Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila SECOND DIVISION G.R. No. 100113 September 3, 1991 RENATO CAYETANO, petitioner, vs.

CHRISTIAN MONSOD, HON. JO ITO R. SA!ONGA, COMMISSION ON APPOINTMENT, "#$ HON. GUI!!ERMO CARAGUE, %# &%' ("p"(%t) "' Se(ret"r) o* +,$-et "#$ M"#"-eme#t, respondents. Renato L. Cayetano for and in his own behalf. Sabina E. Acut, Jr. and Mylene Garcia-Albano co-counsel for petitioner. PARAS, J.:p e are faced here !ith a controvers" of far#reachin$ proportions. hile ostensibl" onl" le$al issues are involved, the Court%s decision in this case !ould indubitabl" have a profound effect on the political aspect of our national e&istence. 'he ()*+ Constitution provides in Section ( ,(-, .rticle I/#C0 'here shall be a Co11ission on Elections co1posed of a Chair1an and si& Co11issioners !ho shall be natural#born citi2ens of the Philippines and, at the ti1e of their appoint1ent, at least thirt"#five "ears of a$e, holders of a colle$e de$ree, and 1ust not have been candidates for an" elective position in the i11ediatel" precedin$ #elections. 3o!ever, a 1a4orit" thereof, includin$ the Chair1an, shall be 1e1bers of the Philippine 5ar !ho have been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. ,E1phasis supplied'he afore6uoted provision is patterned after Section l,l-, .rticle /II#C of the ()+7 Constitution !hich si1ilarl" provides0 'here shall be an independent Co11ission on Elections co1posed of a Chair1an and ei$ht Co11issioners !ho shall be natural#born citi2ens of the Philippines and, at the ti1e of their appoint1ent, at least thirt"#five "ears of a$e and holders of a colle$e de$ree. 3o!ever, a 1a4orit" thereof, includin$ the Chair1an, shall be 1e1bers of the Philippine 5ar who ha e been en!a!ed in the practice of law for at least ten years.% ,E1phasis suppliedRe$rettabl", ho!ever, there see1s to be no 4urisprudence as to !hat constitutes practice of la! as a le$al 6ualification to an appointive office. 5lac8 defines 9practice of la!9 as0 'he rendition of services re6uirin$ the 8no!led$e and the application of le$al principles and techni6ue to serve the interest of another !ith his consent. It is not li1ited to appearin$ in court, or advisin$ and assistin$ in the conduct of liti$ation, but e1braces the preparation of pleadin$s, and other papers incident to actions and special proceedin$s, conve"ancin$, the preparation of le$al instru1ents of all 8inds, and the $ivin$ of all le$al advice to clients. It e1braces all advice to clients and all actions ta8en for the1 in 1atters connected !ith the la!. .n attorne" en$a$es in the practice of la! b" 1aintainin$ an office !here he is held out to be#an attorne", usin$ a letterhead describin$ hi1self as an attorne", counselin$ clients in le$al 1atters, ne$otiatin$ !ith opposin$ counsel about pendin$ liti$ation, and fi&in$ and collectin$ fees for services rendered b" his associate. ,"lac#$s Law %ictionary, 7rd ed.'he practice of la! is not li1ited to the conduct of cases in court. ,Land &itle Abstract and &rust Co. . %wor#en,(:) Ohio St. :7, ()7 N.E. ;<=- . person is also considered to be in the practice of la! !hen he0 ... for valuable consideration en$a$es in the business of advisin$ person, fir1s, associations or corporations as to their ri$hts under the la!, or appears in a

representative capacit" as an advocate in proceedin$s pendin$ or prospective, before an" court, co11issioner, referee, board, bod", co11ittee, or co11ission constituted b" la! or authori2ed to settle controversies and there, in such representative capacit" perfor1s an" act or acts for the purpose of obtainin$ or defendin$ the ri$hts of their clients under the la!. Other!ise stated, one !ho, in a representative capacit", en$a$es in the business of advisin$ clients as to their ri$hts under the la!, or !hile so en$a$ed perfor1s an" act or acts either in court or outside of court for that purpose, is en$a$ed in the practice of la!. ,State e'. rel. Mc#ittric# ..C.S. %udley and Co., (=: S. . :d *)<, 7>= Mo. *<:'his Court in the case of (hilippine Lawyers Association .A!ra a, ,(=< Phil. (+7,(+;#(++- stated0 &he practice of law is not li1ited to the conduct of cases or liti!ation in court? it e1braces the preparation of pleadin$s and other papers incident to actions and special proceedin$s, the 1ana$e1ent of such actions and proceedin$s on behalf of clients before 4ud$es and courts, and in addition, conve"in$. In $eneral, all ad ice to clients, and all action ta8en for the1 in 1attersconnected with the law incorporation services, assess1ent and conde1nation services conte1platin$ an appearance before a 4udicial bod", the foreclosure of a 1ort$a$e, enforce1ent of a creditor%s clai1 in ban8ruptc" and insolvenc" proceedin$s, and conductin$ proceedin$s in attach1ent, and in 1atters of estate and $uardianship have been held to constitute la! practice, as do the preparation and draftin$ of le$al instru1ents, where the wor# done in ol es the deter)ination by the trained le!al )ind of the le!al effect of facts and conditions. ,< .1. @r. p. :;:, :;7-. ,E1phasis supplied(ractice of law under 1ode1 conditions consists in no s1all part of !or8 perfor1ed outside of an" court and havin$ no i11ediate relation to proceedin$s in court. It e1braces conve"ancin$, the $ivin$ of le$al advice on a lar$e variet" of sub4ects, and the preparation and e&ecution of le$al instru1ents coverin$ an e&tensive field of business and trust relations and other affairs. Althou!h these transactions )ay ha e no direct connection with court proceedin!s, they are always sub*ect to beco)e in ol ed in liti!ation. 'he" re6uire in 1an" aspects a hi$h de$ree of le$al s8ill, a !ide e&perience !ith 1en and affairs, and $reat capacit" for adaptation to difficult and co1ple& situations. 'hese custo1ar" functions of an attorne" or counselor at la! bear an inti1ate relation to the ad1inistration of 4ustice b" the courts. No valid distinction, so far as concerns the 6uestion set forth in the order, can be dra!n bet!een that part of the !or8 of the la!"er !hich involves appearance in court and that part !hich involves advice and draftin$ of instru1ents in his office. It is of i1portance to the !elfare of the public that these 1anifold custo1ar" functions be perfor1ed b" persons possessed of ade6uate learnin$ and s8ill, of sound 1oral character, and actin$ at all ti1es under the heav" trust obli$ations to clients !hich rests upon all attorne"s. ,Moran, Co))ents on the Rules of Court, Vol. 7 A()<7 ed.B , p. ;;<#;;;, citin$ +n re ,pinion of the Justices AMass.B, ()> N.E. 7(7, 6uoted in Rhode +s. "ar Assoc. . Auto)obile Ser ice Assoc. AR.I.B (+) .. (7),(>>-. ,E1phasis ours'he Cniversit" of the Philippines Da! Center in conductin$ orientation briefin$ for ne! la!"ers ,()+>#()+<- listed the di1ensions of the practice of la! in even broader ter1s as advocac", counsellin$ and public service. One 1a" be a practicin$ attorne" in follo!in$ an" line of e1plo"1ent in the profession. If !hat he does e&acts 8no!led$e of the la! and is of a 8ind usual for attorne"s en$a$in$ in the active practice of their profession, and he follo!s so1e one or 1ore lines of e1plo"1ent such as this he is a practicin$ attorne" at la! !ithin the 1eanin$ of the statute. ,"arr . Cardell, (<< N 7(:Practice of la! 1eans an" activit", in or out of court, !hich re6uires the application of la!, le$al procedure, 8no!led$e, trainin$ and e&perience. 9'o en$a$e in the practice of la! is to perfor1 those

acts !hich are characteristics of the profession. Eenerall", to practice la! is to $ive notice or render an" 8ind of service, !hich device or service re6uires the use in an" de$ree of le$al 8no!led$e or s8ill.9 ,((( .DR :7'he follo!in$ records of the ()*; Constitutional Co11ission sho! that it has adopted a liberal interpretation of the ter1 9practice of la!.9 MR. FOG. 5efore !e suspend the session, 1a" I 1a8e a 1anifestation !hich I for$ot to do durin$ our revie! of the provisions on the Co11ission on .udit. Ma" I be allo!ed to 1a8e a ver" brief state1entH '3E PRESIDINE OFFICER ,Mr. @a1ir-. 'he Co11issioner !ill please proceed. MR. FOG. &his has to do with the -ualifications of the )e)bers of the Co))ission on Audit. A)on! others, the -ualifications pro ided for by Section + is that .&hey )ust be Me)bers of the (hilippine "ar. / + a) -uotin! fro) the pro ision / .who ha e been en!a!ed in the practice of law for at least ten years.. 'o avoid an" 1isunderstandin$ !hich !ould result in e&cludin$ 1e1bers of the 5ar !ho are no! e1plo"ed in the CO. or Co11ission on .udit, we would li#e to )a#e the clarification that this pro ision on -ualifications re!ardin! )e)bers of the "ar does not necessarily refer or in ol e actual practice of law outside the C,A 0e ha e to interpret this to )ean that as lon! as the lawyers who are e)ployed in the C,A are usin! their le!al #nowled!e or le!al talent in their respecti e wor# within C,A, then they are -ualified to be considered for appoint)ent as )e)bers or co))issioners, e en chair)an, of the Co))ission on Audit . 'his has been discussed b" the Co11ittee on Constitutional Co11issions and .$encies and !e dee1 it i1portant to ta8e it up on the floor so that this interpretation 1a" be 1ade available !henever this provision on the 6ualifications as re$ards 1e1bers of the Philippine 5ar en$a$in$ in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears is ta8en up. MR. OPDE. ill Co11issioner Fo2 "ield to 4ust one 6uestion. MR. FOG. Ies, Mr. Presidin$ Officer. MR. OPDE. +s he, in effect, sayin! that ser ice in the C,A by a lawyer is e-ui alent to the re-uire)ent of a law practice that is set forth in the Article on the Co))ission on Audit1 MR. FOG. 0e )ust consider the fact that the wor# of C,A, althou!h it is auditin!, will necessarily in ol e le!al wor#2 it will in ol e le!al wor#. And, therefore, lawyers who are e)ployed in C,A now would ha e the necessary -ualifications in accordance with the (ro ision on -ualifications under our pro isions on the Co))ission on Audit. And, therefore, the answer is yes. MR. OPDE. Ies. So that the construction $iven to this is that this is e6uivalent to the practice of la!. MR. FOG. 3es, Mr. (residin! ,fficer. MR. OPDE. &han# you. ... , E1phasis suppliedSection (,(-, .rticle I/#D of the ()*+ Constitution, provides, a1on$ others, that the Chair1an and t!o Co11issioners of the Co11ission on .udit ,CO.- should either be certified public accountants !ith not less than ten "ears of auditin$ practice, or 1e1bers of the Philippine 5ar !ho have been en$a$ed in the practice of law for at least ten "ears. ,e1phasis suppliedCorollar" to this is the ter1 9private practitioner9 and !hich is in 1an" !a"s s"non"1ous !ith the !ord 9la!"er.9 'oda", althou$h 1an" la!"ers do not en$a$e in private practice, it is still a fact that

the 1a4orit" of la!"ers are private practitioners. ,Ear" Munne8e, ,pportunities in Law Careers AVEM Career 3ori2ons0 IllinoisB, A()*;B, p. (<-. .t this point, it 1i$ht be helpful to define pri ate practice. 'he ter1, as co11onl" understood, 1eans 9an individual or or$ani2ation en$a$ed in the business of deliverin$ le$al services.9 , +bid.-. Da!"ers !ho practice alone are often called 9sole practitioners.9 Eroups of la!"ers are called 9fir1s.9 'he fir1 is usuall" a partnership and 1e1bers of the fir1 are the partners. So1e fir1s 1a" be or$ani2ed as professional corporations and the 1e1bers called shareholders. In either case, the 1e1bers of the fir1 are the e&perienced attorne"s. In 1ost fir1s, there are "oun$er or 1ore ine&perienced salaried attorne"scalled 9associates.9 ,+bid.-. 'he test that defines la! practice b" loo8in$ to traditional areas of la! practice is essentiall" tautolo$ous, unhelpful definin$ the practice of la! as that !hich la!"ers do. ,Charles . olfra1, Modern Le!al Ethics A est Publishin$ Co.0 Minnesota, ()*;B, p. <)7-. 'he practice of la! is defined as the perfor1ance of an" acts . . . in or out of court, co11onl" understood to be the practice of la!. ,State "ar Ass$n . Connecticut "an# 4 &rust Co., (>< Conn. :::, (>= ..:d *;7, *+= A()<*B A6uotin$ Grie ance Co)). . (ayne, (:* Conn. 7:<, :: ..:d ;:7, ;:; A()>(B-. 5ecause la!"ers perfor1 al1ost ever" function 8no!n in the co11ercial and $overn1ental real1, such a definition !ould obviousl" be too $lobal to be !or8able., olfra1, op. cit.-. 'he appearance of a la!"er in liti$ation in behalf of a client is at once the 1ost publicl" fa1iliar role for la!"ers as !ell as an unco11on role for the avera$e la!"er. Most la!"ers spend little ti1e in courtroo1s, and a lar$e percenta$e spend their entire practice !ithout liti$atin$ a case. , +bid., p. <)7-. Nonetheless, 1an" la!"ers do continue to liti$ate and the liti$atin$ la!"er%s role colors 1uch of both the public i1a$e and the self perception of the le$al profession. , +bid.-. In this re$ard thus, the do1inance of liti$ation in the public 1ind reflects histor", not realit". , +bid.-. h" is this soH Recall that the late .le&ander S"Cip, a corporate la!"er, once articulated on the i1portance of a la!"er as a business counselor in this !ise0 9Even toda", there are still uninfor1ed la"1en !hose concept of an attorne" is one !ho principall" tries cases before the courts. 'he 1e1bers of the bench and bar and the infor1ed la"1en such as business1en, 8no! that in 1ost developed societies toda", substantiall" 1ore le$al !or8 is transacted in la! offices than in the courtroo1s. Eeneral practitioners of la! !ho do both liti$ation and non#liti$ation !or8 also 8no! that in 1ost cases the" find the1selves spendin$ 1ore ti1e doin$ !hat AisB loosel" desccribeAdB as business counselin$ than in tr"in$ cases. 'he business la!"er has been described as the planner, the dia$nostician and the trial la!"er, the sur$eon. IAtB need not AbeB stressAedB that in la!, as in 1edicine, sur$er" should be avoided !here internal 1edicine can be effective.9 , "usiness Star, 9Corporate Finance Da!,9 @an. ((, ()*), p. >-. In the course of a !or8in$ da" the avera$e $eneral practitioner !i$ en$a$e in a nu1ber of le$al tas8s, each involvin$ different le$al doctrines, le$al s8ills, le$al processes, le$al institutions, clients, and other interested parties. Even the increasin$ nu1bers of la!"ers in speciali2ed practice !i$ usuall" perfor1 at least so1e le$al services outside their specialt". .nd even !ithin a narro! specialt" such as ta& practice, a la!"er !ill shift fro1 one le$al tas8 or role such as advice#$ivin$ to an i1portantl" different one such as representin$ a client before an ad1inistrative a$enc". , olfra1, supra, p. ;*+-. 5" no 1eans !ill 1ost of this !or8 involve liti$ation, unless the la!"er is one of the relativel" rare t"pes J a liti$ator !ho speciali2es in this !or8 to the e&clusion of 1uch else. Instead, the !or8 !ill re6uire the la!"er to have 1astered the full ran$e of traditional la!"er s8ills of client counsellin$, advice#$ivin$, docu1ent draftin$, and ne$otiation. .nd increasin$l" la!"ers find that the ne! s8ills of evaluation and 1ediation are both effective for 1an" clients and a source of e1plo"1ent. , +bid.-. Most la!"ers !ill en$a$e in non#liti$ation le$al !or8 or in liti$ation !or8 that is constrained in ver" i1portant !a"s, at least theoreticall", so as to re1ove fro1 it so1e of the salient features of adversarial liti$ation. Of these special roles, the 1ost pro1inent is that of prosecutor. In so1e la!"ers% !or8 the constraints are i1posed both b" the nature of the client and b" the !a" in !hich the la!"er is or$ani2ed into a social unit to perfor1 that !or8. 'he 1ost co11on of these roles are those of corporate practice and $overn1ent le$al service. ,+bid.-.

In several issues of the "usiness Star, a business dail", herein belo! 6uoted are e1er$in$ trends in corporate la! practice, a departure fro1 the traditional concept of practice of la!. e are e&periencin$ toda" !hat trul" 1a" be called a revolutionar" transfor1ation in corporate la! practice. Da!"ers and other professional $roups, in particular those 1e1bers participatin$ in various le$al#polic" decisional conte&ts, are findin$ that understandin$ the 1a4or e1er$in$ trends in corporation la! is indispensable to intelli$ent decision#1a8in$. Constructive ad4ust1ent to 1a4or corporate proble1s of toda" re6uires an accurate understandin$ of the nature and i1plications of the corporate la! research function acco1panied b" an acceleratin$ rate of infor1ation accu1ulation. 'he reco$nition of the need for such i1proved corporate le$al polic" for1ulation, particularl" 91odel# 1a8in$9 and 9contin$enc" plannin$,9 has i1pressed upon us the inade6uac" of traditional procedures in 1an" decisional conte&ts. In a co1ple& le$al proble1 the 1ass of infor1ation to be processed, the sortin$ and !ei$hin$ of si$nificant conditional factors, the appraisal of 1a4or trends, the necessit" of esti1atin$ the conse6uences of $iven courses of action, and the need for fast decision and response in situations of acute dan$er have pro1pted the use of sophisticated concepts of infor1ation flo! theor", operational anal"sis, auto1atic data processin$, and electronic co1putin$ e6uip1ent. Cnderstandabl", an i1proved decisional structure 1ust stress the predictive co1ponent of the polic"#1a8in$ process, !herein a 91odel9, of the decisional conte&t or a se$1ent thereof is developed to test pro4ected alternative courses of action in ter1s of futuristic effects flo!in$ therefro1. .lthou$h 1e1bers of the le$al profession are re$ularl" en$a$ed in predictin$ and pro4ectin$ the trends of the la!, the sub4ect of corporate finance la! has received relativel" little or$ani2ed and for1ali2ed attention in the philosoph" of advancin$ corporate le$al education. Nonetheless, a cross#disciplinar" approach to le$al research has beco1e a vital necessit". Certainl", the $eneral orientation for productive contributions b" those trained pri1aril" in the la! can be i1proved throu$h an earl" introduction to 1ulti#variable decisional conte&t and the various approaches for handlin$ such proble1s. Da!"ers, particularl" !ith either a 1aster%s or doctorate de$ree in business ad1inistration or 1ana$e1ent, functionin$ at the le$al polic" level of decision#1a8in$ no! have so1e appreciation for the concepts and anal"tical techni6ues of other professions !hich are currentl" en$a$ed in si1ilar t"pes of co1ple& decision#1a8in$. 'ruth to tell, 1an" situations involvin$ corporate finance proble1s !ould re6uire the services of an astute attorne" because of the co1ple& le$al i1plications that arise fro1 each and ever" necessar" step in securin$ and 1aintainin$ the business issue raised. ,"usiness Star, 9Corporate Finance Da!,9 @an. ((, ()*), p. >-. In our liti$ation#prone countr", a corporate la!"er is assiduousl" referred to as the 9abo$ado de ca1panilla.9 3e is the 9bi$#ti1e9 la!"er, earnin$ bi$ 1one" and !ith a clientele co1posed of the t"coons and 1a$nates of business and industr". Despite the $ro!in$ nu1ber of corporate la!"ers, 1an" people could not e&plain !hat it is that a corporate la!"er does. For one, the nu1ber of attorne"s e1plo"ed b" a sin$le corporation !ill var" !ith the si2e and t"pe of the corporation. Man" s1aller and so1e lar$e corporations far1 out all their le$al proble1s to private la! fir1s. Man" others have in#house counsel onl" for certain 1atters. Other corporation have a staff lar$e enou$h to handle 1ost le$al proble1s in#house. . corporate la!"er, for all intents and purposes, is a la!"er !ho handles the le$al affairs of a corporation. 3is areas of concern or 4urisdiction 1a" include, inter alia0 corporate le$al research, ta& la!s research, actin$ out as corporate secretar" ,in board 1eetin$s-, appearances in both courts and other ad4udicator" a$encies

E1phasis supplied. . includin$ the resultin$ strate$ic repositionin$ that the fir1s he provides counsel for are re6uired to 1a8e. In 1ost cases. a corporate la!"er is so1eti1es offered this fortune to be 1ore closel" involved in the runnin$ of the business.9 so to spea8. 'he salience of the nation#state is bein$ reduced as fir1s deal both !ith $lobal 1ultinational entities and si1ultaneousl" !ith sub#national $overn1ental units. Such corporate le$al 1ana$e1ent issues deal pri1aril" !ith three . a corporate la!"er%s services 1a" so1eti1es be en$a$ed b" a 1ultinational corporation . the corporate la!"er revie!s the $lobali2ation process. 'his can be frustratin$ to so1eone !ho needs to see the results of his !or8 first hand.a devotion to the or$ani2ation and 1ana$e1ent of the le$al function itself. and in other capacities !hich re6uire an abilit" to deal !ith the la!. . or not understandin$ ho! one%s !or8 actuall" fits into the !or8 of the or$arni2ation. bad la!"er is one !ho fails to spot proble1s. 'hese three sub4ect areas 1a" be thou$ht of as intersectin$ circles. tills is an area coveted b" corporate la!"ers.(. For that 1atter.ac6uisition of insi$hts into current advances !hich are of particular si$nificance to the corporate counsel? . . ho!ever. !ith a shared area lin8in$ the1. to !it0 9. 'oda". >-. 'his brin$s us to the inevitable.9 . ((. one 1a" have a feelin$ of bein$ isolated fro1 the action. 'hese trends are co1plicated as corporations or$ani2e for $lobal operations.())=. .includin$ the Securities and E&chan$e Co11ission-. In short. p.. a corporate la!"er 1a" assu1e responsibilities other than the le$al affairs of the business of the corporation he is representin$. p."usiness Star. the overseas 4obs $o to e&perienced attorne"s !hile the "oun$er attorne"s do their 9international practice9 in la! libraries.In a bi$ co1pan".9 @an. Often these ne! patterns develop alon$side e&istin$ le$al institutions and la!s are perceived as barriers.9 Ma" :<. No lon$er are !e tal8in$ of the traditional la! teachin$ 1ethod of confinin$ the sub4ect stud" to the Corporation Code and the Securities Code but an incursion as !ell into the intert!inin$ 1odern 1ana$e1ent issues. Fir1s increasin$l" collaborate not onl" !ith public entities but !ith each other J often !ith those !ho are co1petitors in other arenas."usiness Star. 'o borro! the lines of 3arvard#educated la!"er 5ruce assertein. Other!ise 8no!n as 9intersectin$ 1ana$erial 4urisprudence. Moreover. 9Corporate Da! Practice. 5ecause !or8in$ in a forei$n countr" is perceived b" 1an" as $la1orous. and the e&cellent la!"er is one !ho sur1ounts the1. E1phasis supplied- .MNC-. 9Corporate Finance Da!. . the nature of the lawyer$s participation in decision-)a#in! within the corporation is rapidly chan!in!.7. i.t"pes of learnin$0 . So1e lar$e MNCs provide one of the fe! opportunities available to corporate la!"ers to enter the international la! field. ()*). >-. &he )ode) corporate lawyer has !ained a new role as a sta#eholder / in so)e cases participatin! in the or!ani5ation and operations of !o ernance throu!h participation on boards and other decision-)a#in! roles .9 it for1s a unif"in$ the1e for the corporate counsel%s total learnin$. the role of the la!"er in the real1 of finance. for e&a1ple. &hese include such )atters as deter)inin! policy and beco)in! in ol ed in )ana!e)ent ..t an" rate.fter all.7. a $ood la!"er is one !ho perceives the difficulties. international la! is practiced in a relativel" s1all nu1ber of co1panies and la! fir1s. the stud" of corporate la! practice direl" needs a 9shot in the ar1. Also.:.e. So1e current advances in behavior and polic" sciences affect the counsel%s role. and the need to thin8 about a corporation%s? strate$" at 1ultiple levels.an introduction to usable disciplinar" s8ins applicable to a corporate counsel%s 1ana$e1ent responsibilities? and .

&he practisin! lawyer of today is fa)iliar as well with !o ern)ental policies toward the pro)otion and )ana!e)ent of technolo!y. the le!al )ana!erial capabilities of the corporate lawyer is-a. . 'he" differ fro1 those of re1edial la!. Eure#a and Race are e&a1ples of collaborative efforts bet!een $overn1ental and business @apan%s M+&+ is !orld fa1ous. inventor" levels. includin$ hands#on on instruction in these techni6ues. aid in ne!otiation settle)ent. 6ew collaborati e arran!e)ents for pro)otin! specific technolo!ies or co)petiti eness )ore !enerally re-uire approaches fro) industry that differ fro) older. Current research is see8in$ !a"s both to anticipate effective 1ana$erial procedures and to understand relationships of financial liabilit" and insurance considerations. Effectiveness of both lon$#ter1 and te1porar" $roups !ithin or$ani2ations has been found to be related to indentifiable factors in the $roup# conte&t interaction such as the $roups activel" revisin$ their 8no!led$e of the environ1ent coordinatin$ !or8 !ith outsiders.is the )ana!erial )ettle of corporations are challen!ed. . . . Mana!erial Jurisprudence. 'his is the fra1e!or8 !ithin !hich are underta8en those activities of the fir1 to !hich le$al conse6uences attach. 'he field of s"ste1s d"na1ics has been found an effective tool for ne! 1ana$erial thin8in$ re$ardin$ both plannin$ and pressin$ i11ediate proble1s.ll inte$rated set of such tools provide coherent and effective ne$otiation support.nd there are lessons to be learned fro1 other countries.E1phasis suppliedFollo!in$ the concept of boundar" spannin$. 'he practice and theor" of 9la!9 is not ade6uate toda" to facilitate the relationships needed in tr"in$ to 1a8e a $lobal econo1" !or8. A5e this as it 1a". Esprit. and )ini)i5e the cost and ris# in ol ed in )ana!in! a portfolio of cases .n understandin$ of the role of feedbac8 loops. and rates of flo!.E1phasis suppliedRe$ardin$ the s8ills to appl" b" the corporate counsel. +n the conte't of a law depart)ent. Preventive la!"erin$ is concerned !ith 1ini1i2in$ the ris8s of le$al trouble and 1a&i1i2in$ le$al ri$hts for such le$al entities at that ti1e !hen transactional or si1ilar facts are bein$ considered and 1ade. Co1puter#based 1odels can be used directl" b" parties and 1ediators in all lands of ne$otiations. thus0 (re enti e Lawyerin!. and ps"cholo$ical. In Europe. 1ana$erial. It needs to be directl" supportive of this nation%s evolvin$ econo1ic and or$ani2ational fabric as fir1s chan$e to sta" co1petitive in a $lobal. pro1otin$ tea1 achieve1ents !ithin the or$ani2ation. econo1ic.E1phasis supplied&hird Modelin! for 6e!otiation Mana!e)ent. such e&ternal activities are better predictors of tea1 perfor1ance than internal $roup processes. +n a crisis situation. concern three pointed areas of consideration.E1phasis suppliedSecond %ecision Analysis. the office of the Corporate Counsel co1prises a distinct $roup !ithin the 1ana$erial structure of all 8inds of or$ani2ations. . si1ulation case of an international 4oint venture 1a" be used to illustrate the point. social. Plannin$ b" la!"ers re6uires special s8ills that co1prise a 1a4or part of the $eneral counsel%s responsibilities. it can be used to appraise the settle)ent alue of liti!ation. 'he $eneral counsel has e1er$ed in the last decade as one of the 1ost vibrant subsets of the le$al . )ore ad ersarial relationships and traditional for)s of see#in! to influence !o ern)ental policies . enable users to si1ulate all sorts of s"ste1atic proble1s J ph"sical.ffice. . .B the or$ani2ation and 1ana$e1ent of the le$al function. 6ew pro!ra))in! techni-ues now )a#e the syste) dyna)ics principles )ore accessible to )ana!ers / includin! corporate counsels. three factors are apropos0 7irst Syste) %yna)ics.r!ani5ation and 7unctionin! of the Corporate Counsel$s . interdependent environ1ent. . In $eneral. . &his enables users to )a#e better decisions in ol in! co)ple'ity and uncertainty.

On @une <. has wor#ed with the under pri ile!ed sectors. . also $ain a !or8in$ 8no!led$e of the 1ana$e1ent issues if onl" to be able to $rasp not onl" the basic le$al 9constitution% or 1a8eup of the 1ode1 corporation. Monsod$s wor# in ol ed bein! #nowled!eable in election law. Respondent Christian Monsod !as no1inated b" President Cora2on C. in initiatin!. Iet.is to have 1ore than a passin$ 8no!led$e of financial la! affectin$ each aspect of their !or8. he too8 his oath of office. Christian Monsod is a 1e1ber of the Philippine 5ar. such as the far)er and urban poor !roups.tt". creatin$ ne! and varied interactions !ith public decision#1a8ers. which conducted nu)erous hearin!s ?9::<@ and as a )e)ber of the Constitutional Co))ission ?9:=>-9:=.and havin$ hurdled the bar. hat transpires ne&t is a dile11a of professional securit"0 ill the la!"er ad1it i$norance and ris8 opprobriu1H? or !ill he fei$n understandin$ and ris8 e&posureH . >-. he assu1ed office as Chair1an of the COMEDEC. Ae appeared for 6AM7REL in its accreditation hearin!s before the Co)elec. he wor#ed with the Meralco Group. and Chair)an of its Co))ittee on Accountability of (ublic .C. As for)er Secretary-General ?9:=>@ and 6ational Chair)an ?9:=.pril :<.9 @an. ()*). 1ana$in$ e&panded liabilit" e&posure. filed the instant petition for certiorari and Prohibition pra"in$ that said confir1ation and the conse6uent appoint1ent of Monsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections be declared null and void.@.pril (=. p. a -uast *udicial body. On the sa1e da". ((. 8pon returnin! to the (hilippines in 9:.p. 3e has also been pa"in$ his professional license fees as la!"er for 1ore than ten "ears. at the ver" least. +n the field of ad ocacy. in his personal capacity and as for)er Co-Chair)an of the "ishops "usiness)en$s Conference for Au)an %e elop)ent. ser ed as chief e'ecuti e officer of an in est)ent ban# and subse-uently of a business con!lo)erate. 3e has been a dues pa"in$ 1e1ber of the Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines since its inception in ()+:#+7. . ())(.fter $raduatin$ fro1 the Colle$e of Da! . ())(."usiness Star. 'he challen$e for la!"ers . . 9Corporate Finance la!. lobbyin! for and en!a!in! in affir)ati e action for the a!rarian refor) law and lately the urban land refor) bill. Durin$ his stint in the orld 5an8 Eroup . 1ana$in$ i1proved relationships !ith an increasin$l" diversified bod" of e1plo"ees.fficers. has rendered ser ices to arious co)panies as a le!al and econo)ic consultant or chief e'ecuti e officer. (:>.nd even if the corporate la!"er%s ai1 is not the understand all of the la!%s effects on corporate activities.both of the bar and the bench. On @une (*. Petitioner opposed the no1ination because alle$edl" Monsod does not possess the re6uired 6ualification of havin$ been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. p.ppoint1ents confir1ed the no1ination of Monsod as Chair1an of the COMEDEC.<. ())(. he 1ust. Monsod wor#ed as an operations officer for about two years in Costa Rica and (ana)a. Atty.#<<K.(). for which he was cited by the (resident of the Co))ission.7#()+=-. 'he corporate counsel hear responsibilit" for 8e" aspects of the fir1%s strate$ic issues. ())(. Monsod. Monsod also )ade use of his le!al #nowled!e as a )e)ber of the %a ide Co))ission. copin$ internall" !ith 1ore co1ple& 1a8e or b" decisions. Monsod wor#ed in the law office of his father. includin$ structurin$ its $lobal operations. Justice Cecilia MuBo5-(al)a for . >-.ppoint1ents of Monsod%s no1ination. and pro*ect wor# of the "an#. which in ol ed !ettin! ac-uainted with the laws of )e)ber-countries ne!otiatin! loans and coordinatin! le!al.P. .profession.ppoint1ents on ..innu)erable a)end)ents to . 9'he Corporate Counsel. and since 9:=>. petitioner as a citi2en and ta&pa"er. 1an" !ould ad1it to i$norance of vast tracts of the financial la! territor". 'his !hole e&ercise drives ho1e the thesis that 8no!in$ corporate la! is not enou$h to 1a8e one a $ood $eneral corporate counsel nor to $ive hi1 a full sense of ho! the le$al s"ste1 shapes corporate activities. the Co11ission on . havin$ passed the bar e&a1inations of (). 9"usiness Star9.@ of 6AM7REL.6uino to the position of Chair1an of the COMEDEC in a letter received b" the Secretariat of the Co11ission on .9 . econo)ic. Challen$in$ the validit" of the confir1ation b" the Co11ission on .= !ith a $rade of *. Rollo.

9 Staff Paper No.7. for instance. and an operations officer . +nterpreted in the li!ht of the arious definitions of the ter) (ractice of law. but 1ust also state the recourse open to either part" !hen the other fails to dischar$e an obli$ation.covenants? and .S. re$ional le$al adviser of the Cnited States . durin$ the Session on Da! for the Develop1ent of Nations at the . .conditions of closin$? . ((-.fter a fashion. Atty.. Michael 3a$er. the loan a$ree1ent is li8e a countr"%s Constitution? it la"s do!n the la! as far as the loan transaction is concerned. Eraduate School of Da!. . in le!islation and a!ree)ent draftin! and in rene!otiation. an unpublished dissertation.9 sub1itted b" D.See Ricardo @. and !hich is ade6uatel" constituted to 1eet the various contin$encies that arise durin$ a ne$otiation. a lawyer-ne!otiator of contracts. the 1eat of an" Doan .+bid. the" score national develop1ent policies as 8e" factors in 1aintainin$ their countries% soverei$nt". Manila. For a co1pleat debt restructurin$ represents a devotion to that principle !hich in the ulti1ate anal"sis is sine -ua non for forei$n loan a$ree1ents#an adherence to the rule of la! in do1estic and international affairs of !hose 8ind C.See +nternational Law Aspects of the (hilippine E'ternal %ebts. and ta#in! into consideration the liberal construction intended by the fra)ers of the Constitution. In a loan a$ree1ent.!ho co1prise the 1e1bers of the tea1. ()*+. . 7:(-.(. a lawyer-entrepreneur of industry. @r. critical aspect of soverei$n debt restructurin$Lcontract construction is the set of ter1s and conditions !hich deter1ines the contractual re1edies for a failure to perfor1 one or 1ore ele1ents of the contract. 9C=-9C: Rollo@ ? E)phasis supplied@ @ust a !ord about the wor# of a ne!otiatin! tea) of !hich . perhaps e en )ore so than purely rene!otiation policies. . de)and e'pertise in the law of contracts..S.>. the" beat no dru1s? but !here the" are.<-.borro!er%s representation? . the finance 1ana$er. :. sponsored b" the orld Peace 'hrou$h Da! Center on .reconcile !o ern)ent functions with indi idual freedo)s and public accountability and the party-list syste) for the Aouse of Representati e. a lawyer)ana!er. C.u$ust :.tt".funda1ental parts0 . Supre1e Court @ustice Oliver endell 3ol1es. (<.<. ()++. Nos. a ne$otiatin$ panel acts as a tea1. Debt restructurin$ contract a$ree1ents contain such a 1i&ture of technical lan$ua$e that the" should be carefull" drafted and si$ned onl" !ith the advise of co1petent counsel in con4unction !ith the $uidance of ade6uate technical support personnel.such as the le$al counsel-.:.$enc" for International Develop1ent. 5esides top officials of the 5orro!er concerned. Central 5an8 of the Philippines. . 9Doan Ne$otiatin$ Strate$ies for Developin$ Countr" 5orro!ers. In the sa1e vein. Ro1ulo. p. 'hird and Fourth Muarters. lawyers play an i)portant role in any debt restructurin! pro!ra) . Soliven.Condensed fro1 the !or8 paper. Monsod$s past wor# e'periences as a lawyer-econo)ist. 'hus. particularly the )odern concept of law practice. Monsod used to be a 1e1ber. Necessaril".9 Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippine @ournal. :. entitled 9 anted0 Develop1ent Da!"ers for Developin$ Nations.9 .such as an official in ol ed in ne!otiatin! the contracts. p. .bid4an orld Conference in Ivor" Coast. $ood a$ree1ent 1ust not onl" define the responsibilities of both parties. once said0 9'he" carr" no banners. . ()+7-. 1en learn that bustle and bush are not the e6ual of 6uiet $enius and serene 1aster".'.Euiller1o V. For aside fro1 perfor1in$ the tas8s of le$islative draftin$ and le$al advisin$. and a lawyer-le!islator .<events of default. 7 and >. Vol. ?pp. p. (7-. 9'he Role of Da!"ers in Forei$n Invest1ents.E1phasis supplied. E1phasis supplied. there are the le$al officer . a soverei$n la!"er 1a" !or8 !ith an international business specialist or an econo1ist in the for1ulation of a 1odel loan a$ree1ent. . E1phasis suppliedLoan concessions and co)pro)ises. p.business ter1s? .$ree1ent can be co1part1entali2ed into five . ()*:.#7(.

.of both the rich and the poor / erily )ore than satisfy the constitutional re-uire)ent / that he has been en!a!ed in the practice of law for at least ten years . .!here it stated0 It is !ell#settled that !hen the appointee is 6ualified.9 'rue I cited the definition but onl" b" !a" of sarcas1 as evident fro1 1" state1ent that the definition of la! practice b" 9traditional areas of la! practice is essentiall" tautolo!ous9 or definin$ a phrase b" 1eans of the phrase itself that is bein$ defined.:. oath#ta8in$. sub*ect to the only condition that the appointee should possess the -ualifications re-uired by law.confir1ation b" the Co11ission on . (+( SCR. Cpon the other hand. No. p. the Co11ission has no alternative but to attest to the appoint1ent in accordance !ith the Civil Service Da!. consists of four . Da! on Public Officers.sta$es0 . 'o do so !ould be an encroach)ent on the discretion ested upon the appointin! authority.>. (>7 SCR. are actuall" . as in this case. Of those first appointed.Lacson . :=='he po!er of the Co11ission on . Clearl". . ()>)? Eon2ales. .. Ci il Ser ice Co))ission.acceptance e. postin$ of bond.rticle C.Central "an# . I 1ade use of a definition of la! practice !hich reall" 1eans nothin$ because the definition sa"s that la! practice 9 . . suffice it to sa" that his definition of the practice of la! is the traditional or stereot"ped notion of la! practice.e1phasis suppliedNo less e1phatic !as the Court in the case of . D#7=*(.Sub#. In no case shall an" Me1ber be appointed or desi$nated in a te1porar" or actin$ capacit". perhaps practised t!o or three ti1es a !ee8 and would outlaw sa". E1phasis supplied'he appointin$ process in a re$ular appoint1ent as in the case at bar. . 7:+.$. .(no1ination? . If he does.7.>. in 1a8in$ use of the la!. and all the other le$al re6uire1ents are satisfied. . the separate opinion of @ustice Isa$ani Cru2 states that in 1" !ritten opinion. upon sub1ission b" the Co11ission on .:. !hich 1odern connotation is e'actly what was intended by the e)inent fra)ers of the 9:=. It also has no authorit" to direct the appoint1ent of a substitute of its choice. as distin$uished fro1 the )odern concept of the practice of law. Ci il Ser ice Co))ission. this is far fro1 the constitutional intent. Ro)ero.nent @ustice 'eodoro Padilla%s separate opinion.ppoint1ents of its certificate of confir1ation. !ithout reappoint1ent. three Me1bers shall hold office for seven "ears. the President issues the per1anent appoint1ent? and . t!o Me1bers for five "ears. the Court said0 Appoint)ent is an essentially discretionary power and 1ust be perfor1ed b" the officer in !hich it is vested accordin$ to his best li$hts. . is !hat people ordinaril" 1ean b" the practice of la!.issuance of a co11ission . or in advisin$ others on !hat the la! 1eans. 1ost individuals. . @ustice Cru2 $oes on to sa" in substance that since the la! covers al1ost all situations. Moreover. Constitution. la! practice once or t!ice a "ear for ten consecutive "ears.ppoint1ents? . @ustice Padilla%s definition !ould re6uire $enerall" a habitual la! practice. the onl" condition bein$ that the appointee should possess the 6ualifications re6uired b" la!. An appoint)ent is essentially within the discretionary power of who)soe er it is ested. then the appoint1ent cannot be faulted on the $round that there are others better 6ualified !ho should have been preferred.ppoint1ents to $ive its consent to the no1ination of Monsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections is 1andated b" Section (. +>>. 5esides in the leadin$ case of Lue!o . 'he Co11ission has no authorit" to revo8e an appoint1ent on the $round that another person is 1ore 6ualified for a particular position.rticle I/ of the Constitution !hich provides0 'he Chair1an and the Co11isioners shall be appointed b" the President !ith the consent of the Co11ission on . &his is a political -uestion in ol in! considerations of wisdo) which only the appointin! authority can decide.ppoint1ent to an" vacanc" shall be onl" for the une&pired ter1 of the predecessor.ppoint1ents for a ter1 of seven "ears !ithout reappoint1ent. October (>. . and the last Me1bers for three "ears. etc.in the Philippines.

7. J. Finall". Delilah !as beside herself !ith an$er.J. 7eliciano. and %a ide. without first beco)in! lawyers. Senate. 'his blinded the 1an.J. Jr.S.nd even assu1in$ that he is indeed dis6ualified. 1a" the Supre1e Court reverse the Co11ission. but !e should not lose si$ht of the fact that Mr. there is no occasion for the e&ercise of the Court%s corrective po!er. 7ernan. !ho1 the Co11ission has confir)edH 'he ans!er is li8e!ise clear. accused the procurator of rene$in$ on his !ord.. but b" the spirit that $iveth life. 'hus. and fu1in$ !ith ri$hteous fur". 'his is different fro1 the acts of persons practisin$ la!.practicin$ la!. .S. one si$nificant le$al 1a&i1 is0 e 1ust interpret not b" the letter that 8illeth.for help in capturin$ Sa1son. consider the follo!in$0 . that !ould a1ount to lac8 or e&cess of 4urisdiction and !ould !arrant the issuance of the !rits pra"ed. . 'his 1atter.ppoint1ents re*ects a no1inee b" the President.If the Co11ission on . VIII. Re!alado.!ho !as Sa1son%s beloved.rt. i1plicitl" deter1ined that he possessed the necessar" 6ualifications as re6uired b" la!. hen Sa1son . + certify that he oted to dis)iss the petition. 'he procurator cal1l" replied0 9Did an" blade touch his s8inH Did an" blood flo! fro1 his veinsH9 'he procurator !as clearl" rel"in$ on the letter. . C. GriBo-A-uino and Medialdea. @ustice Cru2 also sa"s that the Supre1e Court can even dis6ualif" an elected President of the Philippines. In the instant case. JJ. for has been clearl" sho!n. sa".. too# no part. !ho has been practisin$ la! for over ten "ears..dditionall". In that sense.. the procurator placed an iron rod burnin$ !hite#hot t!o or three inches a!a" fro1 in front of Sa1son%s e"es.!as captured. ho! can the action be entertained since he is the incu1bent PresidentH e no! proceed0 'he Co11ission on the basis of evidence sub1itted dolin$ the public hearin$s on Monsod%s confir1ation.his lon$ hair cut b" Delilah. I $reatl" doubt. ?7ernan. J.In the sa1e vein. and thus in effect confir) the appoint1entH Clearl". the ans!er is in the ne$ative.:. perhaps. Sec. For one thin$. . J. Supre1e Court !ould still re erse the C. Delilah a$reed on condition that J No blade shall touch his s8in? No blood shall flo! fro1 his veins. ( Constitution-. ho! can an action or petition be brou$ht a$ainst the PresidentH . 1uch less a $rave abuse of discretion. Once. since no abuse. 1a" the Court re*ect the no1inee.@ Sar)iento. Con$ressdecides to confir)a Presidential no1inee. concur. this petition is hereb" DISMISSED.(. Sep"r"te Op%#%o#' . is on lea e.. In vie! of the fore$oin$. onl" !here such $rave abuse of discretion is clearl" sho!n shall the Court interfere !ith the Co11ission%s 4ud$1ent. 'a8e this h"pothetical case of Sa1son and Delilah. Monsod is a lawyer. 'he 4ud$1ent rendered b" the Co11ission in the e&ercise of such an ac8no!led$ed po!er is be"ond 4udicial interference e&cept onl" upon a clear sho!in$ of a $rave abuse of discretion a1ountin$ to lac8 or e&cess of 4urisdiction. a )e)ber of the (hilippine "ar. the procurator of @udea as8ed Delilah .S... on the $round that he lac8s one or 1ore 6ualifications. C. not the spirit of the a$ree1ent. it !ould be incredible that the C.If the Cnited States Senate .!hich is the confir1in$ bod" in the C. Cpon hearin$ of !hat had happened to her beloved. SO ORDERED.

J. to e&ercise or pursue an e1plo"1ent or profession acti ely.s declared in An!ara . *+ Nan.C. .9 .. Muestions involvin$ the construction of constitutional provisions are best left to 4udicial resolution. <::. the core issue to be resolved in this petition is the proper construal of the constitutional provision re6uirin$ a 1a4orit" of the 1e1bership of COMEDEC.repeated or custo)ary action.C-. certified public accountant !ho !or8s as a cler8. cannot be said to be in the practice of la!.(-. . but I !as the sole vote for the issuance of a te1porar" restrainin$ order to en4oin respondent Monsod fro1 assu1in$ the position of COMEDEC Chair1an."ears.9 It is the bounden dut" of this Court to ensure that such standard is 1et and co1plied !ith.. In other !ords.(=.rticle VIII of the Constitution.. 9practice9 refers to the actual perfor)ance or application of 8no!led$e as distin$uished fro1 )ere possession of #nowled!e? it connotes an acti e. habitually. I therefore vote to DENI the petition. 'he procedural barriers interposed b" respondents deserve scant consideration because.State vs# Cotner.1on$ these are that he 1ust have been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten .7 Phil.9upon the 4udicial depart1ent is thro!n the sole1n and inescapable obli$ation of interpretin$ the Constitution and definin$ constitutional boundaries. ()*+ Constitution-. it is fre6uent habitual e&ercise .. habitual. other than as head or attorne" of a De$al Depart1ent of a corporation or a $overn1ental a$enc". Electoral Co))ission. )* N.. 1eans. ulti1atel".(=. a succession of acts of the sa)e #ind.ppoint1ents#that the appoint1ent of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections should. a readin$ of the Petition then in relation to established 4urisprudence alread" sho!ed pri)a facie that respondent Monsod did not possess the needed 6ualification. he had not en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten . be confir1ed#!as attended b" error so $ross as to a1ount to $rave abuse of discretion and conse6uentl" 1erits nullification b" this Court in accordance !ith the second para$raph of Section (.9 .NAR ASA. . 'herefore. repeatedly or custo)arily. on the basis of his stated 6ualifications and after due assess1ent thereof. *.E.fter considerin$ carefull" respondent Monsod%s co11ent. I a1 even 1ore convinced that the constitutional re6uire1ent of 9practice of law for at least ten ?9<@ years9 has not been 1et.>+.s aptl" held b" this Court in the case of (eople s.State vs. . (7). I/. a doctor of 1edicine !ho is e1plo"ed and is habituall" perfor1in$ the tas8s of a nursin$ aide. PADI!!A. albeit onl" in the result? it does not appear to 1e that there has been an ade6uate sho!in$ that the challen$ed deter1ination b" the Co11ission on .. 1 'o 9practice9 la!. concurrin$0 I concur !ith the decision of the 1a4orit" !ritten b" Mr. 5r"an. includin$ the Chair1an thereof to 9have been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten ."ears prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. p..rt.. cannot be said to practice his profession as an accountant. M" purpose in votin$ for a 'RO !as to prevent the inconvenience and even e1barrass1ent to all parties concerned !ere the Court to finall" decide for respondent Monsod%s dis6ualification.9 'he Constitution has i1posed clear and specific standards for a COMEDEC Chair1an. cannot be said to be in the 9practice of 1edicine.S."ears. !hile the Court deliberated on his constitutional 6ualification for the office.>>. M.>. (ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre-uent or custo)ary actions. (:+. > S. that is.s co11onl" understood. Section (. Dillanue a0 . hat constitutes practice of la!H . a la!"er !ho is e1plo"ed as a business e&ecutive or a corporate 1ana$er.*-. (. . Moreover. J. or an" profession for that 1atter. . I voted not onl" to re6uire the respondents to co11ent on the Petition.(=. @ustice Paras. Practice of la! to fall !ithin the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er and de1andin$ pa"1ent for such services ..e1phasis supplied-. . dissentin$0 'he records of this case !ill sho! that !hen the Court first deliberated on the Petition at bar. +.. . In the sa1e !a". >: DR. .

In other !ords. char$in$ for services such as preparation of docu1ents involvin$ the use of le$al 8no!led$e and s8ill is !ithin the ter1 9practice of la!9 .People v.S.. Dillanue a0 / Essentiall".If co1pensation is e&pected. 3ence. li8e the draftin$ of le$al docu1ents and the renderin$ of le$al opinion or advice.RS prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1anH Eiven the e1plo"1ent or 4ob histor" of respondent Monsod as appears fro1 the records. Villanueva. v.R. <::..ssu1in$ that he perfor1ed an" of such tas8s habituall".s observed b" the Solicitor Eeneral in (eople s. *+ Nan. did he do so 3. 'he follo!in$ relevant 6uestions 1a" be as8ed0 (. Did respondent perfor1 such tas8s custo1aril" or habituall"H 7. citin$ Mendelaun v.People v. a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind. I believe. Did respondent Monsod perfor1 an" of the tas8s !hich are peculiar to the practice of la!H :. hile it 1a" be $ranted that he perfor1ed tas8s and activities !hich could be latitudinarianl" considered activities peculiar to the practice of la!. 7<.. . Villanueva. Practice of la! i1plies that one 1ust have presented hi1self to be in the active and continued practice of the le$al profession and that his professional services are available to the public for co1pensation. (=) citin$ State v.such as !hen one sends a circular announcin$ the establish1ent of a la! office for the $eneral practice of la! . N. >. ).Martin. Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre6uent or custo1ar" action.(=. is to that e&tent. one !ho renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of a statute. Eilbert and 5ar8et Mf$. )>. (> SCR. all advice to clients and all action ta8en for the1 in 1atters connected !ith the la!? are practicin$ la!.*-.>>. 5o"en. .People v. p. (=: Phil. . (. 'a"lor.$palo.. it is a habitual e&ercise . and files a 1anifestation !ith the Supre1e Court infor1in$ it of his intention to practice la! in all courts in the countr" . En$a$in$ in the practice of la! presupposes the e&istence of la!"er#client relationship. (=) citin$ State v. !here a la!"er underta8es an activit" !hich re6uires 8no!led$e of la! but involves no attorne"#client relationship.(=.C.ppoint1ents in a Me1orandu1 it prepared. 7=-.I. Cotner. supra. Aabituality. De$al Ethics. he did not do so AA"+&8ALL3 for at least ten ?9<@ years prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an.El!ood Fitchette et al.Martin supra>.and. .rthur C. such as teachin$ la! or !ritin$ la! boo8s or articles. .E.5. Co)pensation. such !ere isolated transactions or activities !hich do not 6ualif" his past endeavors as 9practice of la!. . (> SCR. * Phil. there 1ust be a continuity. I a1 persuaded that if ever he did perfor1 an" of the tas8s !hich constitute the practice of la!. he cannot be said to be en$a$ed in the practice of his profession or a la!"er . trainin$ and e&perience is !ithin the ter1 9practice of la!9. supra-. People%s Stoc8"ards State 5an8.IE. be useful aids in deter1inin$ !hether or not respondent Monsod 1eets the constitutional 6ualification of practice of la! for at least ten .DDI FOR .5I'C. Villanueva. the !ord private practice of la! i1plies that one 1ust have presented hi1self to be in theacti e and continued practice of the le!al profession and that his . 'he ter1 9practice of la!9 i1plies custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er . Co. as a service of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. 3ence.S. enu1erated several factors deter1inative of !hether a particular activit" constitutes 9practice of la!. practicin$ la! . 5ar Revie!er in De$al and @udicial Ethics. Ne" 5os6ue. *. Application of law le!al principle practice or procedure !hich calls for le$al 8no!led$e.' DE. or !hen one ta8es the oath of office as a la!"er before a notar" public. :)= N.:.>-. )=(. p.It is !orth 1entionin$ that the respondent Co11ission on . (:+.9 It states0 (. and receives pa" for it. p..-. v. De Duna. Attorney-client relationship.C. or a succession of acts. (>.# 7<)7. . (+. :.People vs.Ernani PaOo.9 'o beco1e en$a$ed in the practice of la!. p. )* N. * citin$ People v.#D."ears at the ti1e of his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. ()*) ed.S' 'EN . ()** ed. 3 'he above#enu1erated factors !ould. *=. > S.

If he operates a public utilit" vehicle as his 1ain source of livelihood. dissentin$0 I a1 sincerel" i1pressed b" the ponencia of 1" brother Paras but find I 1ust dissent 4ust the sa1e. It !as that 8ind of discretion that !e said could not be revie!ed. 1" vote is to ER.ct and the rules and re$ulations of the Ener$" Re$ulator" 5oard. CRU0. 3e can be so dee1ed !hen..1erican decision definin$ the practice of la! as the 9perfor1ance of an" acts . Deter1ination of the appointee%s credentials is 1ade on the basis of the established facts..D. 'he possible e&ception is the la!"er !hose inco1e is derived fro1 teachin$ ballroo1 dancin$ or escortin$ !rin8led ladies !ith pubescent pretensions. on his o!n. !hich is cited in the ponencia.connected !ith so1e la!. not the discretion of that bod".(=. Even the President of the Philippines 1a" be declared ineli$ible b" this Court in an appropriate proceedin$ not!ithstandin$ that he has been found acceptable b" no less than the enfranchised citi2enr".even if onl" re1otel". ho!ever peripherall". he !ould still be dee1ed en$a$ed in the practice of la! because he 1ust obe" the Public Service . he rents a house or bu"s a car or consults a doctor as these acts involve his 8no!led$e and application of the la!s re$ulatin$ such transactions. there is hardl" an" activit" that is not affected b" so1e la! or $overn1ent re$ulation the business1an 1ust 8no! about and observe. co11onl" understood to be the practice of la!. In fact. the e&ercise of that discretion !ould still be sub4ect to our revie!. as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. Co1in$ no! to the 6ualifications of the private respondent. If a person elected b" no less than the soverei$n people 1a" be ousted b" this Court for lac8 of the re6uired 6ualifications.. this is not a political 6uestion that !e are barred fro1 resolvin$. .9 'he effect of the definition $iven in the ponencia is to consider virtuall" ever" la!"er to be en$a$ed in the practice of la! even if he does not earn his livin$. such a definition !ould obviousl" be too $lobal to be !or8able.ppoint1ents. as a la!"er. Even if it !ere."ears prior to his appoint1ent to such position. In Lue!o. 'here are certain points on !hich I 1ust differ !ith hi1 !hile of course respectin$ hisvie!point.professional services are available to the public for a co1pensation. I fear that the ponencia 1a" have been too s!eepin$ in its definition of the phrase 9practice of la!9 as to render the 6ualification practicall" toothless. or re$ulation. 'he reason is that !hat !e !ould be e&a1inin$ is not the wisdo) of his election but !hether or not he !as 6ualified to be elected in the first place. It is enou$h that his activities are incidentall" . )=:#. I see no reason !h" !e cannot dis6ualified an appointee si1pl" because he has passed the Co11ission on . a$ain $oin$ b" the definition. I do not thin8 !e are inhibited fro1 e&a1inin$ the 6ualifications of the respondent si1pl" because his no1ination has been confir1ed b" the Co11ission on .CCORDINEDI. Fro1 the nu1erous activities accepted as e1braced in the ter1.N' the petition and to declare respondent Monsod as not 6ualified for the position of COMEDEC Chair1an for not havin$ en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten . Considerin$ the ra1ifications of the 1odern societ".ppoint1ents. J. 'he stoc8 bro8er and the insurance ad4uster and the realtor could co1e under the definition as the" deal !ith or $ive advice on 1atters that are li8el" 9to beco1e involved in liti$ation. in or out of court. 'hat covers ever" co1pan" or$ani2ed under the Corporation Code and re$ulated b" the SEC under P.9 'he la!"er is considered en$a$ed in the practice of la! even if his 1ain occupation is another business and he interprets and applies so1e la! onl" as an incident of such business. In 1" vie!. !hat !as involved !as the discretion of the appointin$ authorit" to choosebet!een t!o clai1ants to the sa1e office !ho both possessed the re6uired 6ualifications. a la!"er does not even have to be part of a business concern to be considered a practitioner.9 !hich tells us absolutel" nothin$. 'he ponencia 6uotes an . I have the unco1fortable feelin$ that one does not even have to be a la!"er to be en$a$ed in the practice of la! as lon$ as his activities involve the application of so1e la!. .. 'o be$in !ith. ordinance. 'he decision $oes on to sa" that 9because la!"ers perfor1 al1ost ever" function 8no!n in the co11ercial and $overn1ental real1. or at least part of it.

3e is doubtless e1inentl" 6ualified for 1an" other positions !orth" of his abundant talents but not as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections. Monsod.. J. if he has not en!a!ed in an acti ity where )e)bership in the bar is a re-uire)ent I fail to see ho! he can clai1 to have been en$a$ed in the practice of la!.!ith one of these < leavin$ his vote behind !hile on official leave but not e&pressin$ his clear stand on the 1atter-? > cate$oricall" statin$ that he did not practice la!? : votin$ in the result because there !as no error so $ross as to a1ount to $rave abuse of discretion? one of official leave !ith no instructions left behind on ho! he vie!ed the issue? and : not ta8in$ part in the deliberations and the decision. educational bac8$round. !or8in$ in 1edia. 3e has never en$a$ed in the practice of la! for even one "ear. to be sure.. but I 1ust re$retfull" vote to $rant the petition. e&perience in international ban8in$ and finance. Cnfortunatel". JR. proficienc" in 1ana$e1ent. Christian Monsod en$a$ed in the practice of la! . and instant reco$nition b" the public. or operatin$ a far1 !ith no active involve1ent in the la!.ppoint1ents. 'o be 9en$a$ed9 in an activit" for ten "ears re6uires co11itted participation in so1ethin$ !hich is the result of one%s decisive choice. but as an e&ecutive and econo1ist and not as a practicin$ la!"er. 1ana$in$ a business corporation. accidental. . but the" do not persuade 1e that he has been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for ten "ears as re6uired b" the Constitution. 3e is a 1e1ber of the bar but to sa" that he has practiced la! is stretchin$ the ter1 be"ond rational li1its. Even if it be ar$ued that he !as actin$ as a la!"er !hen he lobbied in Con$ress for a$rarian and urban refor1. there !as hope that en$a$in$ in the practice of la! as a 6ualification for public office !ould be settled one !a" or another in fairl" definitive ter1s. served in the N. person 1a" have passed the bar e&a1inations. I a$ree !ith the petitioner that based on the bio#data sub1itted b" respondent Monsod to the Co11ission on . e can loo8 onl" into $rave abuse of discretion or !hi1sicall" and arbitrariness.1e1ber Court.ppoint1ents !hose dut" is precisel" to loo8 into the 6ualifications of persons appointed to hi$h office. e&cept that in one 4o"ful 1o1ent in the distant past. Inspite of 1" hi$h re$ard for Mr. First is our revie!in$ the !or8 of a constitutional Co11ission on . he has not proved that his activities in these capacities e&tended over the prescribed (=#"ear period of actual practice of the la!. occasional. GUTIERRE0. En$a$in$ in the practice of la! is a 6ualification not onl" for COMEDEC chair1an but also for appoint1ent to the Supre1e Court and all lo!er courts. I have 1uch ad1iration for respondent Monsod. incidental. @ustice Paras. dissentin$0 hen this petition !as filed. or e&te1poraneous. Second is our belief that Mr. !hether in Eovern1ent or private practice. hat 8ind of @ud$es or @ustices !ill !e have if there 1ain occupation is sellin$ real estate. It 1eans that one is occupied and involved in the enterprise? one is obli$ed or pled$ed to carr" it out !ith intent and attention durin$ the ten#"ear period.9 'he deliberate choice of !ords sho!s that the practice envisioned is active and re$ular. Even if the Co11ission errs. 'here are t!o 8e" factors that 1a8e our tas8 difficult. hat is before us is co1pliance !ith a specific re6uire1ent !ritten into the Constitution. 'he plain fact is that he has occupied the various positions listed in his resu1e b" virtue of his e&perience and presti$e as a business1an and not as an attorne"#at#la! !hose principal attention is focused on the la!.to$ether !ith non#la!"ers li8e far1ers and priests. It is conceded that he has been en$a$ed in business and finance.(>. !e have no po!er to set aside error. the latter has not been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten . I cannot shir8 1" constitutional dut". this !as not the result. the" happened to pass the bar e&a1inationsH 'he Constitution uses the phrase 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. not isolated.'he respondent%s credentials are i1pressive. no less than for Mr. Of the fourteen .and !as a 1e1ber of the Davide Co11ission. servin$ in fact# findin$ co11ittee. inter1ittent. "ut if he has not dedicated his life to the law. seasonal. Monsod possesses superior 6ualifications in ter1s of e&ecutive abilit".MFRED and the Constitutional Co11ission . 3is inte$rit" and co1petence are not 6uestioned b" the petitioner. in !hich areas he has distin$uished hi1self. < are of the vie! that Mr.

()+*#()*.(<. Philippine Petroleu1 Corporation. ()+.Ph. Monsod has never practiced la! e&cept for an alle$ed one "ear period after passin$ the bar e&a1inations !hen he !or8ed in his father%s la! fir1. Eraphic . ()*)#())(0 'he Fact#Findin$ Co11ission on the Dece1ber ()*) Coup . Eui1aras . d."ears. Philippines c.6uaculture Corporation 8. Philippine Electric Corporation >.. 'olon$ . and Ph. Philippine Electric Corporation i.0 Iu4uico Eroup J President. Datin . Manila Electric Co1pan" $. First Philippine Ener$" Corporation c.6uaculture Corporation .sia and Middle East.1erican Depart1ent? Division Chief. Fil#Capital Develop1ent Corporation and affiliated co1panies <. Inc. h.(.. he has la!"ers !or8in$ for hi1.e.6uaculture Corporation l.0 Euevent Eroup of Co1panies J Chief E&ecutive Officer +. Dataprep. ()+7#()+. Inc. if appears that Mr. Inc. candidate-. In fact. he !as the oneadvice and those services as an e&ecutive but not as a la!"er. ()+=#()+70 Meralco Eroup J E&ecutive of various co1panies..ppoint1ents sho! an effort to e6uate 9en$a$ed in the practice of la!9 !ith the use of le$al 8no!led$e in various fields of endeavor such as co11erce. D. pp. Presentl"0 Chair1an of the 5oard and Chief E&ecutive Officer of the follo!in$ co1panies0 a.tte1pt J Me1ber ). Industr" Depart1ent? Operations...Rollo.#()*+0 Philippine Constitutional Co11ission J Me1ber *. b. Meralco Securities Corporation. 'arlac Reforestation and Environ1ent Enterprises 4. i. (). South .70 M. First Philippine 3oldin$s Corporation d. Se1irara Coal Corporation e. Philippine SCNs"ste1s Products.( consist of the follo!in$0 (. En$ineerin$ Construction Corporation of the Philippines b. International Finance Corporation 7. Respondent Monsod%s activities since his passin$ the 5ar e&a1inations in (). C5D 'i1ber Corporation Me1ber of the 5oard of the Follo!in$0 a. Instead of $ivin$ receivin$ that le$al advice of le$al services. Even then his la! practice 1ust have been e&tre1el" li1ited because he !as also !or8in$ for M.(#(). Philippine Co11ercial Capital. (). ()*. 3o! could he practice la! in the Cnited States !hile not a 1e1ber of the 5ar thereH 'he professional life of the respondent follo!s0 (. First Philippine Industrial Corporation e. 'he deliberations before the Co11ission on .. in Econo1ics . Instead of !or8in$ as a la!"er.7#()+=0 orld 5an8 Eroup J Econo1ist. . . Visa"an .CE Container Philippines. D.telier f. Cniversit" of Penns"lvania :. de$rees in Econo1ics at the Cniversit" of Penns"lvania durin$ that period.#()+*0 Finaciera Manila J Chief E&ecutive Officer . :(#::'here is nothin$ in the above bio#data !hich even re1otel" indicates that respondent Monsod has $iven the lawenou$h attention or a certain de$ree of co11it1ent and participation as !ould support in all sincerit" and candor the clai1 of havin$ en$a$ed in its practice for at least ten "ears.

9 hen as8ed if he did not re1e1ber sa"in$ that he had 1ade a practice of preparin$ deeds. fisher1an. and it includes the $ivin$ of advice or the renderin$ of an" services re6uirin$ the use of le$al s8ill or 8no!led$e. or appl" the la! at various ti1es in his life. (eople$s Stoc# 3ards State "an#.(+. 7>> Ill. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . can these people honestl" assert that as such. *+ N. (eople e' rel. .For one%s actions to co1e !ithin the purvie! of practice of law the" should not onl" be activities peculiar to the !or8 of a la!"er. under the facts and conditions involved. De$al 8no!led$e is useful if not necessar" for the business e&ecutive.9 So1e . N.E. !e referred to it as bein$ substantiall" correct in (eople e' rel.:. Chica!o "ar Ass$n . It !ould be difficult.:.)7? (eople e' rel. >.9 &&& &&& &&& Respondent ta8es the position that because he is a real#estate bro8er he has a la!ful ri$ht to do an" le$al !or8 in connection !ith real#estate transactions. teacher. 7>> Ill. :d ++7- . ++. to !it0 &&& &&& &&& Respondent%s ans!ers to 6uestions propounded to hi1 !ere rather evasive. (eople$s Stoc# 3ards State "an#. he said0 9I have no Idea. fir1 or corporation !hen the $ivin$ of such advice or rendition of such service re6uires the use of an" de$ree of le$al 8no!led$e or s8ill. that is not a practice. 1ust be carefull" deter1ined.9 In ans!er to the 6uestion as to ho! 1an" ti1es he had prepared contracts for the parties durin$ the t!ent"#one "ears of his business. Schafer. he ans!ered0 9 ell.E. and student to na1e onl" a fe!. 1a"or. especiall" in dra!in$ of real#estate contracts.. as follo!s0 'he practice of la! involves not onl" appearance in court in connection !ith liti$ation but also services rendered out of court. !here such 8no!led$e !ould be helpful. he ans!ered0 9I don%t recall e&actl" !hat !as said. le$islator. habituall". such as preparin$ a !ill. the" should also be perfor1ed. )=(. ++ N. 7)) Ill.(+.9 Pressed further for an ans!er as to his practice in preparin$ contracts and deeds for parties !here he !as not the bro8er. etc.1erican courts have defined the practice of la!.9 It is not satisfied !ith havin$ been 9a 1e1ber of the Philippine bar for at least ten "ears.E. deeds. follo!. &in#off.9 ithout adoptin$ that definition.. Schafer.:d . fre6uentl" or custo1aril". 1ort$a$es and contracts and char$in$ a fee to the parties therefor in instances !here he !as not the bro8er in the deal. the le$al effect of !hich. 3e !as as8ed !hether or not he ever prepared contracts for the parties in real#estate transactions !here he !as not the procurin$ a$ent. I don%t believe so.People v. 9Practicin$ la!9 has been defined as 9Practicin$ as an attorne" or counselor at la! accordin$ to the la!s and custo1s of our courts. far1er. notes and the li8e.People v. civic !or8.s8ed if he did not recall 1a8in$ the state1ent to several parties that he had prepared contracts in a lar$e nu1ber of instances. *+ N. . police1an. a$rarian refor1. and cases cited. 3e ans!ered0 9Ver" seldo1.E. . :*:. . >.nd "et. is the $ivin$ of advice or rendition of an" sort of service b" an" person. 'here is no doubt but that he has en$a$ed in these practices over the "ears and has char$ed for his services in that connection. 1ar8et vendor. baran$a" captain. . he finall" ans!ered0 9I have done about ever"thin$ that is on the boo8s as far as real estate is concerned.industr".9 hen as8ed if it !ould be 1ore than half a do2en ti1es his ans!er !as I suppose.E. contract or other instru1ent. the" are en$a$ed in the practice of la!H 'he Constitution re6uires havin$ been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. N. 1ort$a$es. Ever" resident of this countr" !ho has reached the a$e of discern1ent has to 8no!. :d ++7. blue ribbon investi$ations. I re$ret that I cannot 4oin in pla"in$ fast and loose !ith a ter1. )=(. !hich even an ordinar" la"1an accepts as havin$ a fa1iliar and custo1ar" !ell#defined 1eanin$. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . if not i1possible to la" do!n a for1ula or definition of !hat constitutes the practice of la!.

to real life2 to e'ercise. tit. In other !ords.(. !e have ruled that the practice of la! denotes fre6uenc" or a succession of acts..E. (> SCR.>>.State v.at p. 9'he principal duties of an attorne" are . or !hen one ta8es the oath of office as a la!"er before a notar" public. public attorne".&&& &&& &&& . p.9 &he transiti e erb .9 . Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance. ).(> SCR. the use of such le$al 8no!led$e is incidental and consists of isolated activities !hich do not fall under the deno1ination of practice of la!. p. person 1a" be an attorne" in facto for another. or attorne" at la!.to 8eep his secrets confided to hi1 as such.such as !hen one sends a circular announcin$ the establish1ent of a la! office for the $eneral practice of la! .. >: DR.. . and non#professional a$ents are properl" st"led 9attorne"%s in fact?9 but the sin$le !ord is 1uch used as 1eanin$ an attorne" at la!.People v. art. . and files a 1anifestation !ith the Supre1e Court infor1in$ it of his intention to practice la! in all courts in the countr" .B-.to 8eep his client infor1ed as to the state of his business? . )* N. as defined by 0ebster. p.7. Cotner. in the 1ost $eneral sense. .n" specific le$al activities !hich 1a" have been assi$ned to Mr. 'he ter1 %practice of la!% i1plies custo1aril"or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er .C.9 . > S.. is an officer of a court of la!.<B-0 &&& &&& &&& . 'hus. is a person desi$nated or e1plo"ed b" another to act in his stead? an a$ent? 1ore especiall".Rollo. it is fre6uent habitual e&ercise . 3is ri$hts are to be 4ustl" co1pensated for his services.People v.practice. a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind.State v. . Da! Dict.*-.tte1pt... and inte$rit"? . Villanueva.S.*-. custo)arily. 9. <:7? E1phasis suppliedIn this 4urisdiction. No" 5os6ue. (=: Phil.C. Aabituality. ( :+. v. (. (> SCR. +nc. ((:It is to be noted that the Co11ission on . Practice of la! to fall !ithin the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public. *. incidental and casual transactions are not !ithin the conte&t of doin$ business..d1ission to the practice of la! !as not re6uired for 1e1bership in the Constitutional Co11ission or in the Fact#Findin$ Co11ission on the ()*) Coup .. . 'his !as our rulin$ in the case of Anta) Consolidated.>. M. . (=) citin$ State v. s8ill.-. )eans $to do or perfor) fre-uently.People v. (>. (>7 SCR. Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance. <::.ppoint1ent itself reco$ni2es habituality as a re6uired co1ponent of the 1eanin$ of practice of la! in a Me1orandu1 prepared and issued b" it. * Phil. Villanueva .E. for it consists in fre6uent or custo1ar" action.. Villanueva. 5r"an.n attorne". it is a habitual e&ercise . to !it0 l. (=) A().to 1ana$e the business of his client !ith care.s in the practice of la!. or habitually2 to perfor) by a succession of acts. Da! Dict. <::. Isolated business transactions or occasional.to be true to the court and to his client? .. !e stated in the case of People v. these professional persons are attorne"s at la!.ttorne". (. as. to carry on in practice.9 5ouv. as a theory. Monsod !hile a 1e1ber 1a" be li8ened to isolated transactions of forei$n corporations in the Philippines !hich do not cate$ori2e the forei$n corporations as doin$ business in the Philippines. Cotner. trade. . Strictl".>.. . one of a class of persons authori2ed to appear and act for suitors or defendants in le$al proceedin$s. *+ Nan.S. to practice law or 1edicine. In other !ords. . doin! business also should be active and continuous. as a profession. :** A()*.% etc. De Duna. Court of appeals. for it consists in fre6uent or custo1ar" actions.. etc. .. !ithout bein$ an attorne" at la!. . *. sa"s ebster. or repeated action2 to apply. le$all" 6ualified to prosecute and defend actions in such court on the retainerof clients. 9. *+ Nan. S. ( =) citin$ State v.>-. +..2 as.. (:+.ttorne". . a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind. 5r"an.:. ((<&&& &&& &&& hile the career as a business1an of respondent Monsod 1a" have profited fro1 his le$al 8no!led$e. to practice !a)in!.bb. . as a la!"er and de1andin$ pa"1ent for such services.9 . .

Senator. . or an" profession for that 1atter."ears prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an.repeated or custo)ary action. 1 'o 9practice9 la!. albeit onl" in the result? it does not appear to 1e that there has been an ade6uate sho!in$ that the challen$ed deter1ination b" the Co11ission on . dissent Sep"r"te Op%#%o#' NAR ASA. J."ears. repeatedly or custo)arily. the core issue to be resolved in this petition is the proper construal of the constitutional provision re6uirin$ a 1a4orit" of the 1e1bership of COMEDEC. ulti1atel".ppoint1ents#that the appoint1ent of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections should. 1eans. be confir1ed#!as attended b" error so $ross as to a1ount to $rave abuse of discretion and conse6uentl" 1erits nullification b" this Court in accordance !ith the second para$raph of Section (.7 Phil. I therefore vote to DENI the petition.1on$ these are that he 1ust have been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten . I. .. I/. M" purpose in votin$ for a 'RO !as to prevent the inconvenience and even e1barrass1ent to all parties concerned !ere the Court to finall" decide for respondent Monsod%s dis6ualification. but I !as the sole vote for the issuance of a te1porar" restrainin$ order to en4oin respondent Monsod fro1 assu1in$ the position of COMEDEC Chair1an.rticle VIII of the Constitution.9 It is the bounden dut" of this Court to ensure that such standard is 1et and co1plied !ith.N' the petition. 9practice9 refers to the actual perfor)ance or application of 8no!led$e as distin$uished fro1 )ere possession of #nowled!e? it connotes an acti e. @ustice Paras.s co11onl" understood. on the basis of his stated 6ualifications and after due assess1ent thereof... J. I a1 even 1ore convinced that the constitutional re6uire1ent of 9practice of law for at least ten ?9<@ years9 has not been 1et. Section (.s declared in An!ara .(="ears for the position of COMEDEC Chair1an has ordered that he 1a" not be confir1ed for that office. dissentin$0 'he records of this case !ill sho! that !hen the Court first deliberated on the Petition at bar. Moreover.. concur.9upon the 4udicial depart1ent is thro!n the sole1n and inescapable obli$ation of interpretin$ the Constitution and definin$ constitutional boundaries. inte$rit". 'he Constitution char$es the public respondents no less than this Court to obe" its 1andate. co1petence. corporate e&ecutive. (7).rt."ears. that is. habitually. and 1e1ber of the Constitutional Co11ission 1a" possess the bac8$round. I voted not onl" to re6uire the respondents to co11ent on the Petition. Muestions involvin$ the construction of constitutional provisions are best left to 4udicial resolution. . . to e&ercise or pursue an e1plo"1ent or profession acti ely. includin$ the Chair1an thereof to 9have been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten .fter considerin$ carefull" respondent Monsod%s co11ent. civic leader. Con$ress1an or Eovernor but the Constitution in prescribin$ the specific 6ualification of havin$ en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten .Respondent Monsod. believe that the Co11ission on .. he had not en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten .(=. "idin. ()*+ Constitution-. !hile the Court deliberated on his constitutional 6ualification for the office.(-. and dedication. Electoral Co))ission. Melencio-Aerrera.C-. . concurrin$0 I concur !ith the decision of the 1a4orit" !ritten b" Mr. hat constitutes practice of la!H . habitual.ppoint1ents co11itted $rave abuse of discretion in confir1in$ the no1ination of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of the COMEDEC. 'he procedural barriers interposed b" respondents deserve scant consideration because. a readin$ of the Petition then in relation to established 4urisprudence alread" sho!ed pri)a facie that respondent Monsod did not possess the needed 6ualification. therefore.(=. . J. I vote to ER..9 'he Constitution has i1posed clear and specific standards for a COMEDEC Chair1an. Vice#President. to 6ualif" for such hi$h offices as President. PADI!!A.(=.9 . J.

and.People v. 3ence. Practice of la! to fall !ithin the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er and de1andin$ pa"1ent for such services . *.. 3ence. . :. *.s aptl" held b" this Court in the case of (eople s. N. cannot be said to practice his profession as an accountant. supra.>>.S. a doctor of 1edicine !ho is e1plo"ed and is habituall" perfor1in$ the tas8s of a nursin$ aide. )* N. p.e1phasis supplied-.State vs# Cotner. (=: Phil.C.. In other !ords. a la!"er !ho is e1plo"ed as a business e&ecutive or a corporate 1ana$er. Aabituality.If co1pensation is e&pected. . is to that e&tent. v.El!ood Fitchette et al. . (. 'a"lor. It is !orth 1entionin$ that the respondent Co11ission on .E. >: DR. char$in$ for services such as preparation of docu1ents involvin$ the use of le$al 8no!led$e and s8ill is !ithin the ter1 9practice of la!9 . (>. !here a la!"er underta8es an activit" !hich re6uires 8no!led$e of la! but involves no attorne"#client relationship. (> SCR.. p. Cotner. it is fre6uent habitual e&ercise . +. ). *+ Nan. 5o"en.such as !hen one sends a circular announcin$ the establish1ent of a la! office for the $eneral practice of la! . Practice of la! i1plies that one 1ust have presented hi1self to be in the active and continued practice of the le$al profession and that his professional services are available to the public for co1pensation. p. ()** ed.5. En$a$in$ in the practice of la! presupposes the e&istence of la!"er#client relationship.Ernani PaOo. De Duna.$palo. In other !ords. Villanueva.rthur C. (:+. ()*) ed. one !ho renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of a statute. I believe.>>. 5ar Revie!er in De$al and @udicial Ethics.People v. other than as head or attorne" of a De$al Depart1ent of a corporation or a $overn1ental a$enc"."ears at the ti1e of his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. supra-. > S. .(=.#D. practicin$ la! . (ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre-uent or custo)ary actions. cannot be said to be in the 9practice of 1edicine. )=(.. cannot be said to be in the practice of la!.I. trainin$ and e&perience is !ithin the ter1 9practice of la!9. Villanueva.. 'he follo!in$ relevant 6uestions 1a" be as8ed0 (. Did respondent Monsod perfor1 an" of the tas8s !hich are peculiar to the practice of la!H .R. Application of law le!al principle practice or procedure !hich calls for le$al 8no!led$e. (. Co)pensation. (> SCR. 7<.:.. >. p. and files a 1anifestation !ith the Supre1e Court infor1in$ it of his intention to practice la! in all courts in the countr" . such as teachin$ la! or !ritin$ la! boo8s or articles. . Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre6uent or custo1ar" action.>-..S. <::.Martin supra>. he cannot be said to be en$a$ed in the practice of his profession or a la!"er . )* N. 5r"an.. v. Ne" 5os6ue.'herefore. Attorney-client relationship. a succession of acts of the sa)e #ind. <::.People v. (=) citin$ State v. (=) citin$ State v. Villanueva. certified public accountant !ho !or8s as a cler8. it is a habitual e&ercise . p. all advice to clients and all action ta8en for the1 in 1atters connected !ith the la!? are practicin$ la!. )>.S.>+.ppoint1ents in a Me1orandu1 it prepared.. In the sa1e !a". (:+. be useful aids in deter1inin$ !hether or not respondent Monsod 1eets the constitutional 6ualification of practice of la! for at least ten .C. enu1erated several factors deter1inative of !hether a particular activit" constitutes 9practice of la!.State vs. citin$ Mendelaun v. .E. 3 'he above#enu1erated factors !ould. . Co.9 It states0 (. People%s Stoc8"ards State 5an8. (+. * Phil.>. as a service of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services.-..People vs. Dillanue a0 .C.9 . 7=-. *+ Nan. Eilbert and 5ar8et Mf$. M. . De$al Ethics.*-.Martin. :)= N. * citin$ People v. *=..*-. > S. or !hen one ta8es the oath of office as a la!"er before a notar" public. a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind. 'he ter1 9practice of la!9 i1plies custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er .# 7<)7. and receives pa" for it.

dissentin$0 I a1 sincerel" i1pressed b" the ponencia of 1" brother Paras but find I 1ust dissent 4ust the sa1e.:.5I'C.s observed b" the Solicitor Eeneral in (eople s. a$ain $oin$ b" the definition.ppoint1ents. . Even the President of the Philippines 1a" be declared ineli$ible b" this Court in an appropriate proceedin$ not!ithstandin$ that he has been found acceptable b" no less than the enfranchised citi2enr". . It !as that 8ind of discretion that !e said could not be revie!ed. he !ould still be . he rents a house or bu"s a car or consults a doctor as these acts involve his 8no!led$e and application of the la!s re$ulatin$ such transactions. CRU0."ears prior to his appoint1ent to such position. he did not do so AA"+&8ALL3 for at least ten ?9<@ years prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. J. Even if it !ere.RS prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1anH Eiven the e1plo"1ent or 4ob histor" of respondent Monsod as appears fro1 the records. Did respondent perfor1 such tas8s custo1aril" or habituall"H 7. Co1in$ no! to the 6ualifications of the private respondent. hile it 1a" be $ranted that he perfor1ed tas8s and activities !hich could be latitudinarianl" considered activities peculiar to the practice of la!. !hich is cited in the ponencia. Considerin$ the ra1ifications of the 1odern societ".(=. . not the discretion of that bod". 'he reason is that !hat !e !ould be e&a1inin$ is not the wisdo) of his election but !hether or not he !as 6ualified to be elected in the first place. In Lue!o. If he operates a public utilit" vehicle as his 1ain source of livelihood.IE. on his o!n.S' 'EN .. as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. I have the unco1fortable feelin$ that one does not even have to be a la!"er to be en$a$ed in the practice of la! as lon$ as his activities involve the application of so1e la!. Dillanue a0 / Essentiall".N' the petition and to declare respondent Monsod as not 6ualified for the position of COMEDEC Chair1an for not havin$ en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten .ppoint1ents. ho!ever peripherall". In 1" vie!. 'hat covers ever" co1pan" or$ani2ed under the Corporation Code and re$ulated b" the SEC under P. If a person elected b" no less than the soverei$n people 1a" be ousted b" this Court for lac8 of the re6uired 6ualifications. 'here are certain points on !hich I 1ust differ !ith hi1 !hile of course respectin$ hisvie!point. there is hardl" an" activit" that is not affected b" so1e la! or $overn1ent re$ulation the business1an 1ust 8no! about and observe. Fro1 the nu1erous activities accepted as e1braced in the ter1.ssu1in$ that he perfor1ed an" of such tas8s habituall". this is not a political 6uestion that !e are barred fro1 resolvin$. did he do so 3.CCORDINEDI.9 'o beco1e en$a$ed in the practice of la!. I fear that the ponencia 1a" have been too s!eepin$ in its definition of the phrase 9practice of la!9 as to render the 6ualification practicall" toothless. I do not thin8 !e are inhibited fro1 e&a1inin$ the 6ualifications of the respondent si1pl" because his no1ination has been confir1ed b" the Co11ission on . )=:#. the e&ercise of that discretion !ould still be sub4ect to our revie!. 'o be$in !ith.DDI FOR . I see no reason !h" !e cannot dis6ualified an appointee si1pl" because he has passed the Co11ission on . I a1 persuaded that if ever he did perfor1 an" of the tas8s !hich constitute the practice of la!. there 1ust be a continuity. !hat !as involved !as the discretion of the appointin$ authorit" to choosebet!een t!o clai1ants to the sa1e office !ho both possessed the re6uired 6ualifications.9 'he la!"er is considered en$a$ed in the practice of la! even if his 1ain occupation is another business and he interprets and applies so1e la! onl" as an incident of such business. Deter1ination of the appointee%s credentials is 1ade on the basis of the established facts.. a la!"er does not even have to be part of a business concern to be considered a practitioner. li8e the draftin$ of le$al docu1ents and the renderin$ of le$al opinion or advice.' DE. the !ord private practice of la! i1plies that one 1ust have presented hi1self to be in theacti e and continued practice of the le!al profession and that his professional services are available to the public for a co1pensation. 3e can be so dee1ed !hen.(=. 1" vote is to ER. 'he stoc8 bro8er and the insurance ad4uster and the realtor could co1e under the definition as the" deal !ith or $ive advice on 1atters that are li8el" 9to beco1e involved in liti$ation.D. or a succession of acts. such !ere isolated transactions or activities !hich do not 6ualif" his past endeavors as 9practice of la!. In fact.

he has not proved that his activities in these capacities e&tended over the prescribed (=#"ear period of actual practice of the la!. GUTIERRE0. hat is before us is co1pliance !ith a specific re6uire1ent !ritten into the Constitution. . ordinance. but I 1ust re$retfull" vote to $rant the petition. 3e has never en$a$ed in the practice of la! for even one "ear. < are of the vie! that Mr. educational bac8$round.1erican decision definin$ the practice of la! as the 9perfor1ance of an" acts . It is conceded that he has been en$a$ed in business and finance. in or out of court. Even if the Co11ission errs. Christian Monsod en$a$ed in the practice of la! . or re$ulation..(>. in !hich areas he has distin$uished hi1self. or at least part of it.!ith one of these < leavin$ his vote behind !hile on official leave but not e&pressin$ his clear stand on the 1atter-? > cate$oricall" statin$ that he did not practice la!? : votin$ in the result because there !as no error so $ross as to a1ount to $rave abuse of discretion? one of official leave !ith no instructions left behind on ho! he vie!ed the issue? and : not ta8in$ part in the deliberations and the decision. En$a$in$ in the practice of la! is a 6ualification not onl" for COMEDEC chair1an but also for appoint1ent to the Supre1e Court and all lo!er courts.connected !ith so1e la!. 'here are t!o 8e" factors that 1a8e our tas8 difficult. but as an e&ecutive and econo1ist and not as a practicin$ la!"er. this !as not the result. Monsod possesses superior 6ualifications in ter1s of e&ecutive abilit".dee1ed en$a$ed in the practice of la! because he 1ust obe" the Public Service . no less than for Mr. It is enou$h that his activities are incidentall" . . 'he respondent%s credentials are i1pressive. JR.9 'he effect of the definition $iven in the ponencia is to consider virtuall" ever" la!"er to be en$a$ed in the practice of la! even if he does not earn his livin$.MFRED and the Constitutional Co11ission . co11onl" understood to be the practice of la!. Second is our belief that Mr. Inspite of 1" hi$h re$ard for Mr. such a definition !ould obviousl" be too $lobal to be !or8able. First is our revie!in$ the !or8 of a constitutional Co11ission on . e can loo8 onl" into $rave abuse of discretion or !hi1sicall" and arbitrariness.and !as a 1e1ber of the Davide Co11ission. if he has not en!a!ed in an acti ity where )e)bership in the bar is a re-uire)ent I fail to see ho! he can clai1 to have been en$a$ed in the practice of la!. proficienc" in 1ana$e1ent. person 1a" have passed the bar e&a1inations. there !as hope that en$a$in$ in the practice of la! as a 6ualification for public office !ould be settled one !a" or another in fairl" definitive ter1s. e&perience in international ban8in$ and finance. 'he plain fact is that he has occupied the various positions listed in his resu1e b" virtue of his e&perience and presti$e as a business1an and not as an attorne"#at#la! !hose principal attention is focused on the la!. Of the fourteen . 3is inte$rit" and co1petence are not 6uestioned b" the petitioner.9 !hich tells us absolutel" nothin$. served in the N.to$ether !ith non#la!"ers li8e far1ers and priests. !e have no po!er to set aside error. Cnfortunatel". to be sure. hat 8ind of @ud$es or @ustices !ill !e . 3e is doubtless e1inentl" 6ualified for 1an" other positions !orth" of his abundant talents but not as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections.ct and the rules and re$ulations of the Ener$" Re$ulator" 5oard. dissentin$0 hen this petition !as filed.ppoint1ents !hose dut" is precisel" to loo8 into the 6ualifications of persons appointed to hi$h office. "ut if he has not dedicated his life to the law. 3e is a 1e1ber of the bar but to sa" that he has practiced la! is stretchin$ the ter1 be"ond rational li1its. I have 1uch ad1iration for respondent Monsod. Monsod. J. 'he decision $oes on to sa" that 9because la!"ers perfor1 al1ost ever" function 8no!n in the co11ercial and $overn1ental real1. . 'he ponencia 6uotes an . as a la!"er. and instant reco$nition b" the public. 'he possible e&ception is the la!"er !hose inco1e is derived fro1 teachin$ ballroo1 dancin$ or escortin$ !rin8led ladies !ith pubescent pretensions. I cannot shir8 1" constitutional dut".1e1ber Court. Even if it be ar$ued that he !as actin$ as a la!"er !hen he lobbied in Con$ress for a$rarian and urban refor1. @ustice Paras.. but the" do not persuade 1e that he has been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for ten "ears as re6uired b" the Constitution.even if onl" re1otel".

e&cept that in one 4o"ful 1o1ent in the distant past. in Econo1ics . if appears that Mr. !hether in Eovern1ent or private practice. 3o! could he practice la! in the Cnited States !hile not a 1e1ber of the 5ar thereH 'he professional life of the respondent follo!s0 (..(. candidate-. First Philippine Ener$" Corporation c. First Philippine 3oldin$s Corporation d. It 1eans that one is occupied and involved in the enterprise? one is obli$ed or pled$ed to carr" it out !ith intent and attention durin$ the ten#"ear period.ppoint1ents.#()+*0 Finaciera Manila J Chief E&ecutive Officer . Philippine Co11ercial Capital.70 M. Manila Electric Co1pan" $. Cniversit" of Penns"lvania :.telier f. inter1ittent..( consist of the follo!in$0 (. Philippine Electric Corporation . i. D.tte1pt J Me1ber ). Dataprep.CE Container Philippines. Fil#Capital Develop1ent Corporation and affiliated co1panies <.. ()*)#())(0 'he Fact#Findin$ Co11ission on the Dece1ber ()*) Coup . or operatin$ a far1 !ith no active involve1ent in the la!. 'o be 9en$a$ed9 in an activit" for ten "ears re6uires co11itted participation in so1ethin$ !hich is the result of one%s decisive choice.have if there 1ain occupation is sellin$ real estate. Philippine Petroleu1 Corporation. the" happened to pass the bar e&a1inationsH 'he Constitution uses the phrase 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. Se1irara Coal Corporation e. Philippine SCNs"ste1s Products. Datin . C5D 'i1ber Corporation Me1ber of the 5oard of the Follo!in$0 a. not isolated. Industr" Depart1ent? Operations. . h..(#(). South .7#()+=0 orld 5an8 Eroup J Econo1ist. !or8in$ in 1edia. Inc.0 Iu4uico Eroup J President. or e&te1poraneous. incidental. Meralco Securities Corporation. accidental. and Ph. Philippines c. d. occasional. Monsod has never practiced la! e&cept for an alle$ed one "ear period after passin$ the bar e&a1inations !hen he !or8ed in his father%s la! fir1. D. 1ana$in$ a business corporation. (). ()+.e. Presentl"0 Chair1an of the 5oard and Chief E&ecutive Officer of the follo!in$ co1panies0 a. seasonal. ()..1erican Depart1ent? Division Chief. International Finance Corporation 7. Inc. ()+7#()+. ()*.#()*+0 Philippine Constitutional Co11ission J Me1ber *.. servin$ in fact# findin$ co11ittee. b.Ph. Philippine Electric Corporation >. Eraphic . the latter has not been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. ()+*#()*. ()+=#()+70 Meralco Eroup J E&ecutive of various co1panies. Inc.0 Euevent Eroup of Co1panies J Chief E&ecutive Officer +.(<.9 'he deliberate choice of !ords sho!s that the practice envisioned is active and re$ular.sia and Middle East. I a$ree !ith the petitioner that based on the bio#data sub1itted b" respondent Monsod to the Co11ission on . Even then his la! practice 1ust have been e&tre1el" li1ited because he !as also !or8in$ for M. In fact. En$ineerin$ Construction Corporation of the Philippines b. Respondent Monsod%s activities since his passin$ the 5ar e&a1inations in (). de$rees in Econo1ics at the Cniversit" of Penns"lvania durin$ that period. First Philippine Industrial Corporation e.

:.(+. and cases cited. Schafer.9 hen as8ed if it !ould be 1ore than half a do2en ti1es his ans!er !as I suppose. :(#::'here is nothin$ in the above bio#data !hich even re1otel" indicates that respondent Monsod has $iven the lawenou$h attention or a certain de$ree of co11it1ent and participation as !ould support in all sincerit" and candor the clai1 of havin$ en$a$ed in its practice for at least ten "ears. can these people honestl" assert that as such. +llinois State "ar Ass$n .9 It is not satisfied !ith havin$ been 9a 1e1ber of the Philippine bar for at least ten "ears. he has la!"ers !or8in$ for hi1. fir1 or corporation !hen the $ivin$ of such advice or rendition of such service re6uires the use of an" de$ree of le$al 8no!led$e or s8ill. I re$ret that I cannot 4oin in pla"in$ fast and loose !ith a ter1. under the facts and conditions involved.6uaculture Corporation 8. Ever" resident of this countr" !ho has reached the a$e of discern1ent has to 8no!. )=(. blue ribbon investi$ations.:d . Instead of $ivin$ receivin$ that le$al advice of le$al services. far1er. 1a"or. >. he !as the oneadvice and those services as an e&ecutive but not as a la!"er. De$al 8no!led$e is useful if not necessar" for the business e&ecutive. &in#off. ++.1erican courts have defined the practice of la!. Visa"an .People v. fisher1an. 3e !as as8ed !hether or not he ever prepared contracts for the parties in real#estate transactions !here he !as not the procurin$ a$ent.For one%s actions to co1e !ithin the purvie! of practice of law the" should not onl" be activities peculiar to the !or8 of a la!"er. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . he said0 9I have no Idea.9 hen as8ed if he did not re1e1ber sa"in$ that he had 1ade a practice of preparin$ deeds. . follo!. fre6uentl" or custo1aril". the le$al effect of !hich. if not i1possible to la" do!n a for1ula or definition of !hat constitutes the practice of la!. Eui1aras .E. pp. to !it0 &&& &&& &&& Respondent%s ans!ers to 6uestions propounded to hi1 !ere rather evasive.)7? (eople e' rel. 7>> Ill. such as preparin$ a !ill. (eople$s Stoc# 3ards State "an#. civic !or8. Chica!o "ar Ass$n . baran$a" captain. *+ N. teacher. or appl" the la! at various ti1es in his life. 3e ans!ered0 9Ver" seldo1. the" are en$a$ed in the practice of la!H 'he Constitution re6uires havin$ been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears.:. :d ++7.E. N.6uaculture Corporation .s8ed if he did not recall 1a8in$ the state1ent to several parties that he had prepared contracts in a lar$e nu1ber of instances. 'arlac Reforestation and Environ1ent Enterprises 4.nd "et. he ans!ered0 9I don%t recall e&actl" !hat !as said.Rollo. 1ort$a$es and contracts and char$in$ a fee to the parties therefor .(+. industr". !e referred to it as bein$ substantiall" correct in (eople e' rel. (eople$s Stoc# 3ards State "an#. 7>> Ill. (eople e' rel. )=(.i. 7)) Ill. a$rarian refor1. 1ar8et vendor. is the $ivin$ of advice or rendition of an" sort of service b" an" person. contract or other instru1ent.9 So1e . le$islator. 'olon$ . !here such 8no!led$e !ould be helpful. etc. !hich even an ordinar" la"1an accepts as havin$ a fa1iliar and custo1ar" !ell#defined 1eanin$. as follo!s0 'he practice of la! involves not onl" appearance in court in connection !ith liti$ation but also services rendered out of court.9 In ans!er to the 6uestion as to ho! 1an" ti1es he had prepared contracts for the parties durin$ the t!ent"#one "ears of his business. . and student to na1e onl" a fe!. ++ N. and it includes the $ivin$ of advice or the renderin$ of an" services re6uirin$ the use of le$al s8ill or 8no!led$e.9 ithout adoptin$ that definition. 'he deliberations before the Co11ission on . police1an. .ppoint1ents sho! an effort to e6uate 9en$a$ed in the practice of la!9 !ith the use of le$al 8no!led$e in various fields of endeavor such as co11erce. >. N. habituall". Instead of !or8in$ as a la!"er. the" should also be perfor1ed.E. :*:. 1ust be carefull" deter1ined.E. 9Practicin$ la!9 has been defined as 9Practicin$ as an attorne" or counselor at la! accordin$ to the la!s and custo1s of our courts. It !ould be difficult.6uaculture Corporation l.

. in the 1ost $eneral sense. 3is ri$hts are to be 4ustl" co1pensated for his services. Cotner. a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind.*-.. person 1a" be an attorne" in facto for another... to real life2 to e'ercise. In other !ords. one of a class of persons authori2ed to appear and act for suitors or defendants in le$al proceedin$s.bb. 1ort$a$es. Da! Dict. as a profession. trade. or attorne" at la!. I don%t believe so. . Da! Dict. Practice of la! to fall !ithin the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public.9 &&& &&& &&& Respondent ta8es the position that because he is a real#estate bro8er he has a la!ful ri$ht to do an" le$al !or8 in connection !ith real#estate transactions. Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance.9 &he transiti e erb .E. .People v. S. . and files a 1anifestation !ith the Supre1e Court infor1in$ it of his intention to practice la! in all courts in the countr" . tit.practice. . is a person desi$nated or e1plo"ed b" another to act in his stead? an a$ent? 1ore especiall". as a la!"er and de1andin$ pa"1ent for such services.<B-0 &&& &&& &&& .(> SCR.>. as.*-. Villanueva. is an officer of a court of la!.% etc. (:+. especiall" in dra!in$ of real#estate contracts. to practice law or 1edicine. or !hen one ta8es the oath of office as a la!"er before a notar" public. !e have ruled that the practice of la! denotes fre6uenc" or a succession of acts. he ans!ered0 9 ell.. public attorne". . <::. . v.E. s8ill. ((:It is to be noted that the Co11ission on . De Duna. (. 'here is no doubt but that he has en$a$ed in these practices over the "ears and has char$ed for his services in that connection. )* N. . * Phil.9 . Villanueva. ( :+. Schafer. .S. it is a habitual e&ercise . *.. or repeated action2 to apply. ( =) citin$ State v. No" 5os6ue..Rollo. !e stated in the case of People v. (> SCR. for it consists in fre6uent or custo1ar" actions. *+ N. Strictl".>-.9 .such as !hen one sends a circular announcin$ the establish1ent of a la! office for the $eneral practice of la! .7. Aabituality. 5r"an.People v. *+ Nan. +. )eans $to do or perfor) fre-uently. <::.to 8eep his secrets confided to hi1 as such. to !it0 l.9 .S. or habitually2 to perfor) by a succession of acts.:. . Villanueva .State v.E.C. and inte$rit"? . (> SCR. sa"s ebster.. (=: Phil.. ((<&&& &&& &&& .2 as. as defined by 0ebster. 'he ter1 %practice of la!% i1plies custo1aril"or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er . :d ++7&&& &&& &&& . and non#professional a$ents are properl" st"led 9attorne"%s in fact?9 but the sin$le !ord is 1uch used as 1eanin$ an attorne" at la!.-. to carry on in practice.ttorne"..ttorne". p. 9.n attorne". !ithout bein$ an attorne" at la!. le$all" 6ualified to prosecute and defend actions in such court on the retainerof clients. Cotner.ppoint1ent itself reco$ni2es habituality as a re6uired co1ponent of the 1eanin$ of practice of la! in a Me1orandu1 prepared and issued b" it.to 8eep his client infor1ed as to the state of his business? .State v.People v. to practice !a)in!.. <:7? E1phasis suppliedIn this 4urisdiction. (=) A().to be true to the court and to his client? . (. > S. *. . >: DR.. 9.in instances !here he !as not the bro8er in the deal. *+ Nan.. deeds.. ). art. 'hus. (=) citin$ State v... as a theory. that is not a practice. p. 9'he principal duties of an attorne" are .>>.(.People v. he finall" ans!ered0 9I have done about ever"thin$ that is on the boo8s as far as real estate is concerned.to 1ana$e the business of his client !ith care.. etc. 5r"an. custo)arily. notes and the li8e.C.. M. In other !ords. these professional persons are attorne"s at la!. Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance.9 5ouv.at p. a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind.9 Pressed further for an ans!er as to his practice in preparin$ contracts and deeds for parties !here he !as not the bro8er. p. for it consists in fre6uent or custo1ar" action. (>. it is fre6uent habitual e&ercise .>.

"idin.n" specific le$al activities !hich 1a" have been assi$ned to Mr. doin! business also should be active and continuous.. Dishonest". :** A()*.5. Court . Sultan. Con$ress1an or Eovernor but the Constitution in prescribin$ the specific 6ualification of havin$ en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten . MA. +RANCH .(="ears for the position of COMEDEC Chair1an has ordered that he 1a" not be confir1ed for that office. 'his !as our rulin$ in the case of Anta) Consolidated.B-. to 6ualif" for such hi$h offices as President. and (#7 and =. . SU!TAN.d1inistrator . the use of such le$al 8no!led$e is incidental and consists of isolated activities !hich do not fall under the deno1ination of practice of la!. Donna Sultan addressed to the Office of the Court . +nc. : (> SCR.bsenteeis1. Dece1ber ())). @ud$e Re$ala alle$es that Ma. . Donna Sultan is $uilt" of habitual absenteeis1 as defined b" . I.co1plainin$ the disapproval b" @ud$e Re$ala of her applications for leave on the above#1entioned dates. dissent 1oot#ote' ( ebster%s 7rd Ne! International Dictionar". and Conduct Pre4udicial to the Service. and 1e1ber of the Constitutional Co11ission 1a" possess the bac8$round. . In a referral letter dated (: Ma" :===.d1inistrative Circular No. +RANCH . of Ma. 'he Constitution char$es the public respondents no less than this Court to obe" its 1andate. 5ranch ::.#+. corporate e&ecutive. > (> SCR. REGIONA! TRIA! COURT. 7#:) Nove1ber ())).. Re$ional 'rial Court . Monsod !hile a 1e1ber 1a" be li8ened to isolated transactions of forei$n corporations in the Philippines !hich do not cate$ori2e the forei$n corporations as doin$ business in the Philippines.C'ICE OF D. (#)( for havin$ incurred .d1ission to the practice of la! !as not re6uired for 1e1bership in the Constitutional Co11ission or in the Fact#Findin$ Co11ission on the ()*) Coup .s in the practice of la!.OC. Respondent Monsod. therefore.4. Donna I. J. Court of appeals. Senator. Sultan. Vice#President. Said absences !ere the sub4ect of a letter b" Ma. I vote to ER. Isolated business transactions or occasional.."r) . J. vs.d1inistrator 5ernardo '.R'C-. Donna I. REGIONA! TRIA! COURT. 6UE0ON CITY. !EGA! RESEARCHER.Respondent. Falsification of Dail" 'i1e Record. . Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila SECOND DIVISION A. .: @ud$e Deah Do1in$o#Re$ala.003 JUDGE !EAH DOMINGO2REGA!A.' CONS'I'C'ES PR. !ith Inefficienc". . 'ardiness.N' the petition.hile the career as a business1an of respondent Monsod 1a" have profited fro1 his le$al 8no!led$e. DONNA Y. co1plainant. and dedication.ppoint1ents% Me1orandu1 dated :< @une ())( RE0 3. inte$rit".. Mue2on Cit". believe that the Co11ission on . De$al Researcher of the sa1e court. In her co11ent dated =< @une :===. No. civic leader. (=) 7 Co11ission on . (=). incidental and casual transactions are not !ithin the conte&t of doin$ business. (>7 SCR.M. . DECISION CHICO2NA0ARIO. co1petence. pp.tte1pt. 3abitual . Ponferrada re6uested @ud$e Re$ala to co11ent on the unauthori2ed leave of absence for the period (#:) October ())). P203219/0 1ebr.ppoint1ents co11itted $rave abuse of discretion in confir1in$ the no1ination of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of the COMEDEC.5. 6UE0ON CITY. has char$ed Ma.

consecutive 1onths durin$ the "ear.unauthori2ed absences e&ceedin$ the allo!able :.7.7. all her absences !ere authori2ed. for it !as durin$ said period that respondent suffered a ver" serious fa1il" proble1 and had to absent herself fro1 !or8 to attend to said dile11a. On the char$e of tardiness and falsification of dail" ti1e record.: Re$ardin$ the i1putation of dishonest". co1plainant alle$es that in the 1onth of October. Nove1ber. Said acts. @ud$e Re$ala 1aintains that Ma. respondent 1isled her and the 1e1bers of her staff to believe that respondentQs dau$hter !as confined in Malvar Eeneral 3ospital for da"s. re6uires fre6uent instruction. ith respect to the char$e of inco1petence. that is. and Dece1ber ())). and that she en$a$es in lon$ telephone conversations durin$ office hours. Moreover.< da"s 1onthl" leave credits for at least three .u$ust ())) ############ Septe1ber ())) ####### October ())) ########## Nove1ber ())) ####### * P da"s : da"s 7 da"s < P da"s :( da"s () da"s Dece1ber ())) ######## 7 da"s @anuar" :=== ########### : da"s Februar" :=== ########## ( da" March :=== ############## ( da" Ma" :=== ################# + da"s( Said circular states that 9an officer or e1plo"ee in the civil service shall be considered habituall" absent if he incurs unauthori2ed absences e&ceedin$ the allo!able :. and finds difficult" in ad4ustin$ herself to ne! tas8s. also in violation of said Circular. accordin$ to co1plainant. @ud$e Re$ala asserts that respondent often $oes out of the office to tal8 to la!"ers !ho have cases before 5ranch ::. Said entries in the lo$boo8 are reflected in her dail" ti1e record.1onths in a se1ester or at least three . For the absences she incurred for the above#1entioned 1onths. !hen respondent !ent on an e&tended leave. Donna Sultan leaves at about eleven oQcloc8 in the 1ornin$ to ta8e lon$ lunch brea8s out of the office and co1es bac8 lon$ after t!o oQcloc8 in the afternoon. @ud$e Re$ala clai1s that respondent has al!a"s been tard" in reportin$ for !or8 and si$ns the office lo$boo8 !ith a ti1e earlier than that of her actual arrival. !ith the correspondin$ applications for leave dul" filed and approved.9 She added further that Ma. @ud$e Re$ala finds respondent not suited for the 4ob.. Respondent does not den" that she has incurred the alle$ed absences but states that e&cept for the 1onths of October. !hich upon verification. co1plainant clai1s that Ma. Donna Sultan had al!a"s $one on e&tended leave of absence !ithout filin$ applications for leave in advance. constitute conduct pre4udicial to the service. 1ethods and details of !or8. Respondent no! evo8es the for$iveness of @ud$e Re$ala.71onths in a se1ester0 @une ())) ############### @ul" ())) ################ . Donna Sultan is slo! to learn. she cannot find cases in point? neither can she co1e up !ith the latest 4urisprudence on the sub4ect 1atter assi$ned to her and instead copies verbati1 fro1 te&tboo8s. .< da"s 1onthl" leave credit under the leave la! for at least three . R'C. Donna Sultan cannot carr" out proper le$al research. Mue2on Cit". !as discovered to be untrue. respondent did file the re6uired applications for leave but all !ere disapproved. co1plainant alle$es that Ma. and her understandin$.

'he 6ualification that a la! $raduate can be appointed le$al researcher and the lo! salar" attached to the position are to be bla1ed for the 9lo! 6ualit" perfor1ance of plent" of R'C researchers. Respondent e&plains that !hen la!"ers and liti$ants co1e to their office to in6uire re$ardin$ the status of their cases.. referred the 1atter to 3on. Respondent ad1its that there !ere instances !hen she arrives after *07= a. falsification of dail" ti1e record. Respondent ad1its that at ti1es she co11its errors and 1ista8es in the perfor1ance of her duties. she at least has the basic 8no!led$e of la! and le$al research.9 the latter had earlier $iven her a ratin$ of 9Ver" Satisfactor".s to the use of the office telephone. report and reco11endation. as b" her ad1ission. Respondent further denies that she is usuall" out of the office the !hole da". there !ere instances !hen respondent had to attend to the1. Respondent e&pected $uidance fro1 co1plainant as her 4ud$e. respondent 1aintains that @ud$e Re$ala had $iven her staff a $race period of thirt" . if ever she had to $o out of the office. respondent 1aintains that she onl" uses the phone to ans!er inco1in$ calls but sees to it that she does not ta8e lon$ in deference to other official calls.7=. and investi$atin$ 4ud$e of the case.+ In his Resolution and Reco11endation dated () Nove1ber :==:. Moreover. and. she told her office1ate Evel"n 5orela that she !ould brin$ her dau$hter to said hospital as an out#patient for 1edical e&a1inations.E.1. affir1ed the findin$s of the Investi$atin$ @ud$e pertainin$ to respondentQs liabilit" for inefficienc" and habitual absenteeis1 but overturned the reco11endation absolvin$ respondent fro1 the char$e of conduct pre4udicial to the service.ccordin$ to the OC. respondent !ould al!a"s as8 per1ission fro1 either the 5ranch Cler8 of Court or @ud$e Re$ala herself. she tries to fulfill it to the best of her abilities. 'he Investi$atin$ @ud$e reco11ended that respondent be repri1anded for inco1petence. R'C. but these late arrivals are all properl" reflected in the lo$boo8 and on her dail" ti1e records. Mue2on Cit". Respondent is apolo$etic if an" 1isunderstandin$ occurred because of her failure to personall" infor1 @ud$e Re$ala re$ardin$ her !hereabouts.. Due to the fact that the instant ad1inistrative case involves several issues !hich could not be resolved b" 1erel" $oin$ over the pleadin$s sub1itted b" the parties. . especiall" !hen the person in char$e !as not around. Monina .9 Da! $raduates !ho are 9bri$ht9 usuall" pass the bar.9 Re$ardin$ the i1putation that respondent has 1isled the court to believe that her absence !as due to her dau$hterQs confine1ent in the hospital.. Mue2on Cit". Mue2on Cit".1. respondent asserts that she !ill not co1pro1ise her e1plo"1ent b" $oin$ out of the office to tal8 to la!"ers !ho have cases before the court. Dastl". and conduct pre4udicial to the service due to insufficienc" of evidence. !ith no . for investi$ation. .propos her alle$ed inco1petence. respondent 1aintains that she did not tell a 1e1ber of the staff of 5ranch ::. per reco11endation of the OC. 7 .. > then E&ecutive @ud$e. 5ranch (=7. in vie! of the nu1erous cases the latter inherited fro1 her predecessors#in#office.. respondent !as 96uite ill#prepared for the 4ob9 and the present scenario is not uni6ue bet!een co1plainant and respondent. but refrained fro1 reco11endin$ an" penalt" for habitual absenteeis1 in deference to the evaluation of the OC.ith respect to the accusations of habitual tardiness. she ho!ever discloses that she !as loo8in$ for!ard to the $uidance and tutela$e of @ud$e Re$ala in order to enhance her !or8. or up to *07= a. E&ecutive @ud$e Di2on desi$nated @ud$e @ai1e N. in turn !as succeeded b" @ud$e Natividad Eiron Di2on as E&ecutive @ud$e of R'C. @r.. 3o!ever.< @ud$e GeOarosa !as succeeded b" @ud$e Catral Mendo2a. Respondent stresses that in an" tas8 assi$ned to her. to conduct the investi$ation in the instant case. Investi$atin$ @ud$e Sala2ar found respondent liable for inco1petence and habitual absenteeis1.1. that she confined her dau$hter at Malvar Eeneral 3ospital? rather. In a Report dated () October :==>. R'C.1inutes fro1 *0== a. Sala2ar.0 Investi$atin$ @ud$e observed that. respondent clai1s that as a la! $raduate.revalo GeOarosa. respondent pointed out that althou$h co1plainant had recentl" $iven her a perfor1ance ratin$ of 9Cnsatisfactor". 7rd Vice E&ecutive @ud$e of Mue2on Cit". the OC. !ho. but absolved respondent as re$ards the char$es of habitual tardiness. 'he Investi$atin$ @ud$e concurs as it 9can be e&pected since a la! $raduate fro1 C.. the Court. to ti1e#in !ithout bein$ considered late.

she !as still able to $o to the court to $et her .bsenteeis1.net . Public office is public trust.. ())(. (>#:==: .acade1ic bac8$round on le$al biblio$raph" and no professional bac8$round on le$al research can onl" e&pect $uidance fro1 her @ud$e and possibl". On the occasions that she called the office. . 'he $enerali2ation of Investi$atin$ @ud$e re$ardin$ the substandard capabilit" of le$al researchers to deliver decent service bein$ 1ere la! $raduates is not onl" unfounded but unfair as !ell. respondent is e&pected to e&ecute her duties !ith efficienc" and co1petence. RespondentQs violation of the rule on filin$ applications for leave is apparent in her narration of facts.. hen she returned to !or8 in Dece1ber and found the at1osphere in the court hostile..s all others in public service. . .citin$ Me1orandu1 Circular No. s.. she !as re1inded to file her leave of absence and to spea8 !ith co1plainant !ho !as alread" loo8in$ for her. She !ent on leave !ithout see8in$ proper per1ission fro1 her superior. 'he investi$ation revealed that respondent incurred unauthori2ed absences on the follo!in$ 1onths0 October ())) R Nove1ber ())) R Dece1ber ())) R := P da"s () da"s > da"s It !as also found that respondent !ent on .Re0 Reiteratin$ the Civil Service Co11issionQs Polic" on 3abitual . but she did not do either. Records sho! that respondent failed to e&ert efforts to infor1 co1plainant of her dire do1estic situation. 'his state1ent is tanta1ount to sa"in$ that inco1petence is to be e&pected fro1 le$al researchers. but she never as8ed to spea8 !ith co1plainant. RespondentQs absences on the relevant 1onths 6ualif" as habitual absenteeis1 as defined and penali2ed in . Infor1ation reachin$ co1plainant re$ardin$ respondent durin$ her absence !ere rela"ed b" office1ates !ith !ho1 respondent 8ept in touch. . Respondent sub1its to the findin$s of the Investi$atin$ @ud$e and pleads to co1plainant for understandin$ and for$iveness. An officer or e)ployee in the ci il ser ice shall be considered habitually absent if he incurs unauthori5ed absences e'ceedin! the allowable C. . respondent 1et no proble1 $ettin$ the approval for her applications for leave.'M card "et she !as not able to file her application for leave... OD. the 5ranch Cler8 of Court. OD pri1aril" due to serious fa1il" e1er$enc". .9 e do not subscribe to the alibis proffered that the 6ualifications for the position of le$al researcher and the lo! salar" attached to the position are the causes for poor 6ualit" of !or8 turned in b" le$al researchers.sicconduct !as ini1ical to the service or resulted in an" 8ind of corruption.F days )onthly lea e credit under the lea e law for at least three ?G@ )onths in a se)ester or at least three ?G@ consecuti e )onths durin! the year . 'he investi$ation confir1ed the alle$ation that respondent has been seen tal8in$ to la!"ers and liti$ants and tal8s to the phone ver" often. 'he investi$ation report rationali2ed that 9.9 lE phi9. . !hich provides to !it0 A. .d1inistrative Circular No. =>. It !as !hen respondent !ent on prolon$ed unauthori2ed absences and co1plainant started as8in$ for her !hereabouts that the approval of her applications for leave beca1e an issue. Nothin$ less is e&pected of her. there is no sho!in$ that respondent . She called the office dail". Aabitual Absenteeis) (. hen the fa1il" crisis ca1e about. It is noted that prior to respondent $oin$ on .t-he courts are service#oriented line or field a$encies of the @udiciar"S it is inevitable for la!"ers and liti$ants to tal8 to court personnel !hen the" !ant to in6uire about so1e ad1inistrative proble1s or thin$s the" do not understand that are related to their case. in the course of her !or8. 3o!ever. she incurred additional absences to !or8 on her transfer to another court.

and has been sincerel" beseechin$ for co1plainantQs for$iveness and understandin$.(. . .nKt lE phi9. and the fact that this is respondentQs first offense. fro1 the presidin$ 4ud$e to the lo!liest cler8.. but hereb" MODIFIES the penalt" reco11ended. and conduct pre4udicial to the best interest of the service. . Nove1ber.===-.classifies inefficienc". . Sr. Adolfo. .(> the Court. the service e&pected fro1 respondent is 1ore in the nature of doin$ valuable research !or8 than in actuall" entertainin$ 6ueries fro1 parties and counsel.) no other office in the $overn1ent service e&acts a $reater de1and for 1oral ri$hteousness and upri$htness fro1 an e1plo"ee than the 4udiciar". SO ORDERED. Further1ore.s enunciated b" the Court in several cases. In the recent case of Monserate . (7 'he fact that said dau$hter suffered relapse after $ivin$ birth resulted in respondentQs need to absent herself fro1 !or8 to attend to her sic8 dau$hter and the ne!born bab". the Court.ustria#Martine2. Records also disclose that this is respondentQs first offense. ))()7. series of ())) of the Civil Service Co11ission . ho!ever. .. Resolution No. :=-. the OC. Calle4o.. habitual absenteeis1.(.. the Court resolves to 1odif" the penalt" reco11ended. the presence of 1iti$atin$ circu1stances in herein case."ear.Cnifor1 Rules on . . reco11ended that respondent be suspended fro1 the service for si& . the Court hereb" adopts the findin$s of the Office of the Court . Rule IV. I.net .P:=.da" to one .. absenteeis1 and failure to serve su11ons.. * 3oldin$ respondent liable for inefficienc".d1inistrative Cases in the Civil Service.N is hereb" SCSPENDED fro1 the service for three .sic-. ta8in$ into consideration 1iti$atin$ circu1stances present in the said case. SCD'.RNED that a repetition of the sa1e acts shall be dealt !ith 1ore severel".d1inistrator. respondentQs conduct falls short of the e&actin$ standards of public office.. 7HERE1ORE.7.Chair1an-.(. . She is S'ERNDI . and Dece1ber ()))..1onths and one . and 'in$a. the !ord . HandI perfor)ance of household chores are not reasons sufficient to warrant e'e)ption. 'hus.sic. 9awphi9. 1ust al!a"s be be"ond reproach and 1ust be circu1scribed !ith the heav" burden of responsibilit". instead of i1posin$ the penalt" of dis1issal as prescribed for the second offense of fre6uent unauthori2ed absences.n" act !hich falls short of the e&actin$ standards for public office. declared that 9H)Ioral obli!ations.(: hen respondent incurred several absences durin$ the 1onths of October. (+. . student dau$hter is pre$nant. thus. Puno. as le$al researcher. (( It is the i1perative and sacred dut" of each and ever"one in the court to 1aintain its $ood na1e and standin$ as a true te1ple of 4ustice. respondentQs poi$nant open ad1ission of her 9e&cesses and shortco1in$s9 and her plea to co1plainant for for$iveness and understandin$.1onths !ithout pa". DONN. especiall" on the part of those e&pected to preserve the i1a$e of the 4udiciar". hu)anitarian consideration. respondent has been unabashedl" ad1ittin$ her e&cesses and shortco1in$s. !e are 1oved to te1per our vie! of her actuations !ith altruistic consideration and reco11end the li$htest penalt" possible for all three offenses. e a$ree in the findin$s of the OC. In su1. i1posed a fine of '!ent" 'housand Pesos . (=Public officers 1ust be accountable to the people at all ti1es and serve the1 !ith the ut1ost de$ree of responsibilit" and efficienc". Each offense carries an i1posable penalt" of si& . !ho are 1ore ac6uainted !ith the records and the status of the cases pendin$ in the court. +f at all. respondent M.9ver" often9 bein$ the definitive !ord . concur....s 1odified.1onths !ithout pa". .. shall not be countenanced.. 'he conduct and behavior of ever"one connected !ith an office char$ed !ith the dispensation of 4ustice. or the branch cler8 of court. as needed. Considerin$. these facts )ay only be considered in )iti!atin! respondentJs liability.e a$ree !ith 6ualification. Considerin$. hile it is true that courts are service#oriented. Respondin$ to 6ueries are better perfor1ed b" other court e1plo"ees. @@. fre6uent unauthori2ed absences and conduct pre4udicial to the best interest of the service as $rave offenses. Section <:. in i1posin$ a penalt" on a court e1plo"ee !ho has been previousl" found $uilt" of $ross inefficienc". such as the cler8s in char$e of the cases. she !as indeed confronted !ith a passionatel" difficult fa1il" proble1 due to the discover" that her un!ed.

7(. THE !EGA! C!INIC.EEH P<.M DIVORCE.NC +"r M"tter No.<=. 1993 MAURICIO C. . (? . Victoria 5ld$. No. Fernande2. <:::=>( CDINIC.. p. . 333 J.+ DEE. Anne' " EC.0== p1 +#Flr. Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN 5. Di1. (+ October :==7.D <:(+:7:. . Info on DIVORCE.ve. (=+.M. 'on$a. P#=7#(+>>. p.. (: Supra. INC. ) . :* October :==7.== for a valid 1arria$e. . >(7 SCR. note (=. J. P#=7#(. (=+. . p.M.ndal .M..1oot#ote' ( Rollo.: Petitioner pra"s this Court 9to order the respondent to cease and desist fro1 issuin$ advertise1ents si1ilar to or of the sa1e tenor as that of anne&es 9..#e 18.M. vs. P#=:#(. p. pp. * Rollo. p. (( Septe1ber :===. < Per resolution dated (( Septe1ber :==: of the Second Division of the Court..9 'he advertise1ents co1plained of b" herein petitioner are as follo!s0 Anne' A SECRE' M. No. VIS.r1ida. : Rollo..and to perpetuall" prohibit persons or entities fro1 1a8in$ advertise1ents pertainin$ to the e&ercise of the la! profession other than those allo!ed b" la!.ssociate @ustice of the Court of .9 and 959 . P#=:#(<*(.. @r.ppeals. . No. Valle. DON P. P#))#(7=). No. :7+. No! . (: @ul" :==>. > No! . <:>.. 7=. R E SO D C ' I O N REGA!ADO.)<. >(> SCR. Mla. petitioner.6uino . No.. .NNCDMEN'.. P#=>#(*:7..RRI. (( Re"es#Macabeo . :( . respondent.RNINSON . >+*? Cler8 of Court Muidilla. Muebral. (> . '3E Please call0 <:(#=+. .M. CN . =+ October :==7. (= Iba" . >=( SCR. (7 Rollo.ppeals. 7>= SCR.pril :==7. >== SCR. (=:.pril :==7. INC.=. >(7 SCR. + Rollo. =7 .ssociate @ustice of the Court of .M.of said petition. 7 Rollo. :7*#:>(. :=+. P#=(#(>+<. *07= a1J . . No.5SENCE. U!EP. <)+? Madrid .

Invest1ent in the Phil.bsence. Respondent further ar$ues that assu1in$ that the services advertised are le$al services.to sub1it their respective position papers on the controvers" and.>.-. de1eanin$ of the la! profession.(. .I5P. DEE. their 1e1oranda.. In its ans!er to the petition. obtainin$ docu1ents li8e clearance.nnul1ent of Marria$e. thereafter. Inc. . !e re6uired the .. 'he De$al Clinic. reportedl" decided b" the Cnited States Supre1e Court on @une +. Eua1 divorce. <:(#+:7:? <:(#+:<(? <::#:=>(? <:(#=+.is 9le$al services9. !hether the sa1e can properl" be the sub4ect of the advertise1ents herein co1plained of. Considerin$ the critical i1plications on the le$al profession of the issues raised herein. Re1arria$e to Filipina Fiancees. is $ivin$ FREE 5OONS on Eua1 Divorce throu$h 'he De$al Clinic be$innin$ Monda" to Frida" durin$ office hours. 3 'he said bar associations readil" responded and e&tended their valuable services and cooperation of !hich this Court ta8es note !ith appreciation and $ratitude. assistance to la"1an in need of basic institutional services fro1 $overn1ent or non#$overn1ent a$encies li8e birth. evidence $atherin$. MuotaLNon# 6uota Res.ssociation . o1ens Da!"ers% Circle .ttorne" in Eua1. as advertised b" it constitutes practice of la! and.o1en Da!"ers .ve. ..does not !ish to 1a8e issue !ith respondent%s forei$n citations.bo$adas . local or forei$n visas. 1 'el. D.. propert". or business re$istration. 1arria$e.:.<. co11on sense !ould readil" dictate that the sa1e are essentiall" !ithout substantial distinction. Call Marivic. and destructive of the confidence of the co11unit" in the inte$rit" of the 1e1bers of the bar and that.P. but clai1s that it is not en$a$ed in the practice of la! but in the renderin$ of 9le$al support services9 throu$h parale$als !ith the use of 1odern co1puters and electronic 1achines.7.Philippine Da!"ers% . '3E +F Victoria 5ld$.D Er1ita.e.Philippine 5ar .-. ()++.ssociation . >:) CN . i. (.Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines . T Special Retiree%s Visa.P-. 'he 1ain issues posed for resolution before the Court are !hether or not the services offered b" respondent.PD. . I11i$ration Proble1s.I5P-. to !it.. passports. in either case. . respondent ad1its the fact of publication of said advertise1ent at its instance. Declaration of . the act of advertisin$ these services should be allo!ed supposedl" in the li$ht of the case of John R.doption. Suffice it to state that the I5P has 1ade its position 1anifest. Manila nr. and . For !ho could den" that docu1ent search. "ates and Dan . hence the reliefs sou$ht in his petition as hereinbefore 6uoted. 5efore proceedin$ !ith an in#depth anal"sis of the 1erits of this case.P5. constitutes practice of la!H &&& &&& &&& 'he Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines . that it stron$l" opposes the vie! espoused b" respondent ..FID. +nte!rated "ar of the (hilippines0 &&& &&& &&& Not!ithstandin$ the subtle 1anner b" !hich respondent endeavored to distin$uish the t!o ter1s.an . CS E1bass" CDINIC.+ It is the sub1ission of petitioner that the advertise1ents above reproduced are cha1pterous. he is asha1ed and offended b" the said advertise1ents. 9le$al support services9 is-a. INC. Visa E&t.Federacion International de .to the effect that toda" it is alri$ht to advertise one%s le$al services-. .$Steen s. !e dee1 it proper and enli$htenin$ to present hereunder e&cerpts fro1 the respective position papers adopted b" the afore1entioned bar associations and the 1e1oranda sub1itted b" the1 on the issues involved in this bar 1atter. . . unethical. CSLForei$n Visa for Filipina SpouseLChildren. as a 1e1ber of the le$al profession. IDOCI-.ssociation of the Philippines .C. State "ar of Ari5ona . 'he I5P accordin$l" declares in no uncertain ter1s its opposition to respondent%s act of establishin$ a 9le$al clinic9 and of conco1itantl" advertisin$ the sa1e throu$h ne!spaper publications.

the advertise1ents in 6uestion are onl" 1eant to infor1 the $eneral public of the services bein$ offered b" it. 'he i1pression created b" the advertise1ents in 6uestion can be traced. the advertise1ents in 6uestion $ive the i1pression that respondent is offerin$ le$al services.nd it beco1es unnecessar" to 1a8e a distinction bet!een 9le$al services9 and 9le$al support services. Inc. the Filipino spouse shall have capacit" to re1arr" under Philippine Da!. 1orals. / &&& &&& &&& . In addition. . as earlier 1entioned. +t is the foundation of the fa)ily and an in iolable social institution !hose nature. Said advertise1ents.'he I5P !ould therefore invo8e the ad1inistrative supervision of this 3onorable Court to perpetuall" restrain respondent fro1 underta8in$ hi$hl" unethical activities in the field of la! practice as aforedescribed. to the ver" na1e bein$ used b" respondent J 9'he De$al Clinic. there is onl" one instance !hen a forei$n divorce is reco$ni2ed. .rticle :. 'he advertise1ents in 6uestion leave no roo1 for doubt in the 1inds of the readin$ public that le$al services are bein$ offered b" la!"ers.a 1arria$e as follo!s0 .9 Such a na1e. apparentl" because this . 'he advertise1ents in 6uestion are 1eant to induce the perfor1ance of acts contrar" to la!.9 as the respondent !ould have it. 4ust li8e a 1edical clinic connotes 1edical services for 1edical proble1s.the. the ter1 9De$al Clinic9 connotes la!"ers. as published in the advertise1ents sub4ect of the present case. Inc.. it is obvious that the 1essa$e bein$ conve"ed is that Filipinos can avoid the le$al conse6uences of a 1arria$e . Marria$e is special contract of per)anent union bet!een a 1an and !o1an entered into accordance !ith la! for the establish1ent of con4u$al and fa1il" life. e1phasi2e to Eua1 divorce. 5. the respondent%s na1e. that the Fa1il" Code .of 4ustice. conse6uences. 5" si1pl" readin$ the 6uestioned advertise1ents. . and an" la! student ou$ht to 8no! that under the Fa1il" Code. .scale.is. It 1a" be conceded that. as the ter1 1edical clinic connotes doctors. ho!ever. More i1portantl". the advertise1ents in 6uestion appear !ith a picture and na1e of a person bein$ represented as a la!"er fro1 Eua1. Further1ore. It 1ust not be for$otten. and incidents are $overned b" la! and not sub4ect to stipulation. It thus beco1es irrelevant !hether respondent is 1erel" offerin$ 9le$al support services9 as clai1ed b" it. public order and public polic". and this practicall" re1oves !hatever doubt 1a" still re1ain as to the nature of the service or services bein$ offered. hile the respondent repeatedl" denies that it offers le$al services to the public. 'he Petition in fact si1pl" assu1es this to be so. !hich all the 1ore reinforces the i1pression that it is bein$ operated b" 1e1bers of the bar and that it offers le$al services.s. and that is0 . first of all. e&cept that 1arria$e settle1ents 1a" fi& the propert" relation durin$ the 1arria$e !ithin the li1its provided b" this Code.the effect that the advertise1ents have on the readin$ public.9 $ives the i1pression that respondent corporation is bein$ operated b" la!"ers and that it renders le$al services. appears !ith .rticle (.. as the respondent clai1s. 'he use of the na1e 9'he De$al Clinic.defines. here a 1arria$e bet!een a Filipino citi2en and a forei$ner is validl" celebrated and a di orce is thereafter alidly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitatin! hi) or her to re)arry. or !hether it offers le$al services as an" la!"er activel" en$a$ed in la! practice does. too. it is respectfull" sub1itted connotes the renderin$ of le$al services for le$al proble1s. !hether true or not.

!hich is su$$estive of i11oral publication of applications for a 1arria$e license. investi$ators for $atherin$ of evidence.t the ver" least. or an" other advertise1ents si1ilar thereto. the onl" lo$ical conse6uence is that. !here certain defects in Philippine la!s are e&ploited for the sa8e of profit. it 1a" also be relevant to point out that advertise1ents such as that sho!n in .d1ittedl". !ho b" reason of their havin$ devoted ti1e and effort e&clusivel" to such field cannot fulfill the e&actin$ re6uire1ents for ad1ission to the 5ar. violation of Philippine la!. but encoura$es. Indeed. obviousl" to e1phasi2e its sanctit" and inviolabilit". 1orals. or. as earlier discussed. even if both are . in the e"es of an ordinar" ne!spaper reader. . thereb" destro"in$ and de1eanin$ the inte$rit" of the 5ar.a bi$a1ous 1arria$e in 3on$ Non$ or Das Ve$as. this can be considered 9the dar8 side9 of le$al practice. 1e1bers of the bar the1selves are encoura$in$ or inducin$ the perfor1ance of acts !hich are contrar" to la!.9 !hich is ho! the Fa1il" Code describes 1arria$e. !hen the conduct of such business b" non#1e1bers of the 5ar encroaches upon the practice of la!. the advertise1ents in 6uestion $ive the i1pression that respondent corporation is bein$ operated b" la!"ers and that it offers le$al services.t !orst. !hich contains a cartoon of a 1otor vehicle !ith the !ords 9@ust Married9 on its bu1per and see1s to address those plannin$ a 9secret 1arria$e. 'his is not onl" 1isleadin$.in s8ill. stora$e and retrieval. this is outri$ht 1alpractice.e6ual. electronic data $atherin$.9 of the Petition. .nne& 9. $ood custo1s and the public $ood. there can be no choice but to prohibit such business. J . 1an" of the services involved in the case at bar can be better perfor1ed b" specialists in other fields.celebrated in accordance !ith our la!. 'hus.that.!ith i1punit" si1pl" because the 4urisdiction of Philippine courts does not e&tend to the place !here the cri1e is co11itted.=:. such as co1puter e&perts. fro1 offerin$ such services to the public in $eneral. 'o prohibit the1 fro1 9encroachin$9 upon the le$al profession !ill den" the profession of the $reat benefits and advanta$es of 1odern technolo$". &&& &&& &&& It is respectfull" sub1itted that respondent should be en4oined fro1 causin$ the publication of the advertise1ents in 6uestion. 'he I5P is a!are of the fact that providin$ co1puteri2ed le$al research. a la!"er usin$ a co1puter !ill be doin$ better than a la!"er usin$ a t"pe!riter. . . it can readil" be concluded that the above i1pressions one 1a" $ather fro1 the advertise1ents in 6uestion are accurate. 3o!ever. 3ere it can be seen that cri1inal acts are bein$ encoura$ed or co11itted . In addition. 'he Sharon Cuneta#Eabb" Concepcion e&a1ple alone confir1s !hat the advertise1ents su$$est.9 the inviolable social institution. la!"er shall not counsel or abet activities ai1ed at defiance of the la! or at lessenin$ confidence in the le$al s"ste1. Even if it be assu1ed. at the ver" least.9 if not su$$estin$ a 9secret 1arria$e. It is also sub1itted that respondent should be prohibited fro1 further perfor1in$ or offerin$ so1e of the services it presentl" offers. Rule (. orse. . b" si1pl" $oin$ to Eua1 for a divorce.9 1a8es li$ht of the 9special contract of per1anent union. this particular advertise1ent appears to encoura$e 1arria$es celebrated in secrec". ar!uendo. and li8e services !ill $reatl" benefit the le$al profession and should not be stifled but instead encoura$ed. standardi2ed le$al for1s. If the article 9R& for De$al Proble1s9 is to be revie!ed. or serves to induce.the 9le$al support services9 respondent offers do not constitute le$al services as co11onl" understood.

Inc. ho!ever.9 and solicitin$ e1plo"1ent for its enu1erated services fall !ithin the real1 of a practice !hich thus "ields itself to the re$ulator" po!ers of the Supre1e Court. but includes dra!in$ of deeds. it 1ust be re6uired to include. Co11ent-. 'his. that it is not authori2ed or capable of renderin$ a le$al opinion. 1a" re6uire further proceedin$s because of the factual considerations involved. ()*> ed. For respondent to sa" that it is 1erel" en$a$ed in parale$al !or8 is to stretch credulit". It has been held that the practice of la! is not li1ited to the conduct of cases in court. and 1ore i1portantl". 'his is absurd. the corporation%s . 3 :. respondent 9'he De$al Clinic. Respondent asserts that it 9is not en$a$ed in the practice of la! but en$a$ed in $ivin$ le$al support services to la!"ers and la"1en. la! practice in a corporate for1 1a" prove to be advanta$eous to the le$al profession. a disclai1er that it is not authori2ed to practice la!. 'echnolo$ical develop1ent in the profession 1a" be encoura$ed !ithout toleratin$. but instead ensurin$ prevention of ille$al practice. advertisin$ should be directed e&clusivel" at 1e1bers of the 5ar. Respondent%s o!n co11ercial advertise1ent !hich announces a certainAtty. .. (hilippine "ar Association0 &&& &&& &&&. that certain course of action 1a" be ille$al under Philippine la!. not le$al services. p.. for the protection of the public. but before allo!ance of such practice 1a" be considered. such as acts !hich tend to su$$est or induce celebration abroad of 1arria$es !hich are bi$a1ous or other!ise ille$al and void under Philippine la!. Inc.lso. in the infor1ation $iven. ho!ever. throu$h e&perienced parale$als.rticle of Incorporation and 5"#la!s 1ust confor1 to each and ever" provision of the Code of Professional Responsibilit" and the Rules of Court. and ad isin! clients as to their le!al ri!ht and then ta#e the) to an attorney and as# the latter to loo# after their case in court See Martin. incorporation. If respondent is allo!ed to advertise.pars. It is apt to recall that onl" natural persons can en$a$e in the practice of la!. and such li1itation cannot be evaded b" a corporation e1plo"in$ co1petent la!"ers to practice for it. !ithout such ter1 bein$ clearl" defined b" rule or re$ulation. . that so1e of respondent%s services ou$ht to be prohibited outri$ht. respondent%s acts of holdin$ out itself to the public under the trade na1e 9'he De$al Clinic. : and 7. De$al and @udicial Ethics. Respondent !ould then be offerin$ technical assistance. ho!ever. %on (ar#inson to be handlin$ the fields of la! belies its pretense. !ith the use of 1odern co1puters and electronic 1achines9 . the 1ore difficult tas8 of carefull" distin$uishin$ bet!een !hich service 1a" be offered to the public in $eneral and !hich should be 1ade available e&clusivel" to 1e1bers of the 5ar 1a" be underta8en. Cn6uestionabl". 7)-. that a la!"er should be consulted before decidin$ on !hich course of action to ta8e.9 is offerin$ and renderin$ le!al ser ices throu$h its reserve of la!"ers. 'he benefits of bein$ assisted b" parale$als cannot be i$nored. !ith a clear and un1ista8able disclai1er that it is not authori2ed to practice la! or perfor1 le$al services. 'here 1i$ht be nothin$ ob4ectionable if respondent is allo!ed to perfor1 all of its services. and !ithout an" ade6uate and effective 1eans of re$ulatin$ his activities.9 . Inc. this is the sche1e or device b" !hich respondent 9'he De$al Clinic.5oth the 5ench and the 5ar. and that it cannot reco11end an" particular la!"er !ithout sub4ectin$ itself to possible sanctions for ille$al practice of la!. hile respondent 1a" not be prohibited fro1 si1pl" disse1inatin$ infor1ation re$ardin$ such 1atters. It 1ust be e1phasi2ed. should be careful not to allo! or tolerate the ille$al practice of la! in an" for1. 5ut nobod" should be allo!ed to represent hi1self as a 9parale$al9 for profit. Fro1 all indications. but onl" if such services are 1ade available e&clusivel" to 1e1bers of the 5ench and 5ar. Obviousl". not onl" for the protection of 1e1bers of the 5ar but also.lternativel". renderin$ opinions.

hile it 1a" no! be the opportune ti1e to establish these courses of stud" andLor standards. as enu1erated above. Revised Rules of Court. It is a personal ri!ht li1ited to persons !ho have 6ualified the1selves under the la!.holds out itself to the public and solicits e1plo"1ent of its le$al services. are !it0 (. the activities of respondent fall s6uarel" and are e1braced in !hat la!"ers and la"1en e6uall" ter1 as 9the practice of la!. 'he practice of la! is not a profession open to all !ho !ish to en$a$e in it nor can it be assi$ned to another . 'he advertise1ents co1plained of are not onl" unethical.ppl"in$ the test laid do!n b" the Court in the aforecited . it offers the $eneral public its advisor" services on Persons and Fa1il" Relations Da!. is a la!"er 6ualified to practice la!.s advertised. Its advertised services un1ista8abl" re6uire the application of the aforesaid la!. absence and adoption? I11i$ration Da!s. Onl" then.$rava Case. the issues before this 3onorable Court. secret 1arria$es. 8. 0o)en Lawyers$ Circle0 In resolvin$. . . liti$ants and the $eneral public as enunciated in the Pri1ar" Purpose Clause of its . courses of stud" andLor standards !hich !ould 6ualif" these parale$als to deal !ith the $eneral public as such. the persons and the la!"ers !ho act for it are sub4ect to court discipline.1. 'he 3onorable Supre1e Court has the po!er to supress and punish the De$al Clinic and its corporate officers for its unauthori2ed practice of la! and for its unethical. :+=-. clearl" and convincin$l" sho! that it is indeed en$a$ed in la! practice. annul1ent of 1arria$es. . the fact re1ains that at present. It is an odious ehicle for deception.t present.Sec. 'he De$al Clinic is en$a$ed in the practice of la!? :. in ans!er to the issues stated herein. particularl" re$ardin$ forei$n divorces. Precisel". albeit outside of court.9 8 >.lthou$h respondent uses its business na)e. Rule (7*. 8no!led$e and e&perience. para1ount consideration should be $iven to the protection of the $eneral public fro1 the dan$er of bein$ e&ploited b" un6ualified persons or entities !ho 1a" be en$a$ed in the practice of la!.See pa$es : to < of Respondent%s Co11ent-.(. 5 7.ssociation%s position.is to sub4ect the 1e1bers to the discipline of the Supre1e Court.rticle. It follo!s that not onl" respondent but also all the persons !ho are actin$ for respondent are the persons en$a$ed in unethical la! practice. Such practice is unauthori2ed? 7. particularl" on visa related proble1s. but also 1isleadin$ and patentl" i11oral? and >. these do not e&ist in the Philippines. (.of Incorporation.s. 1isleadin$ and i11oral advertisin$. 5ut its advertised services.See < . . In the 1eanti1e. beco1in$ a la!"er re6uires one to ta8e a ri$orous four#"ear course of stud" on top of a four#"ear bachelor of arts or sciences course and then to ta8e and pass the bar e&a1inations. this 3onorable Court 1a" decide to 1a8e 1easures to . It clai1s that it 1erel" renders 9le$al support services9 to ans!ers. especiall" so !hen the public cannot ventilate an" $rievance for )alpractice a$ainst the business conduit. i11i$ration proble1s? the Invest1ents Da! of the Philippines and such other related la!s. there are in those 4urisdictions. hile the use of a parale$al is sanctioned in 1an" 4urisdiction as an aid to the ad1inistration of 4ustice. . the le$al principles and procedures related thereto. &&& &&& &&& Respondent posits that is it not en$a$ed in the practice of la!. (hilippine Lawyers$ Association0 'he Philippine Da!"ers% . @ur. the le$al advices based thereon and !hich activities call for le$al trainin$. the li1itation of practice of la! to persons !ho have been dul" ad1itted as 1e1bers of the 5ar .

0o)en Lawyer$s Association of the (hilippines0 . 'he la! has "et to be a1ended so that such act could beco1e 4ustifiable. as there are doctors in an" 1edical clinic. In the sa1e 1anner.b" our Code of Morals should not be done. i11i$ration.= for a valid 1arria$e it is certainl" foolin$ the public for valid 1arria$es in the Philippines are sole1ni2ed onl" b" officers authori2ed to do so under the la!. Inc. adoption and forei$n invest1ent. 1easures should be ta8en to protect the $eneral public fro1 fallin$ pre" to those !ho advertise le$al services !ithout bein$ 6ualified to offer such services.nne& 9. Inc.nd to e1plo" an a$enc" for said purpose of contractin$ 1arria$e is not necessar". declaration of absence.of. ho!ever...9 9 <. Canada and other countries the trend is to!ards allo!in$ la!"ers to advertise their special s8ills to enable people to obtain fro1 6ualified practitioners le$al services for their particular needs can 4ustif" the use of advertise1ents such as are the sub4ect 1atter of the petition. it appears in the instant case that le$al services are bein$ advertised not b" la!"ers but b" an entit" staffed b" 9parale$als. le$al 1atters . the Supre1e Court held that solicitation for clients b" an attorne" b" circulars of advertise1ents. is unprofessional. but it is ille$al in that in bold letters it announces that the De$al Clinic.nne&es 9.ille$al and a$ainst the Code of Professional Responsibilit" of la!"ers in this countr". . and offenses of this character 4ustif" per1anent eli1ination fro1 the 5ar. hile it appears that la!"ers are prohibited under the present Code of Professional Responsibilit" fro1 advertisin$.protect the $eneral public fro1 bein$ e&ploited b" those !ho 1a" be dealin$ !ith the $eneral public in the $uise of bein$ 9parale$als9 !ithout bein$ 6ualified to do so. J does not help 1atters. !hen onl" 9parale$als9 are involved in 'he De$al Clinic. the $eneral public should also be protected fro1 the dan$ers !hich 1a" be brou$ht about b" advertisin$ of le$al services.. are hi$hl" reprehensible. It !ould encoura$e people to consult this clinic about ho! the" could $o about havin$ a secret 1arria$e here. <7 Phil. hile it is advertised that one has to $o to said a$enc" and pa" P<. e sub1it further that these advertise1ents that see1 to pro4ect that secret 1arria$es and divorce are possible in this countr" for a fee. . could !or8 outLcause the celebration of a secret 1arria$e !hich is not onl" ille$al but i11oral in this countr". 4 .9 and 959 of the petition are clearl" advertise1ents to solicit cases for the purpose of $ain !hich.tt". for one . it also $ives the 1isleadin$ i1pression that there are la!"ers involved in 'he De$al Clinic. annul1ent of 1arria$e. 10 . No$ales.9 Clearl". !hich are in essence. . see1s to $ive the i1pression that infor1ation re$ardin$ validit" of 1arria$es.In re 'a$uda. visa e&tensions.. and see8 advice on divorce. !hen in fact it is not so.ssu1in$ that Respondent is. . e&cept under the Code of Musli1 Personal Da!s in the Philippines.cannot4ustif" an ille$al act even b" !hatever 1erit the ille$al act 1a" serve.are. !ill be $iven to the1 if the" avail of its services. 7ederacion +nternacional de Abo!ados0 . No a1ount of reasonin$ that in the CS. 'he Respondent%s na1e J 'he De$al Clinic. perusal of the 6uestioned advertise1ents of Respondent. staffed purel" b" parale$als. It is also a$ainst $ood 1orals and is deceitful because it falsel" represents to the public to be able to do that !hich b" our la!s cannot be done . In the case . . as clai1ed. Respondent%s alle$ations are further belied b" the ver" ad1issions of its President and 1a4orit" stoc8holder. as provided for under the above cited la!. 7+. !here in this countr" there is none. It $ives the i1pression a$ain that Respondent !ill or can cure the le$al proble1s brou$ht to the1. Inc.and.9 of the petition is not onl" ille$al in that it is an advertise1ent to solicit cases. divorce. Inc. !hen it cannot nor should ever be atte1pted. !ho $ave an insi$ht on the structure and 1ain purpose of Respondent corporation in the afore1entioned 9Star!ee89 article.

&&& &&& &&& (. . 'he court should be ver" cautious about declarin$ AthatB a !idespread.the consultant%s8no!led$e of the la!. the" are not. . . consultants li8e the defendants have the sa1e service that the lar$er e1plo"ers $et fro1 their o!n speciali2ed staff. . .+ 'hat entities ad1ittedl" not en$a$ed in the practice of la!. . but !hen !e are servin$ others. and !ho dra!s plans and specification in har1on" !ith the la!. Of necessit". 5an8ers. In the sa1e vein.clear that . . . More recentl". if the industrial relations field had been pre#e1pted b" la!"ers. 'he handlin$ of industrial relations is $ro!in$ into a reco$ni2ed profession for !hich appropriate courses are offered b" our leadin$ universities. provided no separate fee is char$ed for the le$al advice or infor1ation. .re the" practicin$ la!H In 1" opinion. Or the industrial relations e&pert cites. then an architect !ho perfor1ed this function !ould probabl" be considered to be trespassin$ on territor" reserved for licensed attorne"s. do not constitute the practice of la! . $ood e&a1ple is the architect. or custo1 placed a la!"er al!a"s at the elbo! of the la" personnel 1an. perfor1 the services rendered b" Respondent does not necessaril" lead to the conclusion that Respondent is not unla!full" practicin$ la!. buildin$ and fire prevention codes. and !ithout re$ard to le$al thin8in$ or lac8 of it. 5ut this is not the case. as8ed b" his client to o1it a fire to!er. and the le$al 6uestion is subordinate and incidental to a 1a4or non#le$al proble1. . . and his use of that 8no!led$e as a factor in deter1inin$ !hat 1easures he shall reco11end. . . . such as 1ana$e1ent consultanc" fir1s or travel a$encies. in support of so1e 1easure that he reco11ends.1on$ the lar$er corporate e1plo"ers. . actin$ as a consultant can render effective service unless he is fa1iliar !ith such statutes and re$ulations. Our 8no!led$e of the la! J accurate or inaccurate J 1oulds our conduct not onl" !hen !e are actin$ for ourselves. no one . It see1s . !ho 1ust be fa1iliar !ith 2onin$. It is not onl" presu1ed that all 1en 8no! the la!. . 'he 1ost i1portant bod" of the industrial relations e&perts are the officers and business a$ents of the labor unions and fe! of the1 are la!"ers. ho!ever. li6uor dealers and la"1en $enerall" possess rather precise 8no!led$e of the la!s touchin$ their particular business or profession. If it !ere usual for one intendin$ to erect a buildin$ on his land to en$a$e a la!"er to advise hi1 and the architect in respect to the buildin$ code and the li8e. . !ell#established 1ethod of conductin$ business is . It is lar$el" a 1atter of de$ree and of custo1. 'his is not practicin$ la!.involves 8no!led$e of the la! does not necessaril" 1a8e respondent $uilt" of unla!ful practice of la!. !hether run b" la!"ers or not. . . it has been the practice for so1e "ears to dele$ate special responsibilit" in e1plo"ee 1atters to a 1ana$e1ent $roup chosen for their practical 8no!led$e and s8ill in such 1atter. the fact that the business of respondent . 3e 1ust be careful not to su$$est a course of conduct !hich the la! forbids. but it is a fact that 1ost 1en have considerable ac6uaintance !ith broad features of the la! .assu1in$ it can be en$a$ed in independentl" of the practice of la!. replies that it is re6uired b" the statute. 5ut suppose the architect. a decision of the National Dabor Relations 5oard. factor" and tene1ent house statutes. Di8e!ise.

since the situation is not presented b" the proofs. :d *==. it is 6uite li8el" that defendant should not handle it.. Most real estate sales are ne$otiated b" bro8ers !ho are not la!"ers. at pp. he perfor)ed ser ices which are custo)arily reser ed to )e)bers of the bar. or b" other representative. or that the technical education $iven b" our schools cannot be used b" the $raduates in their business.nother branch of defendant%s !or8 is the representations of the e1plo"er in the ad4ust1ent of $rievances and in collective bar$ainin$. 3ere. . especiall" before trial e&a1iners of the National Dabor Relations 5oard. of course. and ther representative% one not a la!"er. and the person appointed is free to accept the e1plo"1ent !hether or not he is a 1e1ber of the bar. Rules and Re$ulations.unla!ful. cited in Stats8". Let )e add that if. !ould be the practice of the la!. 'he State of Ne! @erse" is !ithout po!er to interfere !ith such deter1ination or to forbid representation before the a$enc" b" one !ho1 the a$enc" ad1its. Defendant also appears to represent the e1plo"er before ad1inistrative a$encies of the federal $overn1ent. 'his.7(. even ar$uin$ 6uestions purel" le$al. . actin$ b" virtue of an authorit" $ranted b" the Con$ress. does not transfor) his acti ities into the practice of law. 1a" re$ulate the representation of parties before such a$enc". . or b" counsel. or that the considerable class of 1en !ho custo1aril" perfor1 a certain function have no ri$ht to do so. <7 . or of a statute. Septe1ber ((th.. (<>#(<.. as a whole . then it 1a" be that onl" a la!"er can accept the assi$n1ent. he dre! e1plo"ees% !ills. I can i1a$ine defendant bein$ en$a$ed pri1aril" to advise as to the la! definin$ his client%s obli$ations to his e1plo"ees. 5ut such is not the fact in the case before 1e. 'he rules of the National Dabor Relations 5oard $ive to a part" the ri$ht to appear in person.-. ()>. he would be practicin! law. ood. In this phase of his !or8. 'he la! onl" provides the fra1e !ithin !hich he 1ust !or8. there 1a" be an e&ception !here the business turns on a 6uestion of la!. we should consider his wor# for any particular client or custo)er. ho!ever. &he incidental le!al ad ice or infor)ation defendant )ay !i e. Defendant%s pri1aril" efforts are alon$ econo1ic and ps"cholo$ical lines. to $uide his client%s obli$ations to his e1plo"ees. 5ut if the value of the land depends on a disputed ri$ht#of#!a" and the principal role of the ne$otiator is to assess the probable outco1e of the dispute and persuade the opposite part" to the sa1e opinion. defendant 1a" la!full" do !hatever the Dabor 5oard allo!s. +n deter)inin! whether a )an is practicin! law. . 4ust as the 2onin$ code li1its the 8ind of buildin$ the li1its the 8ind of buildin$ the architect 1a" plan. 5ut I need not reach a definite conclusion here. !ith or !ithout a 1ediator. S.. For instance. Or if a controvers" bet!een an e1plo"er and his 1en $ro!s fro1 differin$ interpretations of a contract. e en as a )inor feature of his wor#. %Counsel% here 1eans a licensed attorne".uerbacher v. . 'his is not per se the practice of la!.n"one 1a" use an a$ent for ne$otiations and 1a" select an a$ent particularl" s8illed in the sub4ect under discussion. to $uide his client alon$ the path charted b" la!. if as part of a !elfare pro$ra1. :=7.n a$enc" of the federal $overn1ent. Introduction to Parale$alis1 A()+>B.

a. la!"er !ho is en$a$ed in another profession or occupation concurrentl" !ith the practice of la! shall 1a8e clear to his client !hether he is actin$ as a la!"er or in another capacit".'he services perfor1ed are not custo1aril" reserved to 1e1bers of the bar? .).=* J . that aside fro1 purel" $ivin$ infor1ation. strai$htfor!ard 1arria$es. the De$al Clinic appears to render !eddin$ services .is not en$a$ed in the practice of la! provided that0 . 'here bein$ no le$al i1pedi1ent under the statute to the sale of the 8it. absence. In the present case.ll these 1ust be considered in relation to the !or8 for an" particular client as a !hole. and $ive le$al advice.6 +6 A (AR&+C8LAR S+&8A&+. such as the De$al Clinic. (. 1a" not constitute practice of la!. Dace"%s boo8 is sold to the public at lar$e. Si1ilarl" the defendant%s publication does not purport to $ive personal advice on a specific proble1 peculiar to a desi$nated or readil" identified person in a particular situation J in their publication and sale of the 8its. annul1ent of 1arria$e and visas . . (.7 A (AR&+C8LAR (ERS. the De$al Clinic%s parale$als 1a" appl" the la! to the particular proble1 of the client. 3o!ever. It is not entirel" i1probable. . If a non#la!"er. li8e securin$ a 1arria$e license.b.((. it can be said that a person en$a$ed in a la!ful callin$ . . such publication and sale did not constitutes the unla!ful practice of la! . there !as no proper basis for the in4unction a$ainst . . . the te&t and the for1s.7 LEGAL (RAC&+CE / &AE RE(RESE6&A&+.6 A6% A%D+S+6G . !ith advice as to ho! the for1s should be filled out. &A+S +S &AE ESSE6&+AL .9 Petition-. .No separate fee is char$ed for the le$al advice or infor1ation.'he le$al 6uestion is subordinate and incidental to a 1a4or non#le$al proble1?. (. .nne&es 9. If the person involved is both la!"er and non#la!"er. ho!ever. . &here is no personal contact or relationship with a particular indi idual. 'he business is si1ilar to that of a boo8store !here the custo1er bu"s 1aterials on the sub4ect and deter1ines on the sub4ect and deter1ines b" hi1self !hat courses of action to ta8e. .pparentl" it is ur$ed that the con4oinin$ of these t!o.c. . that is. and does not purport to $ive personal advice on a specific proble1 peculiar to a desi$nated or readil" identified person. then !hat 1a" be involved is actuall" the practice of la!. 'he De$al Clinic also appears to $ive infor1ation on divorce. .t 1ost the boo8 assu1es to offer $eneral advice on co11on proble1s. .6.(. renders such services then it is en$a$ed in the unauthori2ed practice of la!. constitutes the unla!ful practice of la!. and 1a8in$ arran$e1ents !ith a priest or a 4ud$e.See .(=. 5ut that is the situation !ith 1an" approved and accepted te&ts. if the proble1 is as co1plicated as that described in 9R& for De$al Proble1s9 on the Sharon Cuneta#Eabb" Concepcion# Richard Eo1e2 case.nne& 9.* Fro1 the fore$oin$.nd the 1ere fact that the principles or rules stated in the te&t 1a" be accepted b" a particular reader as a solution to his proble1 does not affect this. . It cannot be clai1ed that the publication of a le$al te&t !hich publication of a le$al te&t !hich purports to sa" !hat the la! is a1ount to le$al practice. 6or does there e'ist that relation of confidence and trust so necessary to the status of attorney and client. Such !ould constitute unauthori2ed practice of la!.9 and 959 Petition-. Services on routine. Purel" $ivin$ infor1ational 1aterials 1a" not constitute of la!.See . the Code of Professional Responsibilit" succintl" states the rule of conduct0 Rule (<.!hich 1a" involve 8no!led$e of the la!.

and the preparation of le$al instru1ents and contract b" !hich le$al ri$hts are secured. On this score.Co11ent. particularl" !ith reference to the $ivin$ of advice and counsel b" the defendant relatin$ to specific proble1s of particular individuals in connection !ith a divorce. the defendant $ave le$al advice in the course of personal contacts concernin$ particular proble1s !hich 1i$ht arise in the preparation and presentation of the purchaser%s asserted 1atri1onial cause of action or pursuit of other le$al re1edies and assistance in the preparation of necessar" docu1ents . separation. ho!ever. . 1/ hen a person participates in the a trial and advertises hi1self as a la!"er. It is in this li$ht that FID. annul1ent or separation a$ree1ent an" printed 1aterial or !ritin$s relatin$ to 1atri1onial la! or the prohibition in the 1e1orandu1 of 1odification of the 4ud$1ent a$ainst defendant havin$ an interest in an" publishin$ house publishin$ his 1anuscript on divorce and a$ainst his havin$ an" personal contact !ith an" prospective purchaser. 13 In the practice of his profession. for1alities and other re6uisites of 1arria$es . . libert". Eenerall".9 11 . It includes le$al advice and counsel. in order to assist in proper interpretation and enforce1ent of la!. !e note that the clause 9practice of la!9 has lon$ been the sub4ect of 4udicial construction and interpretation. 1.. a licensed attorne" at la! $enerall" en$a$es in three principal t"pes of professional activit"0 le$al advice and instructions to clients to infor1 the1 of their ri$hts and obli$ations. (=(.nne& 959 1a" li8e!ise be ethicall" ob4ectionable. cited in Stats8". !hich re6uires the application of la!. prefator" discussion on the 1eanin$ of the phrase 9practice of la!9 beco1es e&i$ent for the proper deter1ination of the issues raised b" the petition at bar.'he in4unction therefore sou$ht to. . annul1ent of separation a$ree1ent sou$ht and should be affir1ed.9 1a" be ethicall" ob4ectionable in that it can $ive the i1pression . althou$h such 1atter 1a" or 1a" not be pendin$ in a court. :. advises the1 as to their le$al ri$hts and then ta8es the business .(:. 9It is not controverted.rticles :. non# advisor". ho!ever.defendant 1aintainin$ an office for the purpose of sellin$ to persons see8in$ a divorce. he is in the practice of la!. &&& &&& &&& :. 'he record does full" support.or perpetuate the !ron$ notion. 8no!led$e. and appearance for clients before public tribunals !hich possess po!er and authorit" to deter1ine ri$hts of life. par. of course. to practice la! is to $ive advice or render an" 8ind of service that involves le$al 8no!led$e or s8ill.State v. and propert" accordin$ to la!.:-.(=. 'he courts have laid do!n $eneral principles and doctrines e&plainin$ the 1eanin$ and scope of the ter1. 'he second para$raph thereof .nne& 9. 'he practice of la! is not li1ited to the conduct of cases in court. the findin$ that for the chan$e of U+< or U(== for the 8it. so1e of !hich !e no! ta8e into account. 'o en$a$e in the practice of la! is to perfor1 those acts !hich are characteristic of the profession. et se-. le$al procedures.. states that its services are 9strictl" non#dia$nostic. inder.fails to state the li1itation that onl" 9parale$al servicesH9 or 9le$al support services9. preparation for clients of docu1ents re6uirin$ 8no!led$e of le$al principles not possessed b" ordinar" la"1an. .9 such !ould constitute practice of la! .-.!hich is not necessaril" related to the first para$raph. in or out of court.en4oin conduct constitutin$ the practice of la!. Practice of la! 1eans an" activit".See . are available. 7>*. 13 One !ho confers !ith clients.((. trainin$ and e&perience. supra at p. Fa1il" Code-. sub1its that a factual in6uir" 1a" be necessar" for the 4udicious disposition of this case. NIS :D :+= A()+7B. that if the services 9involve $ivin$ le$al advice or counsellin$. (. no Philippine 1arria$e can be secret.that there is a secret 1arria$e. ith all the sole1nities. Respondent. separation. and not le$al services.

. conve"in$. one !ho. or co11ission constituted b" la! or authori2ed to settle controversies and there. pendin$ or prospective. A!ra a . .:. and $reat capacit" for adaptation to difficult and co1ple& situations. v. and in addition. person is also considered to be in the practice of la! !hen he0 .S. and conductin$ proceedin$s in attach1ent. (+7. :. or !hile so en$a$ed perfor1s an" act or acts either in court or outside of court for that purpose. referee. 18 One !ho renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of a statute. for valuable consideration en$a$es in the business of advisin$ person. is en$a$ed in the practice of la!. Other!ise stated. and all action ta8en for the1 in 1atters connected !ith the la! incorporation services. rel. before an" court. In $eneral. but e1braces the preparation of pleadin$s. D!or8en .7-. all advice to clients. is also practicin$ la!.<=-. It e1braces conve"ancin$. 'he practice of la! is not li1ited to the conduct of cases on court. practicin$ la!.9 thus0 5lac8 defines 9practice of la!9 as0 'he rendition of services re6uirin$ the 8no!led$e and the application of le$al principles and techni6ue to serve the interest of another !ith his consent.. Dudle" and Co. (+. . *<:-. in the case of (hilippines Lawyers Association . . . 19 after citin$ the doctrines in several cases. . and the $ivin$ of all le$al advice to clients.1.to an attorne" and as8s the latter to loo8 after the case in court. . 15 Eivin$ advice for co1pensation re$ardin$ the le$al status and ri$hts of another and the conduct !ith respect thereto constitutes a practice of la!. the 1ana$e1ent of such actions and proceedin$s on behalf of clients before 4ud$es and courts. associations or corporations as to their ri$ht under the la!. as do the preparation and draftin$ of le$al instru1ents. can be dra!n .bstract and 'rust Co. fir1s. . E. and receives pa" for it. the preparation of le$al instru1ents of all 8inds. perfor1s an" act or acts for the purpose of obtainin$ or defendin$ the ri$hts of their clients under the la!. or appears in a representative capacit" as an advocate in proceedin$s. the $ivin$ of le$al advice on a lar$e variet" of sub4ects and the preparation and e&ecution of le$al instru1ents coverin$ an e&tensive field of business and trust relations and other affairs. bod". the foreclosure of a 1ort$a$e. in a representative capacit". en$a$es in the business of advisin$ clients as to their ri$hts under the la!. . and other papers incident to actions and special proceedin$s.Dand 'itle . (=: S. the" are al!a"s sub4ect to beco1e involved in liti$ation. co11issioner. p. in such representative capacit". :. to that e&tent. (:) Ohio St.State e&.stated0 'he practice of la! is not li1ited to the conduct of cases or liti$ation in court? it e1braces the preparation of pleadin$s and other papers incident to actions and special proceedin$s. !here the !or8 done involves the deter1ination b" the trained le$al 1ind of the le$al effect of facts and conditions. 'hese custo1ar" functions of an attorne" or counselor at la! bear an inti1ate relation to the ad1inistration of 4ustice b" the courts. Mc8ittric8 v. is. so far as concerns the 6uestion set forth in the order. enforce1ent of a creditor%s clai1 in ban8ruptc" and insolvenc" proceedin$s. !e laid do!n the test to deter1ine !hether certain acts constitute 9practice of la!. or advisin$ and assistin$ in the conduct of liti$ation. . It is not li1ited to appearin$ in court. :7. It e1braces all advice to clients and all actions ta8en for the1 in 1atters connected !ith the la!.lthou$h these transactions 1a" have no direct connection !ith court proceedin$s. assess1ent and conde1nation services conte1platin$ an appearance before a 4udicial bod". 7>= Mo. :d *)<. a !ide e&perience !ith 1en and affairs.#(++-. 14 In the recent case of Cayetano s. 'he" re6uire in 1an" aspects a hi$h de$ree of le$al s8ill.(=< Phil. and in 1atters or estate and $uardianship have been held to constitute la! practice.< . conve"ancin$. co11ittee. C. @r. 'his Court. Practice of la! under 1odern conditions consists in no s1all part of !or8 perfor1ed outside of an" court and havin$ no i11ediate relation to proceedin$s in court. Monsod. board. ()7N. No valid distinction.

7(7.tt". . 5ar . . obtainin$ docu1entation li8e clearances. as the !ei$ht of authorit" holds. 1arria$e. citin$ In Re Opinion of the @ustices AMassB. pp. to !it0 De$al support services basicall" consists of $ivin$ read" infor1ation b" trained parale$als to la"1en and la!"ers. Ro$elio P. (>>-. v.ppl"in$ the afore1entioned criteria to the case at bar. 1arria$e or adoption la!s that the" can avail of preparator" to e1i$ration to the forei$n countr". 'hat is !hat its advertise1ents represent and for the !hich services it !ill conse6uentl" char$e and be paid. these !ill not suffice to 4ustif" an e&ception to the $eneral rule.9 . corporate le$al depart1ents. therefore.9 Such a conclusion !ill not be altered b" the fact that respondent corporation does not represent clients in court since la! practice.B ()+ . such as the installation of co1puter s"ste1s and pro$ra1s for the efficient 1ana$e1ent of la! offices. throu$h the e&tensive use of co1puters and 1odern infor1ation technolo$" in the $atherin$.9 'he contention of respondent that it 1erel" offers le$al support services can neither be seriousl" considered nor sustained. hat is palpabl" clear is that respondent corporation $ives out le$al infor1ation to la"1en and la!"ers. about forei$n la!s on 1arria$e. divorce and adoption. (7). or business re$istrations? educational or e1plo"1ent records or certifications. and stop there as if it !ere 1erel" a boo8store. Said proposition is belied b" respondent%s o!n description of the services it has been offerin$. propert". li8e forei$n divorce. 'he practice of la!. pro$ra1s. passports.ssoc. Vol. local or forei$n visas? $ivin$ infor1ation about la!s of other countries that the" 1a" find useful. of sound 1oral character. courts and other entities en$a$ed in dispensin$ or ad1inisterin$ le$al services. constitute 9practice of la!. . 6uoted in Rhode Is.B..ssoc. ith its attorne"s and so called parale$als. !ith offices on the seventh floor of the Victoria 5uildin$ alon$ C. and other 1atters that do not involve representation of clients in court? desi$nin$ and installin$ co1puter s"ste1s. In providin$ infor1ation. 'he aforesaid conclusion is further stren$thened b" an article published in the @anuar" (7. . 1ain purpose and operations of respondent corporation !as $iven b" its o!n 9proprietor. .Moran.I. ())( issue of the Star!ee8L'he Sunda" Ma$a2ine of the Philippines Star. it strains the credulit" of this Court that all the respondent corporation !ill si1pl" do is loo8 for the la!. 'hat activit" falls s6uarel" !ithin the 4urisprudential definition of 9practice of la!.9 !here an insi$ht into the structure.. ()> N. as advertised. covers a !ide ran$e of activities in and out of court. contract draftin$ and so forth. !e a$ree !ith the perceptive findin$s and observations of the aforestated bar associations that the activities of respondent..<#. N. processin$. Co11ents on the Rules o Court. such as co1puteri2ed le$al research? encodin$ and reproduction of docu1ents and pleadin$s prepared b" la"1en or la!"ers? docu1ent search? evidence $atherin$? locatin$ parties or !itnesses to a case? fact findin$ investi$ations? and assistance to la"1en in need of basic institutional services fro1 $overn1ent or non#$overn1ent a$encies.. for e&a1ple. and actin$ at all ti1es under the heav" trust obli$ations to clients !hich rests upon all attorne"s. Its contention that such function is non#advisor" and non#dia$nostic is 1ore apparent than real. furnish a cop" thereof to the client. It is of i1portance to the !elfare of the public that these 1anifold custo1ar" functions be perfor1ed b" persons possessed of ade6uate learnin$ and s8ill.uto1obile Service . 7 A()+7 ed. stora$e. it !ill necessaril" have to e&plain to the client the intricacies of the la! and advise hi1 or her on the proper course of action to be ta8en as 1a" be provided for b" said la!. . li8e birth. or the co1puteri2ation of research aids and 1aterials. trans1ission and reproduction of infor1ation and co11unication. or soft!are for the efficient 1ana$e1ent of la! offices.bet!een that part of the !or8 of the la!"er !hich involves appearance in court and that part !hich involves advice and draftin$ of instru1ents in his office. No$ales0 'his is the 8ind of business that is transacted ever"da" at 'he De$al Clinic. AR. No .0 hile so1e of the services bein$ offered b" respondent corporation 1erel" involve 1echanical and technical 8no!ho!. non#advisor". !hich are strictl" non#dia$nostic. is not li1ited 1erel" $ivin$ le$al advice. entitled 9R& for De$al Proble1s..venue in Manila. E.

hindi 8ailan$an$ 1a#confine.P. the client and the bar fro1 the inco1petence or dishonest" of those unlicensed to practice la! and not sub4ect to the disciplinar" control of the court. Most of these services are undoubtedl" be"ond the do1ain of parale$als. 8un$ ba$a sa hospital. the" observe "ou for the s"1pto1s and so on. 'hose cases !hich re6uires 1ore e&tensive 9treat1ent9 are dealt !ith accordin$l". the" ta8e "our te1perature. No$ales set up 'he De$al Clinic in ()*>.nd once the proble1 has been cate$ori2ed. if this !ere a hospital the residents or the interns. 9'hin$s li8e preparin$ a si1ple deed of sale or an affidavit of loss can be ta8en care of b" our staff or. or hereafter ad1itted as such in accordance !ith the provisions of the Rules of Court. and $ather evidence to support the case. 'hese 'he De$al Clinic disposes of in a 1atter of 1inutes. and fa1il" la!. and even if it is as co1plicated as the Cuneta# Concepcion do1estic situation. then it%s referred to one of our specialists./ 'he sa1e rule is observed in the a1erican 4urisdiction !herefro1 respondent !ould !ish to dra! support for his thesis. said reported facts sufficientl" establish that the 1ain purpose of respondent is to serve as a one#stop#shop of sorts for various le$al proble1s !herein a client 1a" avail of le$al services fro1 si1ple docu1entation to co1ple& liti$ation and corporate underta8in$s. No$ales. and onl" a specialist in ta&ation !ould be properl" trained to deal !ith the proble1.tt". It should be noted that in our 4urisdiction the services bein$ offered b" private respondent !hich constitute practice of la! cannot be perfor1ed b" parale$als. 'he doctrines there also stress that the practice of la! is li1ited to those !ho 1eet the re6uire1ents for. 'hat%s ho! !e operate. 'here are cases !hich do not. . has specialists in ta&ation and cri1inal la!. 1edico#le$al proble1s.tt". 'he per1issive ri$ht conferred on the la!"ers is an individual and li1ited privile$e sub4ect to !ithdra!al if he fails to 1aintain proper standards of 1oral and professional conduct. No!. Inspired b" the trend in the 1edical field to!ard speciali2ation.tt". and !ho is in $ood and re$ular standin$. labor. liti$ation. e can ta8e care of these 1atters on a !hile "ou !ait basis. too. . counsellors and attorne"s. 'he" as8 "ou ho! "ou contracted !hat%s botherin$ "ou. and various statutes or rules specificall" so provide. the bar.9 e&plains .3 'he practice of la! is not a la!ful business e&cept for 1e1bers of the bar . .1 'hat fact that the corporation e1plo"s parale$als to carr" out its services is not controllin$.$ain. 'he De$al Clinic has re$ular and !al8#in clients. hat is i1portant is that it is en$a$ed in the practice of la! b" virtue of the nature of the services it renders !hich thereb" brin$s it !ithin the a1bit of the statutor" prohibitions a$ainst the advertise1ents !hich it has caused to be published and are no! assailed in this proceedin$. Inc. !ho 8no!s ho! to arran$e the proble1 for presentation in court. 9If "ou had a rich relative !ho died and na1ed "ou her sole heir. out#patient. 'here !ould be real estate ta&es and arrears !hich !ould need to be put in order. !e start b" anal"2in$ the proble1. . 'hat%s !hat doctors do also. Further. and have been ad1itted to. as correctl" and appropriatel" pointed out b" the C. it caters to clients !ho cannot afford the services of the bi$ la! fir1s. No$ales and his staff of la!"ers. 'he De$al Clinic. if there !ere other heirs contestin$ "our rich relatives !ill. IDOCI. Onl" a person dul" ad1itted as a 1e1ber of the bar. is entitled to practice la!. . re6uire sur$er" or follo!#up treat1ent. li8e doctors are 9specialists9 in various fields can ta8e care of it..1atter !hat the client%s proble1. in 1edical ter1s. . but rather. and "our relative is even ta&ed b" the state for the ri$ht to transfer her propert". !ho.3 Public polic" re6uires that the practice of la! be li1ited to those individuals found dul" 6ualified in education and character. !e !ould refer "ou to a specialist in ta&ation. . 'he purpose is to protect the public. 9!hen the" co1e. and "ou stand to inherit 1illions of pesos of propert". . It%s 4ust li8e a co11on cold or diarrhea. the court. then "ou !ould need a liti$ator. 'hese specialist are bac8ed up b" a batter" of parale$als. are e&clusive functions of la!"ers en$a$ed in the practice of la!. .

there are schools and universities there !hich offer studies and de$rees in parale$al education. 38 'he prescription a$ainst advertisin$ of le$al services or solicitation of le$al business rests on the funda1ental postulate that the that the practice of la! is a profession.nent the issue on the validit" of the 6uestioned advertise1ents. . fraudulent.5 'he 4ustification for e&cludin$ fro1 the practice of la! those not ad1itted to the bar is found. but such allo!able services are li1ited in scope and e&tent b" the la!. 33 Prior to the adoption of the code of Professional Responsibilit". 35 'he standards of the le$al profession conde1n the la!"er%s advertise1ent of his talents. Inc. Onl" those persons are allo!ed to practice la! !ho. counsel !ith. publicit" to attract le$al business. protect.1erican Parale$al . si1ilar to those of respondent !hich are involved in the present proceedin$. 33 3e is not supposed to use or per1it the use of an" false. 3. 'hus. but in the protection of the public fro1 bein$ advised and represented in le$al 1atters b" inco1petent and unreliable persons over !ho1 the 4udicial depart1ent can e&ercise little control. !ith respect to the construction. such as furnishin$ or inspirin$ ne!spaper co11ents. so1e persons not dul" licensed to practice la! are or have been allo!ed li1ited representation in behalf of another or to render le$al services.pproval of De$al . . or liabilities of their clients.1erican 4udicial polic" that.ccordin$l". s.!ho have co1plied !ith all the conditions re6uired b" statute and the rules of court. undi$nified. in the absence of constitutional or statutor" authorit".()+7-. .ssistants. operation and effect of la!. !ithout violatin$ the ethics of his profession. interpretation. 30 . b" reason of attain1ents previousl" ac6uired throu$h education and stud". 'here are also associations of parale$als in the Cnited States !ith their o!n code of professional ethics. "ayot 34 an advertise1ent. the Canons of Professional Ethics had also !arned that la!"ers should not resort to indirect advertise1ents for professional e1plo"1ent. a person !ho has not been ad1itted as an attorne" cannot practice la! for the proper ad1inistration of 4ustice cannot be hindered b" the un!arranted intrusion of an unauthori2ed and uns8illed person into the practice of la!.s ad1itted b" respondent. !e have adopted the . or procurin$ his photo$raph to be published in connection !ith causes in !hich the la!"er has been or is en$a$ed or concernin$ the 1anner of their conduct.ssociation !hich set up Euidelines for the . standards and $uidelines also evolved to protect the $eneral public. !e still have a restricted concept and li1ited acceptance of !hat 1a" be considered as parale$al service. 31 'hat polic" should continue to be one of encoura$in$ persons !ho are unsure of their le$al ri$hts and re1edies to see8 le$al assistance onl" fro1 persons licensed to practice la! in the state.1erican 5ar . Estanislao R. self#laudator" or unfair state1ent or clai1 re$ardin$ his 6ualifications or le$al services. not in the protection of the bar fro1 co1petition. 39 !as held to constitute i1proper advertisin$ or solicitation. respondent cannot but be a!are that this should first be a 1atter for 4udicial rules or le$islative action. or defend the ri$hts clai1s. the i1portance of the la!"er%s position.s pointed out b" FID. .ssociation of De$al .9 In the Philippines. and the . Parale$als in the Cnited States are trained professionals. 1isleadin$. . 3/ Nor shall he pa" or $ive so1ethin$ of value to representatives of the 1ass 1edia in anticipation of. honest. and not of unilateral adoption as it has done. the Code of Professional Responsibilit" provides that a la!"er in 1a8in$ 8no!n his le$al services shall use onl" true. di$nified and ob4ective infor1ation or state1ent of facts. in the case of 'he %irector of Reli!ious Affairs.. and all other li8e self#laudation. advertise his talents or s8ill as in a 1anner si1ilar to a 1erchant advertisin$ his $oods.ssistant Education Pro$ra1s . rules or re$ulations $rantin$ per1ission therefor. De$islation has even been proposed to certif" le$al assistants. have been reco$ni2ed b" the courts as possessin$ profound 8no!led$e of le$al science entitlin$ the1 to advise. hatever 1a" be its 1erits.s the concept of the 9parale$als9 or 9le$al assistant9 evolved in the Cnited States. or in return for. fair.ssociation. such as the National . . One of the 1a4or standards or $uidelines !as developed b" the .8 e have to necessaril" and definitel" re4ect respondent%s position that the concept in the Cnited States of parale$als as an occupation separate fro1 the la! profession be adopted in this 4urisdiction. the 1a$nitude of the interest involved. . . deceptive.4 . la!"er cannot. !hile there are none in the Philippines..

. even for a "oun$ la!"er. telephone nu1bers. the na1es of clients re$ularl" represented. !hich even includes a 6uotation of the fees char$ed b" said respondent . /1 'he first of such e&ceptions is the publication in reputable la! lists. . trade 4ournal or periodical !hich is published principall" for other purposes. !ith their !ritten consent.s a 1e1ber of the bar. associates. /0 Of course. Da! is a profession and not a trade. For that reason. 'he e&ceptions are of t!o broad cate$ories. $ood and reputable la!"er needs no artificial sti1ulus to $enerate it and to 1a$nif" his success. 9'he 1ost !orth" and effective advertise1ent possible.-. the canon of the profession tell us that the best advertisin$ possible for a la!"er is a !ell# 1erited reputation for professional capacit" and fidelit" to trust. 'hat publicit" is a nor1al b"#product of effective service !hich is ri$ht and proper. constitutes 1alpractice.9 .'he pertinent part of the decision therein reads0 It is undeniable that the advertise1ent in 6uestion !as a fla$rant violation b" the respondent of the ethics of his profession. 'he la!"er de$rades hi1self and his profession !ho stoops to and adopts the practices of 1ercantilis1 b" advertisin$ his services or offerin$ the1 to the public. /3 'he use of an ordinar" si1ple professional card is also per1itted. 'he canons of the profession enu1erate e&ceptions to the rule a$ainst advertisin$ or solicitation and define the e&tent to !hich the" 1a" be underta8en. of brief bio$raphical and infor1ative data. 3e 1a" li8e!ise have his na1e listed in a telephone director" but not under a desi$nation of special branch of la!. is not ob4ectionable. trade 4ournal or societ" pro$ra1. 'he card 1a" contain onl" a state1ent of his na1e. Code of Ethics. . 9Such data 1ust not be 1isleadin$ and 1a" include onl" a state1ent of the la!"er%s na1e and the na1es of his professional associates? addresses. those !hich are e&pressl" allo!ed and those !hich are necessaril" i1plied fro1 the restrictions. 1a$a2ine. !hich 1ust be earned as the outco1e of character and conduct. na1el".Canon :+. bein$ for the convenience of the profession. Eood and efficient service to a client as !ell as to the co11unit" has a !a" of publici2in$ itself and catchin$ public attention. ta8in$ into consideration the nature and contents of the advertise1ents for !hich respondent is bein$ ta8en to tas8. 'his cannot be forced but 1ust be the outco1e of character and conduct. 'he publication of a si1ple announce1ent of the openin$ of a la! fir1 or of chan$es in the partnership. cable addresses? branches of la! practiced? date and place of birth and ad1ission to the bar? schools attended !ith dates of $raduation. it bein$ a bra2en solicitation of business fro1 the public. is the establish1ent of a !ell#1erited reputation for professional capacit" and fidelit" to trust. . telephone nu1ber and special branch of la! practiced. in a 1anner consistent !ith the standards of conduct i1posed b" the canons. in le$al and scientific societies and le$al fraternities? the fact of listin$s in other reputable la! lists? the na1es and addresses of references? and. the na1e of the la! fir1 !hich he is connected !ith. // Veril". . fir1 na1e or office address. address. a la!"er 1a" not properl" publish his brief bio$raphical and infor1ative data in a dail" paper. or to lo!er the di$nit" or standin$ of the profession. . he defiles the te1ple of 4ustice !ith 1ercenar" activities as the 1one"#chan$ers of old defiled the te1ple of @ehovah. either personall" or thru paid a$ents or bro8ers. 'he la! list 1ust be a reputable la! list published pri1aril" for that purpose? it cannot be a 1ere supple1ental feature of a paper. Nor 1a" a la!"er per1it his na1e to be published in a la! list the conduct. not all t"pes of advertisin$ or solicitation are prohibited.9 It is hi$hl" unethical for an attorne" to advertise his talents or s8ill as a 1erchant advertises his !ares.9 /. de$rees and other educational distinction? public or 6uasi#public offices? posts of honor? le$al authorships? le$al teachin$ positions? 1e1bership and offices in bar associations and co11ittees thereof. Section :< of Rule (:+ e&pressl" provides a1on$ other thin$s that 9the practice of solicitin$ cases at la! for the purpose of $ain. 1ana$e1ent or contents of !hich are calculated or li8el" to deceive or in4ure the public or the bar. 1a$a2ine. e repeat. 3e easil" sees the difference bet!een a nor1al b"# product of able service and the un!holeso1e result of propa$anda.

the Court Resolved to RES'R. on the attitude of the public about la!"ers after vie!in$ television co11ercials. hile !e dee1 it necessar" that the 6uestion as to the le$alit" or ille$alit" of the purposeLs for !hich the De$al Clinic. can be 1ade onl" if and !hen the canons e&pressl" provide for such an e&ception. /3 !hich is repeatedl" invo8ed and constitutes the 4ustification relied upon b" respondent. It is. albeit in a different proceedin$ and foru1. directl" or indirectl". . !ith a !arnin$ that a repetition of the sa1e or si1ilar acts !hich are involved in this proceedin$ !ill be dealt !ith 1ore severel". of course. and to e&ert all efforts to re$ain the hi$h estee1 for1erl" accorded to the le$al profession. under the present state of our la! and 4urisprudence. !e find and so hold that the sa1e definitel" do not and conclusivel" cannot fall under an" of the above#1entioned e&ceptions.corporation for services rendered. cannot be subverted b" e1plo"in$ so1e so#called parale$als supposedl" renderin$ the alle$ed support services. /9 Considerin$ that . It bears 1ention that in a surve" conducted b" the . to advertise his services e&cept in allo!able instances /4 or to aid a la"1an in the unauthori2ed practice of la!.t this point in ti1e.CCORDINEDI. 'he re1ed" for the apparent breach of this prohibition b" respondent is the concern and province of the Solicitor Eeneral !ho can institute the correspondin$ -uo warranto action. in li$ht of the putative 1isuse thereof. an" activit".ssociation after the decision in 5ates. State "ar of Ari5ona. to publish a state1ent of le$al fees for an initial consultation or the availabilit" upon re6uest of a !ritten schedule of fees or an esti1ate of the fee to be char$ed for the specific services. as in the case at bar. sub4ect to disciplinar" action. i1perative that this 1atter be pro1ptl" deter1ined. . 'he rulin$ in the case of "ates. it is our fir1 belief that !ith the present situation of our le$al and 4udicial s"ste1s. 4ust li8e the rule a$ainst unethical advertisin$. it is of ut1ost i1portance in the face of such ne$ative. s. In su1. et al. Inc. Other!ise. 1a4or stoc8holder and proprietor of 'he De$al Clinic. to adopt and 1aintain that level of professional conduct !hich is be"ond reproach. and fro1 conductin$.nne&es 9. is a 1e1ber of the Philippine 5ar. 'he De$al Clinic. a corporation cannot be or$ani2ed for or en$a$e in the practice of la! in this countr". !hether in our for1er Canons of Professional Ethics or the present Code of Professional Responsibilit". Fore1ost is the fact that the disciplinar" rule involved in said case e&plicitl" allo!s a la!"er. it !as found that public opinion dropped si$nificantl" /8 !ith respect to these characteristics of la!"ers0 'rust!orth" fro1 +(K to (>K Professional fro1 +(K to (>K 3onest fro1 .9 and 959 of this petition.tt". e&pressl" or i1pliedl". the prohibition stands. as an e&ception to the prohibition a$ainst advertise1ents b" la!"ers.. !ho is the pri1e incorporator. 'hat spin#off fro1 the instant bar 1atter is referred to the Solicitor Eeneral for such action as 1a" be necessar" under the circu1stances. 5esides. !e are constrained to refrain fro1 lapsin$ into an obiter on that aspect since it is clearl" not !ithin the ad4udicative para1eters of the present proceedin$ !hich is 1erel" ad1inistrative in nature. fro1 issuin$ or causin$ the publication or disse1ination of an" advertise1ent in an" for1 !hich is of the sa1e or si1ilar tenor and purpose as . since. criticis1s at ti1es. 'his interdiction.1erican 5ar . he is hereb" repri1anded. operation or transaction proscribed b" la! or the Code .9 /5 'his $oes to sho! that an e&ception to the $eneral rule. Inc. even if unfair. 30 after due ascertain1ent of the factual bac8$round and basis for the $rant of respondent%s corporate charter. Ro$elio P. Inc. it is undoubtedl" a 1isbehavior on the part of the la!"er. No such e&ception is provided for. to allo! the publication of advertise1ents of the 8ind used b" respondent !ould onl" serve to a$$ravate !hat is alread" a deterioratin$ public opinion of the le$al profession !hose inte$rit" has consistentl" been under attac8 latel" b" 1edia and the co11unit" in $eneral. such as that bein$ invo8ed b" herein respondent. even the disciplinar" rule in the "ates case contains a proviso that the e&ceptions stated therein are 9not applicable in an" state unless and until it is i1ple1ented b" such authorit" in that state.<K to (>K Di$nified fro1 ><K to (>K Secondl". is obviousl" not applicable to the case at bar.IN and EN@OIN herein respondent. No$ales. !as created should be passed upon and deter1ined.

Earle". (. of Free Dabor Cnions.P. :. Jr. Rafael D.tt".@. :( Rollo. %a ide.tt". (( Position Paper prepared b" . Morro!. 'antuico. and . . :< + C. GriBo-A-uino. (+= So. () :=( SCR. C. Ma$salin. Mariano M. < Me1orandu1 prepared b" . (>> . (: .tt". Co. Cru5. Inc. the Office of the 5ar Confidant and the Office of the Solicitor Eeneral for appropriate action in accordance here!ith. of Credit Men. (. (<>#(<<. (>>. President.(+) . :7#:>? Rollo. 5asilio 3.ssoc. (7)#(>7.? Rollo. Mi$allos.) N".ssoc. IDOCI. (> est Vir$inia State 5ar vs...R. (=? Rollo. ) Me1orandu1 prepared b" . del Rosario.)(. vs. )<#).E. Vice#President. JJ. 5inalba$an#Isabela Su$ar Co. (<. ::).DR :7. :d :+. Det copies of this resolution be furnished the Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines. :.tt". .I. Dil" C. :(= . Doren2o Su1ulon$.Va. . (>.. :)= NIS >. de los Re"es. (=#((? Rollo.DR 7<. . 6ocon. ** Colo. Melo and Luiason.E. (* Mandelau1 vs. :>(#:>:. Officer#in#Char$e.ssn.J..9 in both advertise1ents !hich !ere published in a ne!spaper of $eneral circulation.tt". Rollo. itchita . Rules of Court.<. Eilbert and 5ar8er Mf$. (#:? Rollo. @ose . := Co11ent of Respondent. )7.)#(+=. President. . 7(< Mass. :7 Sec. (7 3o!ton vs. (=<#(=. Mounier vs. et al. Castle1an.lo. (adilla.nnotation0 ((( . 7eliciano. <# .. >: SCR. Co11ittee on Da!"ers% Ri$hts and De$al Ethics. and . "ellosillo. :=).tt". . @r. ())(.>. Position Paper prepared b" .=? Resolution dated Dece1ber (=.nne C.ss%n.7. > Position Paper prepared b" . vs. )> .S.. 6ar asa. <. 7:*. (. Di1pe. Doeb. *. :. vs.())(-. "idin.S. >#<? Rollo.. Nenn" 3.P Free De$al .()+(-. :+ Do!ell 5ar .ffairs. 5arbara .tt".. :> Phil. Victoria C.:(*. :+#:).. .tt". Erapilon. *#(:. .#(*. Chair1an. :? Rollo. facsi1ile of the scales of 4ustice is printed to$ether !ith and on the left side of 9'he De$al Clinic. (= Position Paper prepared b" .. 7+:#7+7. Rollo. (+ Fitchette vs.id Clinic. <7 D Ed :d *(=.>.. :: Me1orandu1 of C.tt". :d >:=. (7).ss%n. (:#(7? Rollo.biera. <. (>: Nan. + Position Paper prepared b" .@.. 7<=. *.. . Rollo >(>#>(. 7+=#7+(. . 7? Rollo. Chair1an. (..+. Inc.. (. . (.of Professional Ethics as indicated herein.. de los Re"es.. 7 Resolution dated @anuar" (<. (< People vs. I5P Director for De$al .tt". ())(. >:<#>:+.ttorne" and Client. Co11ittee on 5ar Discipline. )+ S Ct. 'a"lor.. >=7.S. Sablan. concur 9 1oot#ote' ( Rollo. Rule (7*. et al. and .tt". :* Co11ent of Respondent. (+. 7=: . President. (=) S. vs. Re$cinh. :. D. . Victoria C.ttorne" and Client . * Position Paper prepared b" . Ro)ero. *.? + C.uto1obile Service . (7=#(7(. and . (#:? Rollo. <=>? Rhode Island 5ar .tt". : >77 C. Depe!. :(*.rturo M. <: N. Deticia E. et al.

()*)-. . o1en Da!"ers% Circle .@. De$al Ethics. ()<(-? and :*.ct No. :*> .n a$ent or friend !ho aids a part"#liti$ant in a 1unicipal court for the purpose of conductin$ the liti$ation . (:7 .b.=>. S1ith.$. 7* +> Phil. 77.Sept.Sec.a. 7< Rule 7. Rules of Practice in 'rade1ar8 Cases-? . of Ne! Ior8 vs. :=.Dec. Cl. service 1ar8 and trade na1e cases . (>. representin$ the lot o!ner or clai1ant in a case fallin$ under the Cadastral ..Rule (7*#. ((.5. >= ..f.$palo. cit. citin$ .5. :<. *(.@ul" (:.: : : ..9.-? . ::<)-? and . ()7>-.:) Position Paper. resident of the province and of $ood repute for probit" and abilit". Code of Professional Responsibilit". id.Dec. See Rollo. :d ((*. 7>. cit..Sec.rbiter onl" if .5.Sec.P.Notaries public for 1unicipalities !here co1pletion and passin$ the studies of la! in a reputable universit" or school of la! is dee1ed sufficient 6ualification for appoint1ent .e..d1inistrative Code of ()(+-. C. IDOCI-.. citin$ Stats8". :(>#::>. not an attorne". ()<:-. :*<. Oceana Publications.. >. :(. Rule (7*. .? @ohnsto!n Coal and Co8e Co.n a$ent.Ne! Rules of Procedure of the National Dabor Relations Co11ission-? .Feb. id.()+>.. *=. >( Op.. >> Op. ).. 7= Illustrations0 ..-? .(. . .()>>-.. !ho is appointed counsel de oficio to defend the accused in localities !here 1e1bers of the bar are not available .ct . provided that he shall be 1ade to present !ritten proof that he is properl" authori2ed? or .. ()7=-? . 5ru1bau$th. <+) .and Sha"ne. Rule (7*.Sec. id.#((+.no! 8no!n as the 5ureau of Patents. :>.S. Consultation on an" 1atter free for the poor. ()7(-. Ops.Ma" ((. Op. <7 . id. 7<< So. )7 . 'rade1ar8s and 'echnolo$" 'ransferin trade1ar8. *. (>.he is dul"#accredited 1e1bers of an" le$al aid office dul" reco$ni2ed b" the Depart1ent of @ustice or the Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines in cases referred thereto b" the latter . Rule ((. 7> Rule 7.he represents an or$ani2ation or its 1e1bers. ()++. and 1arria$e arran$ed to !ishes of parties.S..:.n official or other person appointed or desi$nated in accordance !ith la! to appear for the Eovern1ent of the Philippines in a case in !hich the $overn1ent has an interest . 7.. (>>#(><. Rules of Court-? . ()>:-..=(.. . .d.. +)#*=.Sec..he represents hi1self as a part" to the case? . Op. :77. 7+ People vs. 7: Florida 5ar vs. C. ()>(-. la! student !ho has successfull" co1pleted his third "ear of the re$ular four# "ear prescribed la! curriculu1 and is enrolled in a reco$ni2ed la! school%s clinical le$al education pro$ra1 approved b" the Supre1e Court .c. .ttorne" and Client.. Rep..id. St. non#la!"er !ho 1a" appear before the National Dabor Relations Co11ission or an" Dabor . 7) 'he advertise1ent in said case !as as follo!s0 9Marria$e license pro1ptl" secured thru our assistance and the anno"ance of dela" or publicit" avoided if desired. :>( . person. Ever"thin$ confidential. ((#(:.ppendi& II and III? Rollo.Persons re$istered or speciall" reco$ni2ed to practice in the Philippine Patent Office . 77 Canon 7. 'he Parale$al Profession.u$.. 7( + C. . Canons of Professional Ethics.Rule :7.h.@an. Fourth Edition . Introduction to Parale$alis1.-? .7. ():+-? . est Publishin$ Co. (=: Ct. Canon :+... >7 : : : M%''%#.1. (( .. . :> .

ssociation. . vs. >) C. No. Corporation Code. Ne" and 5os6ue. Fn :. .=? Rollo. . and Sec.ssociation @ournal.ffairs vs. +d. >+ Position Paper of the Philippine 5ar .. *(=. 5a"ot. Rule . >* In re 'a$orda. in relation to Sec. )=:#. ()*). . 7+ . supra. :>*. (:. (>.. p. *:<.()<*-. @anuar".D. <= Secs.()=+-? People vs.S. (:(. * Phil.>< Supra. <7 Phil. Rules of Court. Duna. (=: Phil.(-. : and 7. P... citin$ the . ).1erican 5ar .* . Fn 7*.():)-? 'he Director of Reli$ious . >.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful