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

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

&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. 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, )ore ad ersarial relationships and traditional for)s of see#in! to influence !o ern)ental policies . .nd there are lessons to be learned fro1 other countries. In Europe, Esprit, Eure#a and Race are e&a1ples of collaborative efforts bet!een $overn1ental and business @apan%s M+&+ is !orld fa1ous. ,E1phasis suppliedFollo!in$ the concept of boundar" spannin$, the office of the Corporate Counsel co1prises a distinct $roup !ithin the 1ana$erial structure of all 8inds of or$ani2ations. Effectiveness of both lon$#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, pro1otin$ tea1 achieve1ents !ithin the or$ani2ation. In $eneral, such e&ternal activities are better predictors of tea1 perfor1ance than internal $roup processes. +n a crisis situation, the le!al )ana!erial capabilities of the corporate lawyer is-a- is the )ana!erial )ettle of corporations are challen!ed. Current research is see8in$ !a"s both to anticipate effective 1ana$erial procedures and to understand relationships of financial liabilit" and insurance considerations. ,E1phasis suppliedRe$ardin$ the s8ills to appl" b" the corporate counsel, three factors are apropos0 7irst Syste) %yna)ics. '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. .n understandin$ of the role of feedbac8 loops, inventor" levels, and rates of flo!, enable users to si1ulate all sorts of s"ste1atic proble1s J ph"sical, econo1ic, 1ana$erial, social, and ps"cholo$ical. 6ew pro!ra))in! techni-ues now )a#e the syste) dyna)ics principles )ore accessible to )ana!ers / includin! corporate counsels. ,E1phasis suppliedSecond %ecision Analysis. &his enables users to )a#e better decisions in ol in! co)ple'ity and uncertainty. +n the conte't of a law depart)ent, it can be used to appraise the settle)ent alue of liti!ation, aid in ne!otiation settle)ent, and )ini)i5e the cost and ris# in ol ed in )ana!in! a portfolio of cases . ,E1phasis supplied&hird Modelin! for 6e!otiation Mana!e)ent. Co1puter#based 1odels can be used directl" b" parties and 1ediators in all lands of ne$otiations. .ll inte$rated set of such tools provide coherent and effective ne$otiation support, includin$ hands#on on instruction in these techni6ues. . si1ulation case of an international 4oint venture 1a" be used to illustrate the point. A5e this as it 1a",B the or$ani2ation and 1ana$e1ent of the le$al function, concern three pointed areas of consideration, thus0 (re enti e Lawyerin!. Plannin$ b" la!"ers re6uires special s8ills that co1prise a 1a4or part of the $eneral counsel%s responsibilities. 'he" differ fro1 those of re1edial la!. Preventive la!"erin$ 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. Mana!erial Jurisprudence. 'his is the fra1e!or8 !ithin !hich are underta8en those activities of the fir1 to !hich le$al conse6uences attach. It needs to be directl" supportive of this nation%s evolvin$ econo1ic and or$ani2ational fabric as fir1s chan$e to sta" co1petitive in a $lobal, interdependent environ1ent. 'he practice and theor" of 9la!9 is not ade6uate toda" to facilitate the relationships needed in tr"in$ to 1a8e a $lobal econo1" !or8. ,r!ani5ation and 7unctionin! of the Corporate Counsel$s ,ffice. 'he $eneral counsel has e1er$ed in the last decade as one of the 1ost vibrant subsets of the le$al

profession. 'he corporate counsel hear responsibilit" for 8e" aspects of the fir1%s strate$ic issues, includin$ structurin$ its $lobal operations, 1ana$in$ i1proved relationships !ith an increasin$l" diversified bod" of e1plo"ees, 1ana$in$ e&panded liabilit" e&posure, creatin$ ne! and varied interactions !ith public decision#1a8ers, copin$ internall" !ith 1ore co1ple& 1a8e or b" decisions. '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. .nd even if the corporate la!"er%s ai1 is not the understand all of the la!%s effects on corporate activities, he 1ust, at the ver" least, 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. 9"usiness Star9, 9'he Corporate Counsel,9 .pril (=, ())(, p. >-. 'he challen$e for la!"ers ,both of the bar and the bench- is to have 1ore than a passin$ 8no!led$e of financial la! affectin$ each aspect of their !or8. Iet, 1an" !ould ad1it to i$norance of vast tracts of the financial la! territor". hat transpires ne&t is a dile11a of professional securit"0 ill the la!"er ad1it i$norance and ris8 opprobriu1H? or !ill he fei$n understandin$ and ris8 e&posureH ,"usiness Star, 9Corporate Finance la!,9 @an. ((, ()*), p. >-. Respondent Christian Monsod !as no1inated b" President Cora2on C. .6uino to the position of Chair1an of the COMEDEC in a letter received b" the Secretariat of the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents on .pril :<, ())(. 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. On @une <, ())(, the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents confir1ed the no1ination of Monsod as Chair1an of the COMEDEC. On @une (*, ())(, he too8 his oath of office. On the sa1e da", he assu1ed office as Chair1an of the COMEDEC. Challen$in$ the validit" of the confir1ation b" the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents of Monsod%s no1ination, petitioner as a citi2en and ta&pa"er, 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. .tt". Christian Monsod is a 1e1ber of the Philippine 5ar, havin$ passed the bar e&a1inations of ();= !ith a $rade of *;#<<K. 3e has been a dues pa"in$ 1e1ber of the Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines since its inception in ()+:#+7. 3e has also been pa"in$ his professional license fees as la!"er for 1ore than ten "ears. ,p. (:>, Rollo.fter $raduatin$ fro1 the Colle$e of Da! ,C.P.- and havin$ hurdled the bar, Atty. Monsod wor#ed in the law office of his father. Durin$ his stint in the orld 5an8 Eroup ,();7#()+=-, Monsod wor#ed as an operations officer for about two years in Costa Rica and (ana)a, which in ol ed !ettin! ac-uainted with the laws of )e)ber-countries ne!otiatin! loans and coordinatin! le!al, econo)ic, and pro*ect wor# of the "an#. 8pon returnin! to the (hilippines in 9:;<, he wor#ed with the Meralco Group, ser ed as chief e'ecuti e officer of an in est)ent ban# and subse-uently of a business con!lo)erate, and since 9:=>, has rendered ser ices to arious co)panies as a le!al and econo)ic consultant or chief e'ecuti e officer. As for)er Secretary-General ?9:=>@ and 6ational Chair)an ?9:=;@ of 6AM7REL. Monsod$s wor# in ol ed bein! #nowled!eable in election law. Ae appeared for 6AM7REL in its accreditation hearin!s before the Co)elec. +n the field of ad ocacy, Monsod, in his personal capacity and as for)er Co-Chair)an of the "ishops "usiness)en$s Conference for Au)an %e elop)ent, has wor#ed with the under pri ile!ed sectors, such as the far)er and urban poor !roups, in initiatin!, lobbyin! for and en!a!in! in affir)ati e action for the a!rarian refor) law and lately the urban land refor) bill. Monsod also )ade use of his le!al #nowled!e as a )e)ber of the %a ide Co))ission, a -uast *udicial body, which conducted nu)erous hearin!s ?9::<@ and as a )e)ber of the Constitutional Co))ission ?9:=>-9:=;@, and Chair)an of its Co))ittee on Accountability of (ublic ,fficers, for which he was cited by the (resident of the Co))ission, Justice Cecilia MuBo5-(al)a for .innu)erable a)end)ents to

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

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

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

Sep"r"te Op%#%o#'

NAR ASA, J., concurrin$0 I concur !ith the decision of the 1a4orit" !ritten b" Mr. @ustice Paras, albeit onl" in the result? it does not appear to 1e that there has been an ade6uate sho!in$ that the challen$ed deter1ination b" the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents#that the appoint1ent of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections should, on the basis of his stated 6ualifications and after due assess1ent thereof, 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 (, .rticle VIII of the Constitution. I therefore vote to DENI the petition. PADI!!A, J., dissentin$0 'he records of this case !ill sho! that !hen the Court first deliberated on the Petition at bar, I voted not onl" to re6uire the respondents to co11ent on the Petition, but I !as the sole vote for the issuance of a te1porar" restrainin$ order to en4oin respondent Monsod fro1 assu1in$ the position of COMEDEC Chair1an, !hile the Court deliberated on his constitutional 6ualification for the office. 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. Moreover, 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, that is, he had not en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten ,(=- "ears prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. .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. 'he procedural barriers interposed b" respondents deserve scant consideration because, ulti1atel", 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, includin$ the Chair1an thereof to 9have been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten ,(=- "ears.9 ,.rt. I/,C-, Section (,(-, ()*+ Constitution-. Muestions involvin$ the construction of constitutional provisions are best left to 4udicial resolution. .s declared in An!ara . Electoral Co))ission, ,;7 Phil. (7)- 9upon the 4udicial depart1ent is thro!n the sole1n and inescapable obli$ation of interpretin$ the Constitution and definin$ constitutional boundaries.9 'he Constitution has i1posed clear and specific standards for a COMEDEC Chair1an. .1on$ these are that he 1ust have been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten ,(=- "ears.9 It is the bounden dut" of this Court to ensure that such standard is 1et and co1plied !ith. hat constitutes practice of la!H .s co11onl" understood, 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, habitual,repeated or custo)ary action. 1 'o 9practice9 la!, or an" profession for that 1atter, 1eans, to e&ercise or pursue an e1plo"1ent or profession acti ely, habitually, repeatedly or custo)arily. 'herefore, a doctor of 1edicine !ho is e1plo"ed and is habituall" perfor1in$ the tas8s of a nursin$ aide, cannot be said to be in the 9practice of 1edicine.9 . certified public accountant !ho !or8s as a cler8, cannot be said to practice his profession as an accountant. In the sa1e !a", a la!"er !ho is e1plo"ed as a business e&ecutive or a corporate 1ana$er, other than as head or attorne" of a De$al Depart1ent of a corporation or a $overn1ental a$enc", cannot be said to be in the practice of la!. .s aptl" held b" this Court in the case of (eople s. Dillanue a0 . (ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre-uent or custo)ary actions, a succession of acts of the sa)e #ind. In other !ords, it is fre6uent habitual e&ercise ,State vs# Cotner, (:+, p. (, *+ Nan. *;>, >: DR., M.S. +;*-. 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 ,State vs. 5r"an, > S.E. <::, )* N.C. ;>>,;>+.- ... ,e1phasis supplied-.

It is !orth 1entionin$ that the respondent Co11ission on .ppoint1ents in a Me1orandu1 it prepared, enu1erated several factors deter1inative of !hether a particular activit" constitutes 9practice of la!.9 It states0 (. Aabituality. 'he ter1 9practice of la!9 i1plies custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er ,People vs. Villanueva, (> SCR. (=) citin$ State v. 5o"en, > S.E. <::, )* N.C. ;>>- such as !hen one sends a circular announcin$ the establish1ent of a la! office for the $eneral practice of la! ,C.S. v. Ne" 5os6ue, * Phil. (>;-, or !hen one ta8es the oath of office as a la!"er before a notar" public, and files a 1anifestation !ith the Supre1e Court infor1in$ it of his intention to practice la! in all courts in the countr" ,People v. De Duna, (=: Phil. );*-. Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre6uent or custo1ar" action, a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind. In other !ords, it is a habitual e&ercise ,People v. Villanueva, (> SCR. (=) citin$ State v. Cotner, (:+, p. (, *+ Nan, *;>-. :. Co)pensation. Practice of la! i1plies that one 1ust have presented hi1self to be in the active and continued practice of the le$al profession and that his professional services are available to the public for co1pensation, as a service of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. ,People v. Villanueva, supra-. 3ence, char$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 ,Ernani PaOo, 5ar Revie!er in De$al and @udicial Ethics, ()** ed., p. * citin$ People v. People%s Stoc8"ards State 5an8, (+; N.5. )=(- and, one !ho renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of a statute, and receives pa" for it, is to that e&tent, practicin$ la! ,Martin, supra, p. *=; citin$ Mendelaun v. Eilbert and 5ar8et Mf$. Co., :)= N.I.S. >;:- If co1pensation is e&pected, all advice to clients and all action ta8en for the1 in 1atters connected !ith the la!? are practicin$ la!. ,El!ood Fitchette et al., v. .rthur C. 'a"lor, )>.#D.R. 7<;# 7<)7. Application of law le!al principle practice or procedure !hich calls for le$al 8no!led$e, trainin$ and e&perience is !ithin the ter1 9practice of la!9. ,Martin supra>. Attorney-client relationship. En$a$in$ in the practice of la! presupposes the e&istence of la!"er#client relationship. 3ence, !here a la!"er underta8es an activit" !hich re6uires 8no!led$e of la! but involves no attorne"#client relationship, such as teachin$ la! or !ritin$ la! boo8s or articles, he cannot be said to be en$a$ed in the practice of his profession or a la!"er ,.$palo, De$al Ethics, ()*) ed., p. 7=-. 3 'he above#enu1erated factors !ould, I believe, be useful aids in deter1inin$ !hether or not respondent Monsod 1eets the constitutional 6ualification of practice of la! for at least ten ,(=- "ears at the ti1e of his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. '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 :. Did respondent perfor1 such tas8s custo1aril" or habituall"H 7. .ssu1in$ that he perfor1ed an" of such tas8s habituall", did he do so 3.5I'C.DDI FOR .' DE.S' 'EN ,(=- IE.RS prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1anH Eiven the e1plo"1ent or 4ob histor" of respondent Monsod as appears fro1 the records, I a1 persuaded that if ever he did perfor1 an" of the tas8s !hich constitute the practice of la!, he did not do so AA"+&8ALL3 for at least ten ?9<@ years prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. hile it 1a" be $ranted that he perfor1ed tas8s and activities !hich could be latitudinarianl" considered activities peculiar to the practice of la!, li8e the draftin$ of le$al docu1ents and the renderin$ of le$al opinion or advice, such !ere isolated transactions or activities !hich do not 6ualif" his past endeavors as 9practice of la!.9 'o beco1e en$a$ed in the practice of la!, there 1ust be a continuity, or a succession of acts. .s observed b" the Solicitor Eeneral in (eople s. Dillanue a0 / Essentiall", 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, as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. .CCORDINEDI, 1" vote is to ER.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 ,(=- "ears prior to his appoint1ent to such position. CRU0, J., dissentin$0 I a1 sincerel" i1pressed b" the ponencia of 1" brother Paras but find I 1ust dissent 4ust the sa1e. 'here are certain points on !hich I 1ust differ !ith hi1 !hile of course respectin$ hisvie!point. 'o be$in !ith, I do not thin8 !e are inhibited fro1 e&a1inin$ the 6ualifications of the respondent si1pl" because his no1ination has been confir1ed b" the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents. In 1" vie!, this is not a political 6uestion that !e are barred fro1 resolvin$. Deter1ination of the appointee%s credentials is 1ade on the basis of the established facts, not the discretion of that bod". Even if it !ere, the e&ercise of that discretion !ould still be sub4ect to our revie!. In Lue!o, !hich is cited in the ponencia, !hat !as involved !as the discretion of the appointin$ authorit" to choosebet!een t!o clai1ants to the sa1e office !ho both possessed the re6uired 6ualifications. It !as that 8ind of discretion that !e said could not be revie!ed. If a person elected b" no less than the soverei$n people 1a" be ousted b" this Court for lac8 of the re6uired 6ualifications, I see no reason !h" !e cannot dis6ualified an appointee si1pl" because he has passed the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents. Even the President of the Philippines 1a" be declared ineli$ible b" this Court in an appropriate proceedin$ not!ithstandin$ that he has been found acceptable b" no less than the enfranchised citi2enr". '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. Co1in$ no! to the 6ualifications of the private respondent, 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. Fro1 the nu1erous activities accepted as e1braced in the ter1, 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!, ho!ever peripherall". '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.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. 'hat covers ever" co1pan" or$ani2ed under the Corporation Code and re$ulated b" the SEC under P.D. )=:#.. Considerin$ the ra1ifications of the 1odern societ", there is hardl" an" activit" that is not affected b" so1e la! or $overn1ent re$ulation the business1an 1ust 8no! about and observe. In fact, a$ain $oin$ b" the definition, a la!"er does not even have to be part of a business concern to be considered a practitioner. 3e can be so dee1ed !hen, on his o!n, 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. If he operates a public utilit" vehicle as his 1ain source of livelihood, he !ould still be dee1ed en$a$ed in the practice of la! because he 1ust obe" the Public Service .ct and the rules and re$ulations of the Ener$" Re$ulator" 5oard. 'he ponencia 6uotes an .1erican decision definin$ the practice of la! as the 9perfor1ance of an" acts ... in or out of court, co11onl" understood to be the practice of la!,9 !hich tells us absolutel" nothin$. 'he decision $oes on to sa" that 9because 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.9 'he effect of the definition $iven in the ponencia is to consider virtuall" ever" la!"er to be en$a$ed in the practice of la! even if he does not earn his livin$, or at least part of it, as a la!"er. It is enou$h that his activities are incidentall" ,even if onl" re1otel"- connected !ith so1e la!, ordinance, or re$ulation. 'he possible e&ception is the la!"er !hose inco1e is derived fro1 teachin$ ballroo1 dancin$ or escortin$ !rin8led ladies !ith pubescent pretensions.

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

"ears. In fact, if appears that Mr. 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. Even then his la! practice 1ust have been e&tre1el" li1ited because he !as also !or8in$ for M... and Ph. D. de$rees in Econo1ics at the Cniversit" of Penns"lvania durin$ that period. 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 (.(<.(. Respondent Monsod%s activities since his passin$ the 5ar e&a1inations in ();( consist of the follo!in$0 (. ();(#();70 M... in Econo1ics ,Ph. D. candidate-, Cniversit" of Penns"lvania :. ();7#()+=0 orld 5an8 Eroup J Econo1ist, Industr" Depart1ent? Operations, Datin .1erican Depart1ent? Division Chief, South .sia and Middle East, International Finance Corporation 7. ()+=#()+70 Meralco Eroup J E&ecutive of various co1panies, i.e., Meralco Securities Corporation, Philippine Petroleu1 Corporation, Philippine Electric Corporation >. ()+7#()+;0 Iu4uico Eroup J President, Fil#Capital Develop1ent Corporation and affiliated co1panies <. ()+;#()+*0 Finaciera Manila J Chief E&ecutive Officer ;. ()+*#()*;0 Euevent Eroup of Co1panies J Chief E&ecutive Officer +. ()*;#()*+0 Philippine Constitutional Co11ission J Me1ber *. ()*)#())(0 'he Fact#Findin$ Co11ission on the Dece1ber ()*) Coup .tte1pt J Me1ber ). Presentl"0 Chair1an of the 5oard and Chief E&ecutive Officer of the follo!in$ co1panies0 a. .CE Container Philippines, Inc. b. Dataprep, Philippines c. Philippine SCNs"ste1s Products, Inc. d. Se1irara Coal Corporation e. C5D 'i1ber Corporation Me1ber of the 5oard of the Follo!in$0 a. En$ineerin$ Construction Corporation of the Philippines b. First Philippine Ener$" Corporation c. First Philippine 3oldin$s Corporation d. First Philippine Industrial Corporation e. Eraphic .telier f. Manila Electric Co1pan" $. Philippine Co11ercial Capital, Inc. h. Philippine Electric Corporation i. 'arlac Reforestation and Environ1ent Enterprises 4. 'olon$ .6uaculture Corporation 8. Visa"an .6uaculture Corporation l. Eui1aras .6uaculture Corporation ,Rollo, pp. :(#::'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. Instead of !or8in$ as a la!"er, he has la!"ers !or8in$ for hi1. Instead of $ivin$ receivin$ that le$al advice of le$al services, he !as the oneadvice and those services as an e&ecutive but not as a la!"er. 'he deliberations before the Co11ission on .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,

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

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

Respondent Monsod, corporate e&ecutive, civic leader, and 1e1ber of the Constitutional Co11ission 1a" possess the bac8$round, co1petence, inte$rit", and dedication, to 6ualif" for such hi$h offices as President, Vice#President, Senator, Con$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 ,(="ears for the position of COMEDEC Chair1an has ordered that he 1a" not be confir1ed for that office. 'he Constitution char$es the public respondents no less than this Court to obe" its 1andate. I, therefore, believe that the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents co11itted $rave abuse of discretion in confir1in$ the no1ination of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of the COMEDEC. I vote to ER.N' the petition. "idin, J., dissent Sep"r"te Op%#%o#' NAR ASA, J., concurrin$0 I concur !ith the decision of the 1a4orit" !ritten b" Mr. @ustice Paras, albeit onl" in the result? it does not appear to 1e that there has been an ade6uate sho!in$ that the challen$ed deter1ination b" the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents#that the appoint1ent of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections should, on the basis of his stated 6ualifications and after due assess1ent thereof, 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 (, .rticle VIII of the Constitution. I therefore vote to DENI the petition. Melencio-Aerrera, J., concur. PADI!!A, J., dissentin$0 'he records of this case !ill sho! that !hen the Court first deliberated on the Petition at bar, I voted not onl" to re6uire the respondents to co11ent on the Petition, but I !as the sole vote for the issuance of a te1porar" restrainin$ order to en4oin respondent Monsod fro1 assu1in$ the position of COMEDEC Chair1an, !hile the Court deliberated on his constitutional 6ualification for the office. 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. Moreover, 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, that is, he had not en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten ,(=- "ears prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. .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. 'he procedural barriers interposed b" respondents deserve scant consideration because, ulti1atel", 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, includin$ the Chair1an thereof to 9have been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten ,(=- "ears.9 ,.rt. I/,C-, Section (,(-, ()*+ Constitution-. Muestions involvin$ the construction of constitutional provisions are best left to 4udicial resolution. .s declared in An!ara . Electoral Co))ission, ,;7 Phil. (7)- 9upon the 4udicial depart1ent is thro!n the sole1n and inescapable obli$ation of interpretin$ the Constitution and definin$ constitutional boundaries.9 'he Constitution has i1posed clear and specific standards for a COMEDEC Chair1an. .1on$ these are that he 1ust have been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten ,(=- "ears.9 It is the bounden dut" of this Court to ensure that such standard is 1et and co1plied !ith. hat constitutes practice of la!H .s co11onl" understood, 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, habitual,repeated or custo)ary action. 1 'o 9practice9 la!, or an" profession for that 1atter, 1eans, to e&ercise or pursue an e1plo"1ent or profession acti ely, habitually, repeatedly or custo)arily.

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

:. Did respondent perfor1 such tas8s custo1aril" or habituall"H 7. .ssu1in$ that he perfor1ed an" of such tas8s habituall", did he do so 3.5I'C.DDI FOR .' DE.S' 'EN ,(=- IE.RS prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1anH Eiven the e1plo"1ent or 4ob histor" of respondent Monsod as appears fro1 the records, I a1 persuaded that if ever he did perfor1 an" of the tas8s !hich constitute the practice of la!, he did not do so AA"+&8ALL3 for at least ten ?9<@ years prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. hile it 1a" be $ranted that he perfor1ed tas8s and activities !hich could be latitudinarianl" considered activities peculiar to the practice of la!, li8e the draftin$ of le$al docu1ents and the renderin$ of le$al opinion or advice, such !ere isolated transactions or activities !hich do not 6ualif" his past endeavors as 9practice of la!.9 'o beco1e en$a$ed in the practice of la!, there 1ust be a continuity, or a succession of acts. .s observed b" the Solicitor Eeneral in (eople s. Dillanue a0 / Essentiall", the !ord private practice of la! i1plies that one 1ust have presented hi1self to be in theacti e and continued practice of the le!al profession and that his professional services are available to the public for a co1pensation, as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. .CCORDINEDI, 1" vote is to ER.N' the petition and to declare respondent Monsod as not 6ualified for the position of COMEDEC Chair1an for not havin$ en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten ,(=- "ears prior to his appoint1ent to such position. CRU0, J., dissentin$0 I a1 sincerel" i1pressed b" the ponencia of 1" brother Paras but find I 1ust dissent 4ust the sa1e. 'here are certain points on !hich I 1ust differ !ith hi1 !hile of course respectin$ hisvie!point. 'o be$in !ith, I do not thin8 !e are inhibited fro1 e&a1inin$ the 6ualifications of the respondent si1pl" because his no1ination has been confir1ed b" the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents. In 1" vie!, this is not a political 6uestion that !e are barred fro1 resolvin$. Deter1ination of the appointee%s credentials is 1ade on the basis of the established facts, not the discretion of that bod". Even if it !ere, the e&ercise of that discretion !ould still be sub4ect to our revie!. In Lue!o, !hich is cited in the ponencia, !hat !as involved !as the discretion of the appointin$ authorit" to choosebet!een t!o clai1ants to the sa1e office !ho both possessed the re6uired 6ualifications. It !as that 8ind of discretion that !e said could not be revie!ed. If a person elected b" no less than the soverei$n people 1a" be ousted b" this Court for lac8 of the re6uired 6ualifications, I see no reason !h" !e cannot dis6ualified an appointee si1pl" because he has passed the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents. Even the President of the Philippines 1a" be declared ineli$ible b" this Court in an appropriate proceedin$ not!ithstandin$ that he has been found acceptable b" no less than the enfranchised citi2enr". '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. Co1in$ no! to the 6ualifications of the private respondent, 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. Fro1 the nu1erous activities accepted as e1braced in the ter1, 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!, ho!ever peripherall". '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.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. 'hat covers ever" co1pan" or$ani2ed under the Corporation Code and re$ulated b" the SEC under P.D. )=:#.. Considerin$ the ra1ifications of the 1odern societ", there is hardl" an" activit" that is not affected b" so1e la! or $overn1ent re$ulation the business1an 1ust 8no! about and observe. In fact, a$ain $oin$ b" the definition, a la!"er does not even have to be part of a business concern to be considered a practitioner. 3e can be so dee1ed !hen, on his o!n, 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. If he operates a public utilit" vehicle as his 1ain source of livelihood, he !ould still be

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

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

i. 'arlac Reforestation and Environ1ent Enterprises 4. 'olon$ .6uaculture Corporation 8. Visa"an .6uaculture Corporation l. Eui1aras .6uaculture Corporation ,Rollo, pp. :(#::'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. Instead of !or8in$ as a la!"er, he has la!"ers !or8in$ for hi1. Instead of $ivin$ receivin$ that le$al advice of le$al services, he !as the oneadvice and those services as an e&ecutive but not as a la!"er. 'he deliberations before the Co11ission on .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, industr", civic !or8, blue ribbon investi$ations, a$rarian refor1, etc. !here such 8no!led$e !ould be helpful. I re$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$. Ever" resident of this countr" !ho has reached the a$e of discern1ent has to 8no!, follo!, or appl" the la! at various ti1es in his life. De$al 8no!led$e is useful if not necessar" for the business e&ecutive, le$islator, 1a"or, baran$a" captain, teacher, police1an, far1er, fisher1an, 1ar8et vendor, and student to na1e onl" a fe!. .nd "et, can these people honestl" assert that as such, 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.9 It is not satisfied !ith havin$ been 9a 1e1ber of the Philippine bar for at least ten "ears.9 So1e .1erican courts have defined the practice of la!, 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, and it includes the $ivin$ of advice or the renderin$ of an" services re6uirin$ the use of le$al s8ill or 8no!led$e, such as preparin$ a !ill, contract or other instru1ent, the le$al effect of !hich, under the facts and conditions involved, 1ust be carefull" deter1ined. (eople e' rel. Chica!o "ar Ass$n . &in#off, 7)) Ill. :*:, ++ N.E.:d ;)7? (eople e' rel. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . (eople$s Stoc# 3ards State "an#, 7>> Ill. >;:,(+; N.E. )=(, and cases cited. It !ould be difficult, if not i1possible to la" do!n a for1ula or definition of !hat constitutes the practice of la!. 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, is the $ivin$ of advice or rendition of an" sort of service b" an" person, 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$e or s8ill.9 ithout adoptin$ that definition, !e referred to it as bein$ substantiall" correct in (eople e' rel. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . (eople$s Stoc# 3ards State "an#, 7>> Ill. >;:,(+; N.E. )=(. ,People v. Schafer, *+ N.E. :d ++7, ++;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, the" should also be perfor1ed, habituall", fre6uentl" or custo1aril", to !it0 &&& &&& &&& Respondent%s ans!ers to 6uestions propounded to hi1 !ere rather evasive. 3e !as as8ed !hether or not he ever prepared contracts for the parties in real#estate transactions !here he !as not the procurin$ a$ent. 3e ans!ered0 9Ver" seldo1.9 In ans!er to the 6uestion as to ho! 1an" ti1es he had prepared contracts for the parties durin$ the t!ent"#one "ears of his business, he said0 9I have no Idea.9 hen as8ed if it !ould be 1ore than half a do2en ti1es his ans!er !as I suppose. .s8ed if he did not recall 1a8in$ the state1ent to several parties that he had prepared contracts in a lar$e nu1ber of instances, he ans!ered0 9I don%t recall e&actl" !hat !as said.9 hen as8ed if he did not re1e1ber sa"in$ that he had 1ade a practice of preparin$ deeds, 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, he ans!ered0 9 ell, I don%t believe so, that is not a practice.9 Pressed further for an ans!er as to his practice in preparin$ contracts and deeds for parties !here he !as not the bro8er, he finall" ans!ered0 9I have done about ever"thin$ that is on the boo8s as far as real estate is concerned.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, especiall" in dra!in$ of real#estate contracts, deeds, 1ort$a$es, notes and the li8e. '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. ... ,People v. Schafer, *+ N.E. :d ++7&&& &&& &&& ... .n attorne", in the 1ost $eneral sense, is a person desi$nated or e1plo"ed b" another to act in his stead? an a$ent? 1ore especiall", one of a class of persons authori2ed to appear and act for suitors or defendants in le$al proceedin$s. Strictl", these professional persons are attorne"s at la!, and non#professional a$ents are properl" st"led 9attorne"%s in fact?9 but the sin$le !ord is 1uch used as 1eanin$ an attorne" at la!. . person 1a" be an attorne" in facto for another, !ithout bein$ an attorne" at la!. .bb. Da! Dict. 9.ttorne".9 . public attorne", or attorne" at la!, sa"s ebster, is an officer of a court of la!, le$all" 6ualified to prosecute and defend actions in such court on the retainerof clients. 9'he principal duties of an attorne" are ,(- to be true to the court and to his client? ,:- to 1ana$e the business of his client !ith care, s8ill, and inte$rit"? ,7- to 8eep his client infor1ed as to the state of his business? ,>- to 8eep his secrets confided to hi1 as such. ... 3is ri$hts are to be 4ustl" co1pensated for his services.9 5ouv. Da! Dict. tit. 9.ttorne".9 &he transiti e erb .practice,. as defined by 0ebster, )eans $to do or perfor) fre-uently, custo)arily, or habitually2 to perfor) by a succession of acts, as, to practice !a)in!, ... to carry on in practice, or repeated action2 to apply, as a theory, to real life2 to e'ercise, as a profession, trade, art. etc.2 as, to practice law or 1edicine,% etc....9 ,State v. 5r"an, S.E. <::, <:7? E1phasis suppliedIn this 4urisdiction, !e have ruled that the practice of la! denotes fre6uenc" or a succession of acts. 'hus, !e stated in the case of People v. Villanueva ,(> SCR. (=) A();<B-0 &&& &&& &&& ... Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance, for it consists in fre6uent or custo1ar" actions, a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind. In other !ords, it is fre6uent habitual e&ercise ,State v. Cotner, (:+, p. (, *+ Nan. *;>, >: DR., M.S. +;*-. Practice of la! to fall !ithin the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public, as a la!"er and de1andin$ pa"1ent for such services. ... . ,at p. ((:It is to be noted that the Co11ission on .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 !it0 l. Aabituality. 'he ter1 %practice of la!% i1plies custo1aril"or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er ,People v. Villanueva, (> SCR. (=) citin$ State v. 5r"an, > S.E. <::, )* N.C. ;>>- such as !hen one sends a circular announcin$ the establish1ent of a la! office for the $eneral practice of la! ,C.S. v. No" 5os6ue, * Phil. (>;-, or !hen one ta8es the oath of office as a la!"er before a notar" public, and files a 1anifestation !ith the Supre1e Court infor1in$ it of his intention to practice la! in all courts in the countr" ,People v. De Duna, (=: Phil. );*-. Practice is 1ore than an isolated appearance, for it consists in fre6uent or custo1ar" action, a succession of acts of the sa1e 8ind. In other !ords, it is a habitual e&ercise ,People v. Villanueva, (> SCR. ( =) citin$ State v. Cotner, ( :+, p. (, *+ Nan, *;>-.9 ,Rollo, p. ((<&&& &&& &&&

hile the career as a business1an of respondent Monsod 1a" have profited fro1 his le$al 8no!led$e, 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!. .d1ission to the practice of la! !as not re6uired for 1e1bership in the Constitutional Co11ission or in the Fact#Findin$ Co11ission on the ()*) Coup .tte1pt. .n" specific le$al activities !hich 1a" have been assi$ned to Mr. 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. .s in the practice of la!, doin! business also should be active and continuous. Isolated business transactions or occasional, incidental and casual transactions are not !ithin the conte&t of doin$ business. 'his !as our rulin$ in the case of Anta) Consolidated, +nc. . Court of appeals, (>7 SCR. :** A()*;B-. Respondent Monsod, corporate e&ecutive, civic leader, and 1e1ber of the Constitutional Co11ission 1a" possess the bac8$round, co1petence, inte$rit", and dedication, to 6ualif" for such hi$h offices as President, Vice#President, Senator, Con$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 ,(="ears for the position of COMEDEC Chair1an has ordered that he 1a" not be confir1ed for that office. 'he Constitution char$es the public respondents no less than this Court to obe" its 1andate. I, therefore, believe that the Co11ission on .ppoint1ents co11itted $rave abuse of discretion in confir1in$ the no1ination of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of the COMEDEC. I vote to ER.N' the petition. "idin, J., dissent 1oot#ote' ( ebster%s 7rd Ne! International Dictionar". : (> SCR. (=) 7 Co11ission on .ppoint1ents% Me1orandu1 dated :< @une ())( RE0 3.' CONS'I'C'ES PR.C'ICE OF D. , pp. ;#+. > (> SCR. (=).

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila SECOND DIVISION A.M. No. P203219/0 1ebr,"r) .4, .003 JUDGE !EAH DOMINGO2REGA!A, REGIONA! TRIA! COURT, +RANCH ..5, 6UE0ON CITY, co1plainant, vs. MA. DONNA Y. SU!TAN, !EGA! RESEARCHER, REGIONA! TRIA! COURT, +RANCH ..5, 6UE0ON CITY,Respondent. DECISION CHICO2NA0ARIO, J.: @ud$e Deah Do1in$o#Re$ala, Re$ional 'rial Court ,R'C-, 5ranch ::;, Mue2on Cit", has char$ed Ma. Donna I. Sultan, De$al Researcher of the sa1e court, !ith Inefficienc", 3abitual .bsenteeis1, 'ardiness, Falsification of Dail" 'i1e Record, Dishonest", and Conduct Pre4udicial to the Service. In a referral letter dated (: Ma" :===, Court .d1inistrator 5ernardo '. Ponferrada re6uested @ud$e Re$ala to co11ent on the unauthori2ed leave of absence for the period (#:) October ())), 7#:) Nove1ber ())), and (#7 and =; Dece1ber ())), of Ma. Donna I. Sultan. Said absences !ere the sub4ect of a letter b" Ma. Donna Sultan addressed to the Office of the Court .d1inistrator ,OC.co1plainin$ the disapproval b" @ud$e Re$ala of her applications for leave on the above#1entioned dates. In her co11ent dated =< @une :===, @ud$e Re$ala alle$es that Ma. Donna Sultan is $uilt" of habitual absenteeis1 as defined b" .d1inistrative Circular No. (#)( for havin$ incurred

unauthori2ed absences e&ceedin$ the allo!able :.< da"s 1onthl" leave credits for at least three ,71onths in a se1ester0 @une ())) ############### @ul" ())) ################ .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 :.< da"s 1onthl" leave credit under the leave la! for at least three ,7- 1onths in a se1ester or at least three ,7- consecutive 1onths durin$ the "ear.9 She added further that Ma. Donna Sultan had al!a"s $one on e&tended leave of absence !ithout filin$ applications for leave in advance, also in violation of said Circular. On the char$e of tardiness and falsification of dail" ti1e record, @ud$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. Said entries in the lo$boo8 are reflected in her dail" ti1e record. Moreover, co1plainant alle$es that Ma. 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. ith respect to the char$e of inco1petence, co1plainant clai1s that Ma. Donna Sultan cannot carr" out proper le$al research, that is, she cannot find cases in point? neither can she co1e up !ith the latest 4urisprudence on the sub4ect 1atter assi$ned to her and instead copies verbati1 fro1 te&tboo8s. @ud$e Re$ala finds respondent not suited for the 4ob. @ud$e Re$ala 1aintains that Ma. Donna Sultan is slo! to learn, re6uires fre6uent instruction, and finds difficult" in ad4ustin$ herself to ne! tas8s, 1ethods and details of !or8.: Re$ardin$ the i1putation of dishonest", co1plainant alle$es that in the 1onth of October, !hen respondent !ent on an e&tended leave, respondent 1isled her and the 1e1bers of her staff to believe that respondentQs dau$hter !as confined in Malvar Eeneral 3ospital for da"s, !hich upon verification, !as discovered to be untrue. @ud$e Re$ala asserts that respondent often $oes out of the office to tal8 to la!"ers !ho have cases before 5ranch ::;, R'C, Mue2on Cit", and that she en$a$es in lon$ telephone conversations durin$ office hours. Said acts, accordin$ to co1plainant, constitute conduct pre4udicial to the service. Respondent does not den" that she has incurred the alle$ed absences but states that e&cept for the 1onths of October, Nove1ber, and Dece1ber ())), all her absences !ere authori2ed, !ith the correspondin$ applications for leave dul" filed and approved. For the absences she incurred for the above#1entioned 1onths, respondent did file the re6uired applications for leave but all !ere disapproved. Respondent no! evo8es the for$iveness of @ud$e Re$ala, and her understandin$, 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.

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

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", the 5ranch Cler8 of Court, in the course of her !or8.9 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. 'he $enerali2ation of Investi$atin$ @ud$e re$ardin$ the substandard capabilit" of le$al researchers to deliver decent service bein$ 1ere la! $raduates is not onl" unfounded but unfair as !ell. . . 'his state1ent is tanta1ount to sa"in$ that inco1petence is to be e&pected fro1 le$al researchers. Public office is public trust. .s all others in public service, respondent is e&pected to e&ecute her duties !ith efficienc" and co1petence. Nothin$ less is e&pected of her. ... '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 . OD pri1aril" due to serious fa1il" e1er$enc". hen she returned to !or8 in Dece1ber and found the at1osphere in the court hostile, she incurred additional absences to !or8 on her transfer to another court. Respondent sub1its to the findin$s of the Investi$atin$ @ud$e and pleads to co1plainant for understandin$ and for$iveness. It is noted that prior to respondent $oin$ on . OD, respondent 1et no proble1 $ettin$ the approval for her applications for leave. 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. Records sho! that respondent failed to e&ert efforts to infor1 co1plainant of her dire do1estic situation. Infor1ation reachin$ co1plainant re$ardin$ respondent durin$ her absence !ere rela"ed b" office1ates !ith !ho1 respondent 8ept in touch. ... RespondentQs violation of the rule on filin$ applications for leave is apparent in her narration of facts. She !ent on leave !ithout see8in$ proper per1ission fro1 her superior. hen the fa1il" crisis ca1e about, she !as still able to $o to the court to $et her .'M card "et she !as not able to file her application for leave. On the occasions that she called the office, she !as re1inded to file her leave of absence and to spea8 !ith co1plainant !ho !as alread" loo8in$ for her, but she did not do either. She called the office dail", but she never as8ed to spea8 !ith co1plainant. . . RespondentQs absences on the relevant 1onths 6ualif" as habitual absenteeis1 as defined and penali2ed in .d1inistrative Circular No. (>#:==: ,Re0 Reiteratin$ the Civil Service Co11issionQs Polic" on 3abitual .bsenteeis1- citin$ Me1orandu1 Circular No. =>, s. ())(, !hich provides to !it0 A. Aabitual Absenteeis) (. 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.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$ants and tal8s to the phone ver" often. 3o!ever, there is no sho!in$ that respondent ,sicconduct !as ini1ical to the service or resulted in an" 8ind of corruption. 'he investi$ation report rationali2ed that 9,t-he courts are service#oriented line or field a$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.9
lE phi9.net

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

1oot#ote' ( Rollo, p. 7=. : Rollo, p. 7(. 7 Rollo, p. (=:. > No! .ssociate @ustice of the Court of .ppeals. < Per resolution dated (( Septe1ber :==: of the Second Division of the Court. ; No! .ssociate @ustice of the Court of .ppeals. + Rollo, p. :7+. * Rollo, pp. :7*#:>(. ) .6uino . Fernande2, ..M. No. P#=(#(>+<, (+ October :==7, >(7 SCR. <)+? Madrid . Muebral, ..M. No. P#=7#(+>>, =+ October :==7, >(7 SCR. (? .ndal . 'on$a, ..M. No. P#=:#(<*(, :* October :==7, >(> SCR. <:>. (= Iba" . Di1, P#))#(7=), (( Septe1ber :===, 7>= SCR. (=+. (( Re"es#Macabeo . Valle, ..M. No. P#=:#(;<=, =7 .pril :==7, >== SCR. >+*? Cler8 of Court Muidilla, @r. ..r1ida, ..M. No. P#=7#(;)<, :( .pril :==7, >=( SCR. (=+. (: Supra, note (=. (7 Rollo, p. :=+. (> ..M. No. P#=>#(*:7, (: @ul" :==>.

Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN 5.NC +"r M"tter No. 333 J,#e 18, 1993 MAURICIO C. U!EP, petitioner, vs. THE !EGA! C!INIC, INC., respondent. R E SO D C ' I O N REGA!ADO, J.: 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 9.9 and 959 ,of said petition- 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!.9 'he advertise1ents co1plained of b" herein petitioner are as follo!s0 Anne' A SECRE' M.RRI.EEH P<;=.== for a valid 1arria$e. Info on DIVORCE. .5SENCE. .NNCDMEN'. VIS.. '3E Please call0 <:(#=+;+ DEE.D <:(+:7:, <:::=>( CDINIC, INC. *07= a1J ;0== p1 +#Flr. Victoria 5ld$., CN .ve., Mla. Anne' " EC.M DIVORCE. DON P.RNINSON

an .ttorne" in Eua1, is $ivin$ FREE 5OONS on Eua1 Divorce throu$h 'he De$al Clinic be$innin$ Monda" to Frida" durin$ office hours. Eua1 divorce. .nnul1ent of Marria$e. I11i$ration Proble1s, Visa E&t. MuotaLNon# 6uota Res. T Special Retiree%s Visa. Declaration of .bsence. Re1arria$e to Filipina Fiancees. .doption. Invest1ent in the Phil. CSLForei$n Visa for Filipina SpouseLChildren. Call Marivic. '3E +F Victoria 5ld$. >:) CN .ve., DEE.D Er1ita, Manila nr. CS E1bass" CDINIC, INC. 1 'el. <:(#+:7:? <:(#+:<(? <::#:=>(? <:(#=+;+ It is the sub1ission of petitioner that the advertise1ents above reproduced are cha1pterous, unethical, de1eanin$ of the la! profession, and destructive of the confidence of the co11unit" in the inte$rit" of the 1e1bers of the bar and that, as a 1e1ber of the le$al profession, he is asha1ed and offended b" the said advertise1ents, hence the reliefs sou$ht in his petition as hereinbefore 6uoted. In its ans!er to the petition, respondent ad1its the fact of publication of said advertise1ent at its instance, but clai1s that it is not en$a$ed in the practice of la! but in the renderin$ of 9le$al support services9 throu$h parale$als !ith the use of 1odern co1puters and electronic 1achines. Respondent further ar$ues that assu1in$ that the services advertised are le$al services, the act of advertisin$ these services should be allo!ed supposedl" in the li$ht of the case of John R. "ates and Dan ,$Steen s. State "ar of Ari5ona , . reportedl" decided b" the Cnited States Supre1e Court on @une +, ()++. Considerin$ the critical i1plications on the le$al profession of the issues raised herein, !e re6uired the ,(- Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines ,I5P-, ,:- Philippine 5ar .ssociation ,P5.-, ,7- Philippine Da!"ers% .ssociation ,PD.-, ,>- C.P. o1ens Da!"ers% Circle , IDOCI-, ,<- o1en Da!"ers .ssociation of the Philippines , D.P-, and ,;- Federacion International de .bo$adas ,FID.- to sub1it their respective position papers on the controvers" and, thereafter, their 1e1oranda. 3 'he said bar associations readil" responded and e&tended their valuable services and cooperation of !hich this Court ta8es note !ith appreciation and $ratitude. 'he 1ain issues posed for resolution before the Court are !hether or not the services offered b" respondent, 'he De$al Clinic, Inc., as advertised b" it constitutes practice of la! and, in either case, !hether the sa1e can properl" be the sub4ect of the advertise1ents herein co1plained of. 5efore proceedin$ !ith an in#depth anal"sis of the 1erits of this case, !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. (. +nte!rated "ar of the (hilippines0 &&& &&& &&& Not!ithstandin$ the subtle 1anner b" !hich respondent endeavored to distin$uish the t!o ter1s, i.e., 9le$al support services9 is-a- is 9le$al services9, co11on sense !ould readil" dictate that the sa1e are essentiall" !ithout substantial distinction. For !ho could den" that docu1ent search, evidence $atherin$, assistance to la"1an in need of basic institutional services fro1 $overn1ent or non#$overn1ent a$encies li8e birth, 1arria$e, propert", or business re$istration, obtainin$ docu1ents li8e clearance, passports, local or forei$n visas, constitutes practice of la!H &&& &&& &&& 'he Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines ,I5P- does not !ish to 1a8e issue !ith respondent%s forei$n citations. Suffice it to state that the I5P has 1ade its position 1anifest, to !it, that it stron$l" opposes the vie! espoused b" respondent ,to the effect that toda" it is alri$ht to advertise one%s le$al services-. '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.

'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. /

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

celebrated in accordance !ith our la!, b" si1pl" $oin$ to Eua1 for a divorce. 'his is not onl" 1isleadin$, but encoura$es, or serves to induce, violation of Philippine la!. .t the ver" least, this can be considered 9the dar8 side9 of le$al practice, !here certain defects in Philippine la!s are e&ploited for the sa8e of profit. .t !orst, this is outri$ht 1alpractice. Rule (.=:. J . la!"er shall not counsel or abet activities ai1ed at defiance of the la! or at lessenin$ confidence in the le$al s"ste1. In addition, it 1a" also be relevant to point out that advertise1ents such as that sho!n in .nne& 9.9 of the Petition, !hich contains a cartoon of a 1otor vehicle !ith the !ords 9@ust Married9 on its bu1per and see1s to address those plannin$ a 9secret 1arria$e,9 if not su$$estin$ a 9secret 1arria$e,9 1a8es li$ht of the 9special contract of per1anent union,9 the inviolable social institution,9 !hich is ho! the Fa1il" Code describes 1arria$e, obviousl" to e1phasi2e its sanctit" and inviolabilit". orse, this particular advertise1ent appears to encoura$e 1arria$es celebrated in secrec", !hich is su$$estive of i11oral publication of applications for a 1arria$e license. If the article 9R& for De$al Proble1s9 is to be revie!ed, it can readil" be concluded that the above i1pressions one 1a" $ather fro1 the advertise1ents in 6uestion are accurate. 'he Sharon Cuneta#Eabb" Concepcion e&a1ple alone confir1s !hat the advertise1ents su$$est. 3ere it can be seen that cri1inal acts are bein$ encoura$ed or co11itted ,a bi$a1ous 1arria$e in 3on$ Non$ or Das Ve$as- !ith i1punit" si1pl" because the 4urisdiction of Philippine courts does not e&tend to the place !here the cri1e is co11itted. Even if it be assu1ed, ar!uendo, ,that- the 9le$al support services9 respondent offers do not constitute le$al services as co11onl" understood, the advertise1ents in 6uestion $ive the i1pression that respondent corporation is bein$ operated b" la!"ers and that it offers le$al services, as earlier discussed. 'hus, the onl" lo$ical conse6uence is that, in the e"es of an ordinar" ne!spaper reader, 1e1bers of the bar the1selves are encoura$in$ or inducin$ the perfor1ance of acts !hich are contrar" to la!, 1orals, $ood custo1s and the public $ood, thereb" destro"in$ and de1eanin$ the inte$rit" of the 5ar. &&& &&& &&& It is respectfull" sub1itted that respondent should be en4oined fro1 causin$ the publication of the advertise1ents in 6uestion, or an" other advertise1ents si1ilar thereto. It is also sub1itted that respondent should be prohibited fro1 further perfor1in$ or offerin$ so1e of the services it presentl" offers, or, at the ver" least, fro1 offerin$ such services to the public in $eneral. 'he I5P is a!are of the fact that providin$ co1puteri2ed le$al research, electronic data $atherin$, stora$e and retrieval, standardi2ed le$al for1s, investi$ators for $atherin$ of evidence, and li8e services !ill $reatl" benefit the le$al profession and should not be stifled but instead encoura$ed. 3o!ever, !hen the conduct of such business b" non#1e1bers of the 5ar encroaches upon the practice of la!, there can be no choice but to prohibit such business. .d1ittedl", 1an" of the services involved in the case at bar can be better perfor1ed b" specialists in other fields, such as co1puter e&perts, !ho b" reason of their havin$ devoted ti1e and effort e&clusivel" to such field cannot fulfill the e&actin$ re6uire1ents for ad1ission to the 5ar. '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$". Indeed, a la!"er usin$ a co1puter !ill be doin$ better than a la!"er usin$ a t"pe!riter, even if both are ,e6ual- in s8ill.

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

holds out itself to the public and solicits e1plo"1ent of its le$al services. It is an odious ehicle for deception, especiall" so !hen the public cannot ventilate an" $rievance for )alpractice a$ainst the business conduit. Precisel", the li1itation of practice of la! to persons !ho have been dul" ad1itted as 1e1bers of the 5ar ,Sec. (, Rule (7*, Revised Rules of Court- is to sub4ect the 1e1bers to the discipline of the Supre1e Court. .lthou$h respondent uses its business na)e, the persons and the la!"ers !ho act for it are sub4ect to court discipline. 'he practice of la! is not a profession open to all !ho !ish to en$a$e in it nor can it be assi$ned to another ,See < .1. @ur. :+=-. It is a personal ri!ht li1ited to persons !ho have 6ualified the1selves under the la!. 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. 5

7. (hilippine Lawyers$ Association0 'he Philippine Da!"ers% .ssociation%s position, in ans!er to the issues stated herein, are !it0 (. 'he De$al Clinic is en$a$ed in the practice of la!? :. Such practice is unauthori2ed? 7. 'he advertise1ents co1plained of are not onl" unethical, but also 1isleadin$ and patentl" i11oral? and >. 'he 3onorable Supre1e Court has the po!er to supress and punish the De$al Clinic and its corporate officers for its unauthori2ed practice of la! and for its unethical, 1isleadin$ and i11oral advertisin$. &&& &&& &&& Respondent posits that is it not en$a$ed in the practice of la!. It clai1s that it 1erel" renders 9le$al support services9 to ans!ers, liti$ants and the $eneral public as enunciated in the Pri1ar" Purpose Clause of its .rticle,s- of Incorporation. ,See pa$es : to < of Respondent%s Co11ent-. 5ut its advertised services, as enu1erated above, clearl" and convincin$l" sho! that it is indeed en$a$ed in la! practice, albeit outside of court. .s advertised, it offers the $eneral public its advisor" services on Persons and Fa1il" Relations Da!, particularl" re$ardin$ forei$n divorces, annul1ent of 1arria$es, secret 1arria$es, absence and adoption? I11i$ration Da!s, particularl" on visa related proble1s, i11i$ration proble1s? the Invest1ents Da! of the Philippines and such other related la!s. Its advertised services un1ista8abl" re6uire the application of the aforesaid la!, the le$al principles and procedures related thereto, the le$al advices based thereon and !hich activities call for le$al trainin$, 8no!led$e and e&perience. .ppl"in$ the test laid do!n b" the Court in the aforecited .$rava Case, the activities of respondent fall s6uarel" and are e1braced in !hat la!"ers and la"1en e6uall" ter1 as 9the practice of la!.9 8 >. 8.(. 0o)en Lawyers$ Circle0 In resolvin$, the issues before this 3onorable Court, 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!. .t present, beco1in$ a la!"er re6uires one to ta8e a ri$orous four#"ear course of stud" on top of a four#"ear bachelor of arts or sciences course and then to ta8e and pass the bar e&a1inations. Onl" then, is a la!"er 6ualified to practice la!. hile the use of a parale$al is sanctioned in 1an" 4urisdiction as an aid to the ad1inistration of 4ustice, there are in those 4urisdictions, courses of stud" andLor standards !hich !ould 6ualif" these parale$als to deal !ith the $eneral public as such. hile it 1a" no! be the opportune ti1e to establish these courses of stud" andLor standards, the fact re1ains that at present, these do not e&ist in the Philippines. In the 1eanti1e, this 3onorable Court 1a" decide to 1a8e 1easures to

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. In the sa1e 1anner, the $eneral public should also be protected fro1 the dan$ers !hich 1a" be brou$ht about b" advertisin$ of le$al services. hile it appears that la!"ers are prohibited under the present Code of Professional Responsibilit" fro1 advertisin$, 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.9 Clearl", 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. 4 . perusal of the 6uestioned advertise1ents of Respondent, ho!ever, see1s to $ive the i1pression that infor1ation re$ardin$ validit" of 1arria$es, divorce, annul1ent of 1arria$e, i11i$ration, visa e&tensions, declaration of absence, adoption and forei$n invest1ent, !hich are in essence, le$al 1atters , !ill be $iven to the1 if the" avail of its services. 'he Respondent%s na1e J 'he De$al Clinic, Inc. J does not help 1atters. It $ives the i1pression a$ain that Respondent !ill or can cure the le$al proble1s brou$ht to the1. .ssu1in$ that Respondent is, as clai1ed, staffed purel" b" parale$als, it also $ives the 1isleadin$ i1pression that there are la!"ers involved in 'he De$al Clinic, Inc., as there are doctors in an" 1edical clinic, !hen onl" 9parale$als9 are involved in 'he De$al Clinic, Inc. Respondent%s alle$ations are further belied b" the ver" ad1issions of its President and 1a4orit" stoc8holder, .tt". No$ales, !ho $ave an insi$ht on the structure and 1ain purpose of Respondent corporation in the afore1entioned 9Star!ee89 article.9 9 <. 0o)en Lawyer$s Association of the (hilippines0 .nne&es 9.9 and 959 of the petition are clearl" advertise1ents to solicit cases for the purpose of $ain !hich, as provided for under the above cited la!, ,are- ille$al and a$ainst the Code of Professional Responsibilit" of la!"ers in this countr". .nne& 9.9 of the petition is not onl" ille$al in that it is an advertise1ent to solicit cases, but it is ille$al in that in bold letters it announces that the De$al Clinic, Inc., could !or8 outLcause the celebration of a secret 1arria$e !hich is not onl" ille$al but i11oral in this countr". hile it is advertised that one has to $o to said a$enc" and pa" P<;= for a valid 1arria$e it is certainl" foolin$ the public for valid 1arria$es in the Philippines are sole1ni2ed onl" b" officers authori2ed to do so under the la!. .nd to e1plo" an a$enc" for said purpose of contractin$ 1arria$e is not necessar". No a1ount of reasonin$ that in the CS., 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$al services for their particular needs can 4ustif" the use of advertise1ents such as are the sub4ect 1atter of the petition, for one ,cannot4ustif" an ille$al act even b" !hatever 1erit the ille$al act 1a" serve. 'he la! has "et to be a1ended so that such act could beco1e 4ustifiable. e sub1it further that these advertise1ents that see1 to pro4ect that secret 1arria$es and divorce are possible in this countr" for a fee, !hen in fact it is not so, are hi$hl" reprehensible. It !ould encoura$e people to consult this clinic about ho! the" could $o about havin$ a secret 1arria$e here, !hen it cannot nor should ever be atte1pted, and see8 advice on divorce, !here in this countr" there is none, e&cept under the Code of Musli1 Personal Da!s in the Philippines. It is also a$ainst $ood 1orals and is deceitful because it falsel" represents to the public to be able to do that !hich b" our la!s cannot be done ,and- b" our Code of Morals should not be done. In the case ,of- In re 'a$uda, <7 Phil. 7+, the Supre1e Court held that solicitation for clients b" an attorne" b" circulars of advertise1ents, is unprofessional, and offenses of this character 4ustif" per1anent eli1ination fro1 the 5ar. 10 ;. 7ederacion +nternacional de Abo!ados0

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

unla!ful, or that the considerable class of 1en !ho custo1aril" perfor1 a certain function have no ri$ht to do so, or that the technical education $iven b" our schools cannot be used b" the $raduates in their business. +n deter)inin! whether a )an is practicin! law, we should consider his wor# for any particular client or custo)er, as a whole . I can i1a$ine defendant bein$ en$a$ed pri1aril" to advise as to the la! definin$ his client%s obli$ations to his e1plo"ees, to $uide his client%s obli$ations to his e1plo"ees, to $uide his client alon$ the path charted b" la!. 'his, of course, !ould be the practice of the la!. 5ut such is not the fact in the case before 1e. Defendant%s pri1aril" efforts are alon$ econo1ic and ps"cholo$ical lines. 'he la! onl" provides the fra1e !ithin !hich he 1ust !or8, 4ust as the 2onin$ code li1its the 8ind of buildin$ the li1its the 8ind of buildin$ the architect 1a" plan. &he incidental le!al ad ice or infor)ation defendant )ay !i e, does not transfor) his acti ities into the practice of law. Let )e add that if, e en as a )inor feature of his wor#, he perfor)ed ser ices which are custo)arily reser ed to )e)bers of the bar, he would be practicin! law. For instance, if as part of a !elfare pro$ra1, he dre! e1plo"ees% !ills. .nother branch of defendant%s !or8 is the representations of the e1plo"er in the ad4ust1ent of $rievances and in collective bar$ainin$, !ith or !ithout a 1ediator. 'his is not per se the practice of la!. .n"one 1a" use an a$ent for ne$otiations and 1a" select an a$ent particularl" s8illed in the sub4ect under discussion, and the person appointed is free to accept the e1plo"1ent !hether or not he is a 1e1ber of the bar. 3ere, ho!ever, there 1a" be an e&ception !here the business turns on a 6uestion of la!. Most real estate sales are ne$otiated b" bro8ers !ho are not la!"ers. 5ut if the value of the land depends on a disputed ri$ht#of#!a" and the principal role of the ne$otiator is to assess the probable outco1e of the dispute and persuade the opposite part" to the sa1e opinion, then it 1a" be that onl" a la!"er can accept the assi$n1ent. Or if a controvers" bet!een an e1plo"er and his 1en $ro!s fro1 differin$ interpretations of a contract, or of a statute, it is 6uite li8el" that defendant should not handle it. 5ut I need not reach a definite conclusion here, since the situation is not presented b" the proofs. Defendant also appears to represent the e1plo"er before ad1inistrative a$encies of the federal $overn1ent, especiall" before trial e&a1iners of the National Dabor Relations 5oard. .n a$enc" of the federal $overn1ent, actin$ b" virtue of an authorit" $ranted b" the Con$ress, 1a" re$ulate the representation of parties before such a$enc". '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. 'he rules of the National Dabor Relations 5oard $ive to a part" the ri$ht to appear in person, or b" counsel, or b" other representative. Rules and Re$ulations, Septe1ber ((th, ()>;, S. :=7.7(. %Counsel% here 1eans a licensed attorne", and ther representative% one not a la!"er. In this phase of his !or8, defendant 1a" la!full" do !hatever the Dabor 5oard allo!s, even ar$uin$ 6uestions purel" le$al. ,.uerbacher v. ood, <7 .. :d *==, cited in Stats8", Introduction to Parale$alis1 A()+>B, at pp. (<>#(<;.-.

(.* Fro1 the fore$oin$, it can be said that a person en$a$ed in a la!ful callin$ ,!hich 1a" involve 8no!led$e of the la!- is not en$a$ed in the practice of la! provided that0 ,a- 'he le$al 6uestion is subordinate and incidental to a 1a4or non#le$al proble1?. ,b- 'he services perfor1ed are not custo1aril" reserved to 1e1bers of the bar? . ,c- No separate fee is char$ed for the le$al advice or infor1ation. .ll these 1ust be considered in relation to the !or8 for an" particular client as a !hole. (.). If the person involved is both la!"er and non#la!"er, the Code of Professional Responsibilit" succintl" states the rule of conduct0 Rule (<.=* J . la!"er !ho is en$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". (.(=. In the present case. the De$al Clinic appears to render !eddin$ services ,See .nne& 9.9 Petition-. Services on routine, strai$htfor!ard 1arria$es, li8e securin$ a 1arria$e license, and 1a8in$ arran$e1ents !ith a priest or a 4ud$e, 1a" not constitute practice of la!. 3o!ever, if the proble1 is as co1plicated as that described in 9R& for De$al Proble1s9 on the Sharon Cuneta#Eabb" Concepcion# Richard Eo1e2 case, then !hat 1a" be involved is actuall" the practice of la!. If a non#la!"er, such as the De$al Clinic, renders such services then it is en$a$ed in the unauthori2ed practice of la!. (.((. 'he De$al Clinic also appears to $ive infor1ation on divorce, absence, annul1ent of 1arria$e and visas ,See .nne&es 9.9 and 959 Petition-. Purel" $ivin$ infor1ational 1aterials 1a" not constitute of la!. '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. It is not entirel" i1probable, ho!ever, that aside fro1 purel" $ivin$ infor1ation, the De$al Clinic%s parale$als 1a" appl" the la! to the particular proble1 of the client, and $ive le$al advice. Such !ould constitute unauthori2ed practice of la!. 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$al practice. .nd the 1ere fact that the principles or rules stated in the te&t 1a" be accepted b" a particular reader as a solution to his proble1 does not affect this. . . . . .pparentl" it is ur$ed that the con4oinin$ of these t!o, that is, the te&t and the for1s, !ith advice as to ho! the for1s should be filled out, constitutes the unla!ful practice of la!. 5ut that is the situation !ith 1an" approved and accepted te&ts. Dace"%s boo8 is sold to the public at lar$e. &here is no personal contact or relationship with a particular indi idual. 6or does there e'ist that relation of confidence and trust so necessary to the status of attorney and client. &A+S +S &AE ESSE6&+AL ,7 LEGAL (RAC&+CE / &AE RE(RESE6&A&+,6 A6% A%D+S+6G ,7 A (AR&+C8LAR (ERS,6 +6 A (AR&+C8LAR S+&8A&+,6. .t 1ost the boo8 assu1es to offer $eneral advice on co11on proble1s, and does not purport to $ive personal advice on a specific proble1 peculiar to a desi$nated or readil" identified person. 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, such publication and sale did not constitutes the unla!ful practice of la! . . . . 'here bein$ no le$al i1pedi1ent under the statute to the sale of the 8it, there !as no proper basis for the in4unction a$ainst

defendant 1aintainin$ an office for the purpose of sellin$ to persons see8in$ a divorce, separation, 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. 'he record does full" support, ho!ever, the findin$ that for the chan$e of U+< or U(== for the 8it, 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 ,'he in4unction therefore sou$ht to- en4oin conduct constitutin$ the practice of la!, 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, separation, annul1ent of separation a$ree1ent sou$ht and should be affir1ed. ,State v. inder, 7>*, NIS :D :+= A()+7B, cited in Stats8", supra at p. (=(.-. (.(:. Respondent, of course, states that its services are 9strictl" non#dia$nostic, non# advisor". 9It is not controverted, ho!ever, that if the services 9involve $ivin$ le$al advice or counsellin$,9 such !ould constitute practice of la! ,Co11ent, par. ;.:-. It is in this li$ht that FID. sub1its that a factual in6uir" 1a" be necessar" for the 4udicious disposition of this case. &&& &&& &&& :.(=. .nne& 9.9 1a" be ethicall" ob4ectionable in that it can $ive the i1pression ,or perpetuate the !ron$ notion- that there is a secret 1arria$e. ith all the sole1nities, for1alities and other re6uisites of 1arria$es ,See .rticles :, et se-., Fa1il" Code-, no Philippine 1arria$e can be secret. :.((. .nne& 959 1a" li8e!ise be ethicall" ob4ectionable. 'he second para$raph thereof ,!hich is not necessaril" related to the first para$raph- fails to state the li1itation that onl" 9parale$al servicesH9 or 9le$al support services9, and not le$al services, are available.9 11 . prefator" discussion on the 1eanin$ of the phrase 9practice of la!9 beco1es e&i$ent for the proper deter1ination of the issues raised b" the petition at bar. On this score, !e note that the clause 9practice of la!9 has lon$ been the sub4ect of 4udicial construction and interpretation. 'he courts have laid do!n $eneral principles and doctrines e&plainin$ the 1eanin$ and scope of the ter1, so1e of !hich !e no! ta8e into account. Practice of la! 1eans an" activit", in or out of court, !hich re6uires the application of la!, le$al procedures, 8no!led$e, trainin$ and e&perience. 'o en$a$e in the practice of la! is to perfor1 those acts !hich are characteristic of the profession. Eenerall", to practice la! is to $ive advice or render an" 8ind of service that involves le$al 8no!led$e or s8ill. 1. 'he practice of la! is not li1ited to the conduct of cases in court. It includes le$al advice and counsel, and the preparation of le$al instru1ents and contract b" !hich le$al ri$hts are secured, althou$h such 1atter 1a" or 1a" not be pendin$ in a court. 13 In the practice of his profession, 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, preparation for clients of docu1ents re6uirin$ 8no!led$e of le$al principles not possessed b" ordinar" la"1an, and appearance for clients before public tribunals !hich possess po!er and authorit" to deter1ine ri$hts of life, libert", and propert" accordin$ to la!, in order to assist in proper interpretation and enforce1ent of la!. 1/ hen a person participates in the a trial and advertises hi1self as a la!"er, he is in the practice of la!. 13 One !ho confers !ith clients, advises the1 as to their le$al ri$hts and then ta8es the business

to an attorne" and as8s the latter to loo8 after the case in court, is also practicin$ la!. 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!. 18 One !ho renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of a statute, and receives pa" for it, is, to that e&tent, practicin$ la!. 14 In the recent case of Cayetano s. Monsod, 19 after citin$ the doctrines in several cases, !e laid do!n the test to deter1ine !hether certain acts constitute 9practice of 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. 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$al advice to clients. It e1braces all advice to clients and all actions ta8en for the1 in 1atters connected !ith the la!. 'he practice of la! is not li1ited to the conduct of cases on court.,Dand 'itle .bstract and 'rust Co. v. D!or8en , (:) Ohio St. :7, ()7N. E. ;<=-. . person is also considered to be in the practice of la! !hen he0 . . . . for valuable consideration en$a$es in the business of advisin$ person, fir1s, associations or corporations as to their ri$ht under the la!, or appears in a representative capacit" as an advocate in proceedin$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$ed in the practice of la!. ,State e&. rel. Mc8ittric8 v. C.S. Dudle" and Co., (=: S. . :d *)<, 7>= Mo. *<:-. 'his Court, in the case of (hilippines Lawyers Association . A!ra a ,(=< Phil. (+7, (+;#(++-,stated0 'he practice of la! is not li1ited to the conduct of cases or liti$ation in court? it e1braces the preparation of pleadin$s and other papers incident to actions and special proceedin$s, the 1ana$e1ent of such actions and proceedin$s on behalf of clients before 4ud$es and courts, and in addition, conve"in$. In $eneral, all advice to clients, and all action ta8en for the1 in 1atters connected !ith the la! incorporation services, assess1ent and conde1nation services conte1platin$ 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 or estate and $uardianship have been held to constitute la! practice, as do the preparation and draftin$ of le$al instru1ents, !here the !or8 done involves the deter1ination b" the trained le$al 1ind of the le$al effect of facts and conditions. ,< .1. @r. p. :;:, :;7-. Practice of la! under 1odern conditions consists in no s1all part of !or8 perfor1ed outside of an" court and havin$ no i11ediate relation to proceedin$s in court. It e1braces conve"ancin$, 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. .lthou$h these transactions 1a" have no direct connection !ith court proceedin$s, the" are al!a"s sub4ect to beco1e involved 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$ations to clients !hich rests upon all attorne"s. ,Moran, Co11ents on the Rules o Court, Vol. 7 A()+7 ed.B, pp. ;;<#;;;, citin$ In Re Opinion of the @ustices AMassB, ()> N. E. 7(7, 6uoted in Rhode Is. 5ar .ssoc. v. .uto1obile Service .ssoc. AR.I.B ()+ .. (7), (>>-. 'he practice of la!, therefore, covers a !ide ran$e of activities in and out of court. .ppl"in$ the afore1entioned criteria to the case at bar, !e a$ree !ith the perceptive findin$s and observations of the aforestated bar associations that the activities of respondent, as advertised, constitute 9practice of la!.9 'he contention of respondent that it 1erel" offers le$al support services can neither be seriousl" considered nor sustained. Said proposition is belied b" respondent%s o!n description of the services it has been offerin$, to !it0 De$al support services basicall" consists of $ivin$ read" infor1ation b" trained parale$als to la"1en and la!"ers, !hich are strictl" non#dia$nostic, non#advisor", throu$h the e&tensive use of co1puters and 1odern infor1ation technolo$" in the $atherin$, processin$, stora$e, trans1ission and reproduction of infor1ation and co11unication, 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$encies, li8e birth, 1arria$e, propert", or business re$istrations? educational or e1plo"1ent records or certifications, obtainin$ docu1entation li8e clearances, passports, local or forei$n visas? $ivin$ infor1ation about la!s of other countries that the" 1a" find useful, li8e forei$n divorce, 1arria$e or adoption la!s that the" can avail of preparator" to e1i$ration to the forei$n countr", and other 1atters that do not involve representation of clients in court? desi$nin$ and installin$ co1puter s"ste1s, pro$ra1s, or soft!are for the efficient 1ana$e1ent of la! offices, corporate le$al depart1ents, courts and other entities en$a$ed in dispensin$ or ad1inisterin$ le$al services. .0 hile so1e of the services bein$ offered b" respondent corporation 1erel" involve 1echanical and technical 8no!ho!, such as the installation of co1puter s"ste1s and pro$ra1s for the efficient 1ana$e1ent of la! offices, or the co1puteri2ation of research aids and 1aterials, these !ill not suffice to 4ustif" an e&ception to the $eneral rule. hat is palpabl" clear is that respondent corporation $ives out le$al infor1ation to la"1en and la!"ers. Its contention that such function is non#advisor" and non#dia$nostic is 1ore apparent than real. In providin$ infor1ation, for e&a1ple, about forei$n la!s on 1arria$e, divorce and adoption, it strains the credulit" of this Court that all the respondent corporation !ill si1pl" do is loo8 for the la!, furnish a cop" thereof to the client, and stop there as if it !ere 1erel" a boo8store. ith its attorne"s and so called parale$als, it !ill necessaril" have to e&plain to the client the intricacies of the la! and advise hi1 or her on the proper course of action to be ta8en as 1a" be provided for b" said la!. 'hat is !hat its advertise1ents represent and for the !hich services it !ill conse6uentl" char$e and be paid. 'hat activit" falls s6uarel" !ithin the 4urisprudential definition of 9practice of la!.9 Such a conclusion !ill not be altered b" the fact that respondent corporation does not represent clients in court since la! practice, as the !ei$ht of authorit" holds, is not li1ited 1erel" $ivin$ le$al advice, contract draftin$ and so forth. 'he aforesaid conclusion is further stren$thened b" an article published in the @anuar" (7, ())( issue of the Star!ee8L'he Sunda" Ma$a2ine of the Philippines Star, entitled 9R& for De$al Proble1s,9 !here an insi$ht into the structure, 1ain purpose and operations of respondent corporation !as $iven b" its o!n 9proprietor,9 .tt". Ro$elio P. No$ales0 'his is the 8ind of business that is transacted ever"da" at 'he De$al Clinic, !ith offices on the seventh floor of the Victoria 5uildin$ alon$ C. N. .venue in Manila. No

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

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

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

corporation for services rendered, !e find and so hold that the sa1e definitel" do not and conclusivel" cannot fall under an" of the above#1entioned e&ceptions. 'he rulin$ in the case of "ates, et al. s. State "ar of Ari5ona, /3 !hich is repeatedl" invo8ed and constitutes the 4ustification relied upon b" respondent, is obviousl" not applicable to the case at bar. Fore1ost is the fact that the disciplinar" rule involved in said case e&plicitl" allo!s a la!"er, as an e&ception to the prohibition a$ainst advertise1ents b" la!"ers, to publish a state1ent of le$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. No such e&ception is provided for, e&pressl" or i1pliedl", !hether in our for1er Canons of Professional Ethics or the present Code of Professional Responsibilit". 5esides, 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.9 /5 'his $oes to sho! that an e&ception to the $eneral rule, such as that bein$ invo8ed b" herein respondent, can be 1ade onl" if and !hen the canons e&pressl" provide for such an e&ception. Other!ise, the prohibition stands, as in the case at bar. It bears 1ention that in a surve" conducted b" the .1erican 5ar .ssociation after the decision in 5ates, on the attitude of the public about la!"ers after vie!in$ television co11ercials, it !as found that public opinion dropped si$nificantl" /8 !ith respect to these characteristics of la!"ers0 'rust!orth" fro1 +(K to (>K Professional fro1 +(K to (>K 3onest fro1 ;<K to (>K Di$nified fro1 ><K to (>K Secondl", it is our fir1 belief that !ith the present situation of our le$al and 4udicial s"ste1s, 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 $eneral. .t this point in ti1e, it is of ut1ost i1portance in the face of such ne$ative, even if unfair, criticis1s at ti1es, to adopt and 1aintain that level of professional conduct !hich is be"ond reproach, and to e&ert all efforts to re$ain the hi$h estee1 for1erl" accorded to the le$al profession. In su1, it is undoubtedl" a 1isbehavior on the part of the la!"er, sub4ect to disciplinar" action, to advertise his services e&cept in allo!able instances /4 or to aid a la"1an in the unauthori2ed practice of la!. /9 Considerin$ that .tt". Ro$elio P. No$ales, !ho is the pri1e incorporator, 1a4or stoc8holder and proprietor of 'he De$al Clinic, Inc. is a 1e1ber of the Philippine 5ar, he is hereb" repri1anded, !ith a !arnin$ that a repetition of the sa1e or si1ilar acts !hich are involved in this proceedin$ !ill be dealt !ith 1ore severel". hile !e dee1 it necessar" that the 6uestion as to the le$alit" or ille$alit" of the purposeLs for !hich the De$al Clinic, Inc. !as created should be passed upon and deter1ined, !e are constrained to refrain fro1 lapsin$ 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. It is, of course, i1perative that this 1atter be pro1ptl" deter1ined, albeit in a different proceedin$ and foru1, since, under the present state of our la! and 4urisprudence, a corporation cannot be or$ani2ed for or en$a$e in the practice of la! in this countr". 'his interdiction, 4ust li8e the rule a$ainst unethical advertisin$, cannot be subverted b" e1plo"in$ so1e so#called parale$als supposedl" renderin$ the alle$ed support services. 'he re1ed" for the apparent breach of this prohibition b" respondent is the concern and province of the Solicitor Eeneral !ho can institute the correspondin$ -uo warranto action, 30 after due ascertain1ent of the factual bac8$round and basis for the $rant of respondent%s corporate charter, in li$ht of the putative 1isuse thereof. 'hat spin#off fro1 the instant bar 1atter is referred to the Solicitor Eeneral for such action as 1a" be necessar" under the circu1stances. .CCORDINEDI, the Court Resolved to RES'R.IN and EN@OIN herein respondent, 'he De$al Clinic, Inc., fro1 issuin$ or causin$ the publication or disse1ination of an" advertise1ent in an" for1 !hich is of the sa1e or si1ilar tenor and purpose as .nne&es 9.9 and 959 of this petition, and fro1 conductin$, directl" or indirectl", an" activit", operation or transaction proscribed b" la! or the Code

of Professional Ethics as indicated herein. Det copies of this resolution be furnished the Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines, the Office of the 5ar Confidant and the Office of the Solicitor Eeneral for appropriate action in accordance here!ith. 6ar asa, C.J., Cru5, 7eliciano, (adilla, "idin, GriBo-A-uino, %a ide, Jr., Ro)ero, 6ocon, "ellosillo, Melo and Luiason, JJ., concur
9

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

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

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