders, and STERNLY WARNED that incompetence cannot be excused by a claim of
MANUEL C. YUHICO, Complainant,
a commission of the same or similar acts shall be good faith.50  (Emphasis supplied, citations
vs.
dealt with more severely.48 (Emphasis in the omitted).
ATTY. FRED L. GUTIERREZ, Respondent.
original)
Respondent was careless in disposing the Motions DECISION
This court’s ruling filed by complainant, in a criminal case no less. 
The Office of the Court Administrator correctly
Respondent is guilty of gross ignorance of the law. underscores that his experience as a public PER CURIAM:
attorney and prosecutor should have ingrained in
We agree with the Office of the Court him well-settled doctrines and basic tenets of law.  Before us is a Complaint1 dated January 10, 2006
Administrator’s finding that the Complaint against He cannot be relieved from the consequences of for disciplinary action against respondent Atty.
respondent is meritorious.  Upon thorough his actions simply because he was newly appointed Fred L. Gutierrez (Gutierrez) filed by Manuel C.
evaluation of the parties’ respective arguments, and his case load was heavy.  These circumstances Yuhico (Yuhico) for violation of Rule 1.01 of the
the Office of the Court Administrator found that are not unique to him.  His careless disposition of Code of Professional Responsibility.
respondent should be held administratively liable the motions is a reflection of his competency as a
 119

The antecedent facts of the case are as follows: examination in the U.S. Medical Board. Gutierrez admitted that he accepted the loan due to
assured him that he will pay all his debts on or compelling circumstances. Gutierrez added that he
Complainant Yuhico alleged that he met Gutierrez before August 10, 2005. In his text message on July has no intention of evading his obligation to pay his
at the Office of the City Prosecutor in Pasig City on 12, 2005 at 3:05 p.m., Atty. Gutierrez said: debts, but he is currently in financial distress, thus,
May 4, 2005. Yuhico was there to testify at the he cannot pay his debts yet. He claimed he will pay
preliminary investigation of a Complaint for Estafa As you are aware of these past few days were his debts when his financial condition improves.
against one Jose S. Chicharro, who was then being really great trials 4 me. My mother died, my wife
represented by Gutierrez. He claimed that they got sick and now my bro in law died. These events On March 24, 2006, both parties were directed to
eventually became acquainted as they frequently led me to struggling finances. To get me going I appear at the mandatory conference before the
saw each other during the hearings of the case. tried to sel my car but my buyer backed out. Now IBP-CBD. Gutierrez failed to attend on two
my immediate problem is the amt of 70thousand occasions.
On June 24, 2005, Yuhico averred that Gutierrez which my daughter needs for her payment sa US
phoned him and asked for a cash loan of medical board. I dnt want her to miss this On June 9, 2006, the IBP-CBD directed both parties
₱30,000.00. Gutierrez then claimed that he needed opportunity. Can u help me again? I will pay all my to submit their respective position papers.
money to pay for the medical expenses of his debts on or b4 Aug.10 pls. Thanks.
mother who was seriously ill. Yuhico immediately Likewise, during the clarificatory hearing before the
handed the money. In turn, Gutierrez promised to However, this time, Yuhico refused to lend IBP-CBD, only the complainant's counsel attended.
pay the loan very soon, since he was expecting to Gutierrez any amount of money. Instead, he There was no appearance on the part of Gutierrez.
collect his attorney's fees from a Japanese client. demanded from Gutierrez the payment of his
debts. Gutierrez then sent another text message to
Yuhico on July 12, 2005 and requested him to give In his Position Paper, Yuhico manifested that the
On June 28, 2005, Gutierrez again asked Yuhico for Supreme Court, in Huyssen v. Atty. Gutierrez,6 had
a loan, this time in the amount of ₱60,000.00, him another week to pay his debts. Gutierrez failed
to make the payment. already disbarred Gutierrez from the practice of
allegedly to pay the medical expenses of his wife law for gross misconduct, in view of his failure to
who was also hospitalized. Again, Yuhico readily pay his debts and his issuance of worthless checks.
issued to Atty. Gutierrez an Equitable PCI Bank Yuhico repeatedly requested the payment of loans
check amounting to ₱60,000.00.2 Again, Gutierrez from Gutierrez from August to December 2005.
promised to pay his two loans totalling to Gutierrez, on the other hand, for numerous times Subsequently, in a Resolution dated December 11,
₱90,000.00 "within a short time." promised to pay, but always failed to do so. At one 2008, the, IBP-CBD found Gutierrez guilty of non-
point, Gutierrez even asked Yuhico's account payment of just debts and ordered him to return
number and promised to deposit his payment the amount of Ninety Thousand Pesos (₱90,000.00)
On July 12, 2005, Yuhico asked Gutierrez to pay his to Yuhico, with interest until full payment.
loans. Atty. Gutierrez failed to pay. In a text there, but he never deposited the payment.
message on July 12, 2005 at 2:47 p.m., Atty.
Gutierrez stated: On December 5, 2005, Yuhico's counsel sent a In view of the previous disbarment of Gutierrez, the
demand letter3 to Gutierrez to pay his debts, but to IBP-CBD recommended to the Court that, instead of
no avail. rendering the instant case moot, Gutierrez should
I really don't know how to say this as I don't want be disbarred anew effective upon the expiration of
to think that I may be taking advantage of our the sanction pursuant to the March 26, 2004
friendship. You see i've long expected as Thus, Yuhico filed the instant complaint against Supreme Court Decision. The IBP-CBD explained
substantial attorney's fees since last week from my Gutierrez before the Integrated Bar of the that while we do not have jurisprudence on the
client Ogami from japan. It's more or less more Philippines-Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP- issue of double or multiple disbarment, the
than 5m and its release is delayed due to tax and CBD). American jurisprudence, however, recognizes
the law on money laundering. From my estimate it double or multiple disbarments as well as the
wud be collected by me on or b4 august 5. N the On January 12, 2006, the IBP-CBD directed minimum requirement of five (5) years for
meantime I am quite in a financial difficulty as Gutierrez to submit his Answer on the complaint readmission to the Bar.
everyone is. against him.4
On December 11, 2008, the IBP Board of
Later, Yuhico alleged that Gutierrez attempted to In his Answer,5 Gutierrez claimed that Yuhico was Governors, in Resolution No. XVIII-2008-649,
borrow money from him again. He said Gutierrez the one who offered to lend him money in gratitude resolved to adopt the report and recommendation
claimed that his daughter needed ₱70,000.00 to for the assistance he extended to the latter when of the IBP-CBD and approve it with modification as
pay the fees required to take the licensure he was under threat by his clients. He, however,
 120

to the payment of the amount of Ninety Thousand We also note that in Huyssen v. Atty.
Pesos (₱90,000.00), this time, without interest. Gutierrez,8 the Court had already disbarred
Gutierrez from the practice of law for gross
We sustain the findings of the IBP, but with misconduct due to non-payment of just debts and
modification as to its recommendations. issuance of bouncing checks.

We have held that deliberate failure to pay just In view of the foregoing, while we agree with the
debts constitute gross misconduct, for which a findings of the IBP, we cannot, however, adopt its
lawyer may be sanctioned with suspension from recommendation to disbar Gutierrez for the second
the practice of law. Lawyers are instruments for the time, considering that Gutierrez had already been
administration of justice and vanguards of our legal previously disbarred. Indeed, as the IBP pointed
system. They are expected to maintain not only out, we do not have double or multiple disbarment
legal proficiency, but also a high standard of in our laws or jurisprudence. Neither do we have a
morality, honesty, integrity and fair dealing so that law mandating a minimum 5-year requirement for
the people’s faith and confidence in the judicial readmission, as cited by the IBP. Thus, while
system is ensured. They must, at all times, Gutierrez's infraction calls for the penalty of
faithfully perform their duties to society, to the bar, disbarment, we cannot disbar him anew.
the courts and to their clients, which include
prompt payment of financial obligations. They must WHEREFORE, Resolution No. XVIII-2008-649 dated
conduct themselves in a manner that reflects the December 11, 2008, of the IBP, which found FRED
values and norms of the legal profession as L. GUTIERREZ guilty of GROSS
embodied in the Code of Professional MISCONDUCT, is AFFIRMED. He is ORDERED to
Responsibility.7 PAY the amount of Ninety Thousand Pesos
(₱90,000.00) to the complainant immediately from
In the instant case, there is no question as to receipt of this decision with interest.
Gutierrez's guilt. His admission of the loan he
contracted and his failure to pay the same leaves Let a copy of this Decision be furnished and
no room for interpretation. Neither can he justify properly recorded in the Office of the Bar
his act of non-payment of debt by his dire financial Confidant, to be appended to the personal record
condition. Gutierrez should not have contracted of Gutierrez; the Integrated Bar of the Philippines;
loans which are beyond his financial capacity to and the Office of the Court Administrator, for
pay.1avvphi1 circulation to all courts in the country for their
information and guidance.
Likewise, we cannot overlook Gutierrez's
propensity of employing deceit and This Decision shall be immediately executory.
misrepresentations for the purpose of obtaining
debts without the intention of paying them. SO ORDERED
Records show Gutierrez's pattern of habitually
making promises of paying his debts, yet
repeatedly failing to deliver. The series of text
messages he sent to Yuhico promising to pay his
loans, while simultaneously giving excuses without
actually making good of his promises, is clearly
reprehensible. Undoubtedly, his acts demonstrate
lack of moral character to satisfy the
responsibilities and duties imposed on lawyers as
professionals and as officers of the court.