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

Moreover.9 . . ((..ac6uisition of insi$hts into current advances !hich are of particular si$nificance to the corporate counsel? .())=. 'hese trends are co1plicated as corporations or$ani2e for $lobal operations. For that 1atter. a corporate la!"er is so1eti1es offered this fortune to be 1ore closel" involved in the runnin$ of the business. for e&a1ple.t an" rate. . So1e lar$e MNCs provide one of the fe! opportunities available to corporate la!"ers to enter the international la! field."usiness Star. In short. &he )ode) corporate lawyer has !ained a new role as a sta#eholder / in so)e cases participatin! in the or!ani5ation and operations of !o ernance throu!h participation on boards and other decision-)a#in! roles . .e. E1phasis supplied. >-.9 Ma" :<. a corporate la!"er 1a" assu1e responsibilities other than the le$al affairs of the business of the corporation he is representin$.MNC-. the overseas 4obs $o to e&perienced attorne"s !hile the "oun$er attorne"s do their 9international practice9 in la! libraries. tills is an area coveted b" corporate la!"ers. !ith a shared area lin8in$ the1. ho!ever.an introduction to usable disciplinar" s8ins applicable to a corporate counsel%s 1ana$e1ent responsibilities? and . &hese include such )atters as deter)inin! policy and beco)in! in ol ed in )ana!e)ent . Also. one 1a" have a feelin$ of bein$ isolated fro1 the action. 'oda".9 so to spea8. bad la!"er is one !ho fails to spot proble1s. the role of the la!"er in the real1 of finance. 5ecause !or8in$ in a forei$n countr" is perceived b" 1an" as $la1orous. or not understandin$ ho! one%s !or8 actuall" fits into the !or8 of the or$arni2ation. 9Corporate Finance Da!. includin$ the resultin$ strate$ic repositionin$ that the fir1s he provides counsel for are re6uired to 1a8e."usiness Star.9 it for1s a unif"in$ the1e for the corporate counsel%s total learnin$. No lon$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.t"pes of learnin$0 . 'o borro! the lines of 3arvard#educated la!"er 5ruce assertein. and the e&cellent la!"er is one !ho sur1ounts the1. 'his can be frustratin$ to so1eone !ho needs to see the results of his !or8 first hand.(. i. the stud" of corporate la! practice direl" needs a 9shot in the ar1. Other!ise 8no!n as 9intersectin$ 1ana$erial 4urisprudence. 'he salience of the nation#state is bein$ reduced as fir1s deal both !ith $lobal 1ultinational entities and si1ultaneousl" !ith sub#national $overn1ental units.a devotion to the or$ani2ation and 1ana$e1ent of the le$al function itself. the corporate la!"er revie!s the $lobali2ation process. 'hese three sub4ect areas 1a" be thou$ht of as intersectin$ circles.9 @an. and the need to thin8 about a corporation%s? strate$" at 1ultiple levels. ()*). the nature of the lawyer$s participation in decision-)a#in! within the corporation is rapidly chan!in!. Often these ne! patterns develop alon$side e&istin$ le$al institutions and la!s are perceived as barriers. >-. . 'his brin$s us to the inevitable. international la! is practiced in a relativel" s1all nu1ber of co1panies and la! fir1s. E1phasis supplied- . and in other capacities !hich re6uire an abilit" to deal !ith the la!.. a $ood la!"er is one !ho perceives the difficulties.includin$ the Securities and E&chan$e Co11ission-. a corporate la!"er%s services 1a" so1eti1es be en$a$ed b" a 1ultinational corporation . Such corporate le$al 1ana$e1ent issues deal pri1aril" !ith three . to !it0 9.7. .:.fter all. p. In 1ost cases. 9Corporate Da! Practice. Fir1s increasin$l" collaborate not onl" !ith public entities but !ith each other J often !ith those !ho are co1petitors in other arenas. p. So1e current advances in behavior and polic" sciences affect the counsel%s role.In a bi$ co1pan".7.

In $eneral.E1phasis supplied&hird Modelin! for 6e!otiation Mana!e)ent. pro1otin$ tea1 achieve1ents !ithin the or$ani2ation. si1ulation case of an international 4oint venture 1a" be used to illustrate the point. the le!al )ana!erial capabilities of the corporate lawyer is-a. it can be used to appraise the settle)ent alue of liti!ation. . Plannin$ b" la!"ers re6uires special s8ills that co1prise a 1a4or part of the $eneral counsel%s responsibilities. aid in ne!otiation settle)ent. three factors are apropos0 7irst Syste) %yna)ics.B the or$ani2ation and 1ana$e1ent of the le$al function. 6ew pro!ra))in! techni-ues now )a#e the syste) dyna)ics principles )ore accessible to )ana!ers / includin! corporate counsels. . +n a crisis situation. 'his is the fra1e!or8 !ithin !hich are underta8en those activities of the fir1 to !hich le$al conse6uences attach.ffice. &his enables users to )a#e better decisions in ol in! co)ple'ity and uncertainty. 'he field of s"ste1s d"na1ics has been found an effective tool for ne! 1ana$erial thin8in$ re$ardin$ both plannin$ and pressin$ i11ediate proble1s.E1phasis suppliedFollo!in$ the concept of boundar" spannin$. )ore ad ersarial relationships and traditional for)s of see#in! to influence !o ern)ental policies . and rates of flo!. Esprit. . and ps"cholo$ical.&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. 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. . inventor" levels. 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. . 'he $eneral counsel has e1er$ed in the last decade as one of the 1ost vibrant subsets of the le$al . . . enable users to si1ulate all sorts of s"ste1atic proble1s J ph"sical. Eure#a and Race are e&a1ples of collaborative efforts bet!een $overn1ental and business @apan%s M+&+ is !orld fa1ous. 'he" differ fro1 those of re1edial la!.E1phasis suppliedRe$ardin$ the s8ills to appl" b" the corporate counsel.ll inte$rated set of such tools provide coherent and effective ne$otiation support. Mana!erial Jurisprudence. such e&ternal activities are better predictors of tea1 perfor1ance than internal $roup processes. In Europe. Co1puter#based 1odels can be used directl" b" parties and 1ediators in all lands of ne$otiations. includin$ hands#on on instruction in these techni6ues.n understandin$ of the role of feedbac8 loops.is the )ana!erial )ettle of corporations are challen!ed. 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. 1ana$erial.E1phasis suppliedSecond %ecision Analysis.nd there are lessons to be learned fro1 other countries. +n the conte't of a law depart)ent. and )ini)i5e the cost and ris# in ol ed in )ana!in! a portfolio of cases . . A5e this as it 1a". Current research is see8in$ !a"s both to anticipate effective 1ana$erial procedures and to understand relationships of financial liabilit" and insurance considerations. . 'he practice and theor" of 9la!9 is not ade6uate toda" to facilitate the relationships needed in tr"in$ to 1a8e a $lobal econo1" !or8.r!ani5ation and 7unctionin! of the Corporate Counsel$s . thus0 (re enti e Lawyerin!. interdependent environ1ent. 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. social. econo1ic. the office of the Corporate Counsel co1prises a distinct $roup !ithin the 1ana$erial structure of all 8inds of or$ani2ations. concern three pointed areas of consideration.

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.6uino to the position of Chair1an of the COMEDEC in a letter received b" the Secretariat of the Co11ission on . 9'he Corporate Counsel. in initiatin!. and pro*ect wor# of the "an#. has wor#ed with the under pri ile!ed sectors. Monsod wor#ed in the law office of his father. >-.#<<K. he assu1ed office as Chair1an of the COMEDEC.<. 9Corporate Finance la!. ()*). has rendered ser ices to arious co)panies as a le!al and econo)ic consultant or chief e'ecuti e officer.@ of 6AM7REL. Monsod. includin$ structurin$ its $lobal operations. ser ed as chief e'ecuti e officer of an in est)ent ban# and subse-uently of a business con!lo)erate. Christian Monsod is a 1e1ber of the Philippine 5ar. ())(. On the sa1e da".tt"."usiness Star. 1ana$in$ i1proved relationships !ith an increasin$l" diversified bod" of e1plo"ees. .C. 3e has been a dues pa"in$ 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. ())(. havin$ passed the bar e&a1inations of ().pril :<.9 @an. Durin$ his stint in the orld 5an8 Eroup . and since 9:=>. at the ver" least. he wor#ed with the Meralco Group. 1ana$in$ e&panded liabilit" e&posure.fter $raduatin$ fro1 the Colle$e of Da! . ())(. he 1ust. p. Monsod also )ade use of his le!al #nowled!e as a )e)ber of the %a ide Co))ission.both of the bar and the bench. lobbyin! for and en!a!in! in affir)ati e action for the a!rarian refor) law and lately the urban land refor) bill. for which he was cited by the (resident of the Co))ission.7#()+=-. p. On @une (*. 1an" !ould ad1it to i$norance of vast tracts of the financial la! territor". . Atty. Ae appeared for 6AM7REL in its accreditation hearin!s before the Co)elec. 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 .ppoint1ents on . econo)ic. a -uast *udicial body.ppoint1ents of Monsod%s no1ination.= !ith a $rade of *.@.fficers. .and havin$ hurdled the bar. As for)er Secretary-General ?9:=>@ and 6ational Chair)an ?9:=. '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.p. petitioner as a citi2en and ta&pa"er. 8pon returnin! to the (hilippines in 9:. Monsod$s wor# in ol ed bein! #nowled!eable in election law. 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. Iet. Justice Cecilia MuBo5-(al)a for . Monsod wor#ed as an operations officer for about two years in Costa Rica and (ana)a. 'he challen$e for la!"ers . Petitioner opposed the no1ination because alle$edl" Monsod does not possess the re6uired 6ualification of havin$ been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears.pril (=. ())(.is to have 1ore than a passin$ 8no!led$e of financial la! affectin$ each aspect of their !or8. and Chair)an of its Co))ittee on Accountability of (ublic . copin$ internall" !ith 1ore co1ple& 1a8e or b" decisions. which conducted nu)erous hearin!s ?9::<@ and as a )e)ber of the Constitutional Co))ission ?9:=>-9:=. Challen$in$ the validit" of the confir1ation b" the Co11ission on .innu)erable a)end)ents to . creatin$ ne! and varied interactions !ith public decision#1a8ers. which in ol ed !ettin! ac-uainted with the laws of )e)ber-countries ne!otiatin! loans and coordinatin! le!al. (:>. in his personal capacity and as for)er Co-Chair)an of the "ishops "usiness)en$s Conference for Au)an %e elop)ent.9 .nd even if the corporate la!"er%s ai1 is not the understand all of the la!%s effects on corporate activities. ((.P.profession. 9"usiness Star9. +n the field of ad ocacy. Respondent Christian Monsod !as no1inated b" President Cora2on C. Rollo.().. . he too8 his oath of office. >-.ppoint1ents confir1ed the no1ination of Monsod as Chair1an of the COMEDEC. such as the far)er and urban poor !roups. the Co11ission on . 'he corporate counsel hear responsibilit" for 8e" aspects of the fir1%s strate$ic issues. On @une <.

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

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

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

>>. cannot be said to practice his profession as an accountant.repeated or custo)ary action. @ustice Paras. . a doctor of 1edicine !ho is e1plo"ed and is habituall" perfor1in$ the tas8s of a nursin$ aide. 5r"an. albeit onl" in the result? it does not appear to 1e that there has been an ade6uate sho!in$ that the challen$ed deter1ination b" the Co11ission on . it is fre6uent habitual e&ercise .. Muestions involvin$ the construction of constitutional provisions are best left to 4udicial resolution. I therefore vote to DENI the petition. . (7).. ()*+ Constitution-. cannot be said to be in the 9practice of 1edicine.>+. I/.(=..State vs. . 1 'o 9practice9 la!."ears.9 'he Constitution has i1posed clear and specific standards for a COMEDEC Chair1an. habitual.fter considerin$ carefull" respondent Monsod%s co11ent. In the sa1e !a".9 It is the bounden dut" of this Court to ensure that such standard is 1et and co1plied !ith. habitually. 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. 'herefore. .9 . I a1 even 1ore convinced that the constitutional re6uire1ent of 9practice of law for at least ten ?9<@ years9 has not been 1et.1on$ these are that he 1ust have been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten . 'he procedural barriers interposed b" respondents deserve scant consideration because. 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. repeatedly or custo)arily. hat constitutes practice of la!H .7 Phil. 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. 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. to e&ercise or pursue an e1plo"1ent or profession acti ely. .C-. other than as head or attorne" of a De$al Depart1ent of a corporation or a $overn1ental a$enc". . )* N.e1phasis supplied-.rticle VIII of the Constitution.State vs# Cotner. PADI!!A.."ears prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. concurrin$0 I concur !ith the decision of the 1a4orit" !ritten b" Mr. Electoral Co))ission.s declared in An!ara . 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 (. !hile the Court deliberated on his constitutional 6ualification for the office. J. In other !ords.. ulti1atel".. <::. dissentin$0 'he records of this case !ill sho! that !hen the Court first deliberated on the Petition at bar. or an" profession for that 1atter. (:+.(=. (.9 . p. *+ Nan.s co11onl" understood. Practice of la! to fall !ithin the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as custo1aril" or habituall" holdin$ one%s self out to the public as a la!"er and de1andin$ pa"1ent for such services .. (ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre-uent or custo)ary actions. Moreover. he had not en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten .rt. on the basis of his stated 6ualifications and after due assess1ent thereof. certified public accountant !ho !or8s as a cler8.(=. 1eans.ppoint1ents#that the appoint1ent of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections should.S. cannot be said to be in the practice of la!. J.NAR ASA. +. .. Dillanue a0 . > S.(-. M. >: DR."ears. a la!"er !ho is e1plo"ed as a business e&ecutive or a corporate 1ana$er.E. that is.>.s aptl" held b" this Court in the case of (eople s. includin$ the Chair1an thereof to 9have been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten . 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.C.*-. I voted not onl" to re6uire the respondents to co11ent on the Petition. . *.9upon the 4udicial depart1ent is thro!n the sole1n and inescapable obli$ation of interpretin$ the Constitution and definin$ constitutional boundaries.. a succession of acts of the sa)e #ind.. Section (. .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

South .Ph. inter1ittent. !or8in$ in 1edia. occasional. if appears that Mr. incidental. i. 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. . seasonal. Eraphic . Respondent Monsod%s activities since his passin$ the 5ar e&a1inations in (). C5D 'i1ber Corporation Me1ber of the 5oard of the Follo!in$0 a. or operatin$ a far1 !ith no active involve1ent in the la!.telier f. Philippine SCNs"ste1s Products. Inc.CE Container Philippines. servin$ in fact# findin$ co11ittee. First Philippine Industrial Corporation e. h..tte1pt J Me1ber ). Philippine Electric Corporation >. ()+. Even then his la! practice 1ust have been e&tre1el" li1ited because he !as also !or8in$ for M. Cniversit" of Penns"lvania :...ppoint1ents. Meralco Securities Corporation. Dataprep.0 Euevent Eroup of Co1panies J Chief E&ecutive Officer +.(#(). ().(<. First Philippine 3oldin$s Corporation d. D. Philippine Co11ercial Capital. D. !hether in Eovern1ent or private practice. ()*. Presentl"0 Chair1an of the 5oard and Chief E&ecutive Officer of the follo!in$ co1panies0 a.( consist of the follo!in$0 (. Manila Electric Co1pan" $.0 Iu4uico Eroup J President. Philippine Petroleu1 Corporation. Philippines c. de$rees in Econo1ics at the Cniversit" of Penns"lvania durin$ that period. Se1irara Coal Corporation e.1erican Depart1ent? Division Chief.have if there 1ain occupation is sellin$ real estate.7#()+=0 orld 5an8 Eroup J Econo1ist.9 'he deliberate choice of !ords sho!s that the practice envisioned is active and re$ular. I a$ree !ith the petitioner that based on the bio#data sub1itted b" respondent Monsod to the Co11ission on .. and Ph. Philippine Electric Corporation . not isolated. in Econo1ics . 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.(..#()*+0 Philippine Constitutional Co11ission J Me1ber *.70 M. '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. ()+*#()*.e. In fact. ()..#()+*0 Finaciera Manila J Chief E&ecutive Officer . ()+=#()+70 Meralco Eroup J E&ecutive of various co1panies. Fil#Capital Develop1ent Corporation and affiliated co1panies <. ()*)#())(0 'he Fact#Findin$ Co11ission on the Dece1ber ()*) Coup . International Finance Corporation 7. 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 (. e&cept that in one 4o"ful 1o1ent in the distant past. En$ineerin$ Construction Corporation of the Philippines b. Datin .sia and Middle East. Inc. the latter has not been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. b. Inc. d. It 1eans that one is occupied and involved in the enterprise? one is obli$ed or pled$ed to carr" it out !ith intent and attention durin$ the ten#"ear period. First Philippine Ener$" Corporation c. accidental. ()+7#()+. candidate-. Industr" Depart1ent? Operations. or e&te1poraneous. 1ana$in$ a business corporation.

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

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

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

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

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

Public office is public trust. but she did not do either. 3o!ever. On the occasions that she called the office. OD pri1aril" due to serious fa1il" e1er$enc". Aabitual Absenteeis) (. hen she returned to !or8 in Dece1ber and found the at1osphere in the court hostile. she !as still able to $o to the court to $et her .acade1ic bac8$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. . she incurred additional absences to !or8 on her transfer to another court. 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.d1inistrative Circular No.. . there is no sho!in$ that respondent . '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. It is noted that prior to respondent $oin$ on . respondent is e&pected to e&ecute her duties !ith efficienc" and co1petence. .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. . but she never as8ed to spea8 !ith co1plainant. respondent 1et no proble1 $ettin$ the approval for her applications for leave. OD. s. (>#:==: .bsenteeis1.citin$ Me1orandu1 Circular No. 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. hen the fa1il" crisis ca1e about. RespondentQs violation of the rule on filin$ applications for leave is apparent in her narration of facts.sicconduct !as ini1ical to the service or resulted in an" 8ind of corruption..net . .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 .9 lE phi9. !hich provides to !it0 A. . She called the office dail".. . 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 investi$ation report rationali2ed that 9. 'he investi$ation confir1ed the alle$ation that respondent has been seen tal8in$ to la!"ers and liti$ants and tal8s to the phone ver" often. she !as re1inded to file her leave of absence and to spea8 !ith co1plainant !ho !as alread" loo8in$ for her.s all others in public service..Re0 Reiteratin$ the Civil Service Co11issionQs Polic" on 3abitual . Respondent sub1its to the findin$s of the Investi$atin$ @ud$e and pleads to co1plainant for understandin$ and for$iveness. Infor1ation reachin$ co1plainant re$ardin$ respondent durin$ her absence !ere rela"ed b" office1ates !ith !ho1 respondent 8ept in touch. Records sho! that respondent failed to e&ert efforts to infor1 co1plainant of her dire do1estic situation. ())(. . She !ent on leave !ithout see8in$ proper per1ission fro1 her superior.. 'he investi$ation revealed that respondent incurred unauthori2ed absences on the follo!in$ 1onths0 October ())) R Nove1ber ())) R Dece1ber ())) R := P da"s () da"s > da"s It !as also found that respondent !ent on . Nothin$ less is e&pected of her..'M card "et she !as not able to file her application for leave. 'his state1ent is tanta1ount to sa"in$ that inco1petence is to be e&pected fro1 le$al researchers. RespondentQs absences on the relevant 1onths 6ualif" as habitual absenteeis1 as defined and penali2ed in .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

.ttorne" and Client. :<.. . S1ith.@. ()++. <7 . ).-? . ..Sec..P. Ops.S. :(. citin$ Stats8".$palo. id.Dec. 77 Canon 7.7.9. ((.-? . id. representin$ the lot o!ner or clai1ant in a case fallin$ under the Cadastral . (>.ppendi& II and III? Rollo.h. (:7 .@ul" (:. St. Ever"thin$ confidential.. 'he Parale$al Profession. non#la!"er !ho 1a" appear before the National Dabor Relations Co11ission or an" Dabor . :> .5.: : : . :*> . Canons of Professional Ethics.Ne! Rules of Procedure of the National Dabor Relations Co11ission-? . 'rade1ar8s and 'echnolo$" 'ransferin trade1ar8... . *=.he is dul"#accredited 1e1bers of an" le$al aid office dul" reco$ni2ed b" the Depart1ent of @ustice or the Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines in cases referred thereto b" the latter .Sec. >( Op. (( . service 1ar8 and trade na1e cases .Sept.no! 8no!n as the 5ureau of Patents. Cl.he represents hi1self as a part" to the case? .ct . <+) . id.Rule :7. :(>#::>.e.a.Sec. ()<(-? and :*.1.5. . 7( + C. ()>:-. person.. De$al Ethics. Oceana Publications. ():+-? .. and 1arria$e arran$ed to !ishes of parties.()+>.-? . not an attorne". )7 . cit.(. >> Op. Canon :+.()*)-. 7* +> Phil. >= . resident of the province and of $ood repute for probit" and abilit"..S.n a$ent or friend !ho aids a part"#liti$ant in a 1unicipal court for the purpose of conductin$ the liti$ation .. :d ((*.n official or other person appointed or desi$nated in accordance !ith la! to appear for the Eovern1ent of the Philippines in a case in !hich the $overn1ent has an interest . . ()>(-. :=. :>( . IDOCI-. :>.Feb. C. (>. Rule ((. ::<)-? and . Rule (7*. :77.. Rules of Court-? . C..id. Fourth Edition . 7: Florida 5ar vs. 77.. ()<:-. 7> Rule 7. >. >7 : : : M%''%#..5.Dec. 7>.and Sha"ne. 7< Rule 7. la! student !ho has successfull" co1pleted his third "ear of the re$ular four# "ear prescribed la! curriculu1 and is enrolled in a reco$ni2ed la! school%s clinical le$al education pro$ra1 approved b" the Supre1e Court . 7.. 5ru1bau$th. . Code of Professional Responsibilit".Sec...#((+.. provided that he shall be 1ade to present !ritten proof that he is properl" authori2ed? or . Introduction to Parale$alis1. :*<.he represents an or$ani2ation or its 1e1bers.:.d1inistrative Code of ()(+-. Rules of Practice in 'rade1ar8 Cases-? .=>.Persons re$istered or speciall" reco$ni2ed to practice in the Philippine Patent Office .:) Position Paper. Op..=(. of Ne! Ior8 vs. *(. ((#(:. +)#*=.rbiter onl" if .Ma" ((.ct No. See Rollo. *. cit. o1en Da!"ers% Circle .? @ohnsto!n Coal and Co8e Co.Rule (7*#. 7) 'he advertise1ent in said case !as as follo!s0 9Marria$e license pro1ptl" secured thru our assistance and the anno"ance of dela" or publicit" avoided if desired.u$. 7+ People vs. Rep.f.. (=: Ct.$. Op. (>>#(><.Notaries public for 1unicipalities !here co1pletion and passin$ the studies of la! in a reputable universit" or school of la! is dee1ed sufficient 6ualification for appoint1ent .b. citin$ . 7= Illustrations0 . ()7(-. .Sec. !ho is appointed counsel de oficio to defend the accused in localities !here 1e1bers of the bar are not available .n a$ent. id. ..d. 7<< So. ()7=-? ..()>>-.. est Publishin$ Co.@an. ()7>-. Rule (7*.c.. Consultation on an" 1atter free for the poor. .

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

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful