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

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

pro1otin$ tea1 achieve1ents !ithin the or$ani2ation. Co1puter#based 1odels can be used directl" b" parties and 1ediators in all lands of ne$otiations. 'he $eneral counsel has e1er$ed in the last decade as one of the 1ost vibrant subsets of the le$al . three factors are apropos0 7irst Syste) %yna)ics.is the )ana!erial )ettle of corporations are challen!ed. +n the conte't of a law depart)ent. .B the or$ani2ation and 1ana$e1ent of the le$al function. Eure#a and Race are e&a1ples of collaborative efforts bet!een $overn1ental and business @apan%s M+&+ is !orld fa1ous. inventor" levels. .ffice. Esprit. . 6ew pro!ra))in! techni-ues now )a#e the syste) dyna)ics principles )ore accessible to )ana!ers / includin! corporate counsels.&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 can be used to appraise the settle)ent alue of liti!ation. and rates of flo!. the office of the Corporate Counsel co1prises a distinct $roup !ithin the 1ana$erial structure of all 8inds of or$ani2ations. the le!al )ana!erial capabilities of the corporate lawyer is-a. and )ini)i5e the cost and ris# in ol ed in )ana!in! a portfolio of cases .E1phasis suppliedRe$ardin$ the s8ills to appl" b" the corporate counsel. 1ana$erial. 'he field of s"ste1s d"na1ics has been found an effective tool for ne! 1ana$erial thin8in$ re$ardin$ both plannin$ and pressin$ i11ediate proble1s. 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. includin$ hands#on on instruction in these techni6ues. &his enables users to )a#e better decisions in ol in! co)ple'ity and uncertainty. and ps"cholo$ical. It needs to be directl" supportive of this nation%s evolvin$ econo1ic and or$ani2ational fabric as fir1s chan$e to sta" co1petitive in a $lobal. A5e this as it 1a". .E1phasis suppliedFollo!in$ the concept of boundar" spannin$.E1phasis suppliedSecond %ecision Analysis. . concern three pointed areas of consideration. Plannin$ b" la!"ers re6uires special s8ills that co1prise a 1a4or part of the $eneral counsel%s responsibilities. Preventive la!"erin$ 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. enable users to si1ulate all sorts of s"ste1atic proble1s J ph"sical. In $eneral. .E1phasis supplied&hird Modelin! for 6e!otiation Mana!e)ent. . 6ew collaborati e arran!e)ents for pro)otin! specific technolo!ies or co)petiti eness )ore !enerally re-uire approaches fro) industry that differ fro) older. Mana!erial Jurisprudence.nd there are lessons to be learned fro1 other countries. 'he practice and theor" of 9la!9 is not ade6uate toda" to facilitate the relationships needed in tr"in$ to 1a8e a $lobal econo1" !or8. In Europe. . aid in ne!otiation settle)ent. )ore ad ersarial relationships and traditional for)s of see#in! to influence !o ern)ental policies . +n a crisis situation. si1ulation case of an international 4oint venture 1a" be used to illustrate the point.ll inte$rated set of such tools provide coherent and effective ne$otiation support. interdependent environ1ent. econo1ic. 'his is the fra1e!or8 !ithin !hich are underta8en those activities of the fir1 to !hich le$al conse6uences attach.r!ani5ation and 7unctionin! of the Corporate Counsel$s . . Current research is see8in$ !a"s both to anticipate effective 1ana$erial procedures and to understand relationships of financial liabilit" and insurance considerations. 'he" differ fro1 those of re1edial la!. thus0 (re enti e Lawyerin!. such e&ternal activities are better predictors of tea1 perfor1ance than internal $roup processes.n understandin$ of the role of feedbac8 loops.

fficers. ())(. Ae appeared for 6AM7REL in its accreditation hearin!s before the Co)elec. >-. 9Corporate Finance la!. a -uast *udicial body. . and since 9:=>. Atty.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 . 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 . has wor#ed with the under pri ile!ed sectors.ppoint1ents on .C. which in ol ed !ettin! ac-uainted with the laws of )e)ber-countries ne!otiatin! loans and coordinatin! le!al. Rollo. he assu1ed office as Chair1an of the COMEDEC. On @une <. Iet. he wor#ed with the Meralco Group. Durin$ his stint in the orld 5an8 Eroup .= !ith a $rade of *. Justice Cecilia MuBo5-(al)a for .profession.ppoint1ents confir1ed the no1ination of Monsod as Chair1an of the COMEDEC. .fter $raduatin$ fro1 the Colle$e of Da! . filed the instant petition for certiorari and Prohibition pra"in$ that said confir1ation and the conse6uent appoint1ent of Monsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections be declared null and void. On the sa1e da". in initiatin!. Monsod also )ade use of his le!al #nowled!e as a )e)ber of the %a ide Co))ission. ())(.and havin$ hurdled the bar. 9"usiness Star9. 3e has been a dues pa"in$ 1e1ber of the Inte$rated 5ar of the Philippines since its inception in ()+:#+7. 'he corporate counsel hear responsibilit" for 8e" aspects of the fir1%s strate$ic issues.tt".@."usiness Star. '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. copin$ internall" !ith 1ore co1ple& 1a8e or b" decisions. 3e has also been pa"in$ his professional license fees as la!"er for 1ore than ten "ears. (:>. 9'he Corporate Counsel. havin$ passed the bar e&a1inations of (). lobbyin! for and en!a!in! in affir)ati e action for the a!rarian refor) law and lately the urban land refor) bill. has rendered ser ices to arious co)panies as a le!al and econo)ic consultant or chief e'ecuti e officer.ppoint1ents of Monsod%s no1ination.nd even if the corporate la!"er%s ai1 is not the understand all of the la!%s effects on corporate activities.innu)erable a)end)ents to .pril :<. . Christian Monsod is a 1e1ber of the Philippine 5ar. Monsod.6uino to the position of Chair1an of the COMEDEC in a letter received b" the Secretariat of the Co11ission on . ())(.<. such as the far)er and urban poor !roups. . p. ()*).p.7#()+=-.P. at the ver" least. for which he was cited by the (resident of the Co))ission. 1ana$in$ i1proved relationships !ith an increasin$l" diversified bod" of e1plo"ees. also $ain a !or8in$ 8no!led$e of the 1ana$e1ent issues if onl" to be able to $rasp not onl" the basic le$al 9constitution% or 1a8eup of the 1ode1 corporation. Monsod wor#ed in the law office of his father.9 @an. the Co11ission on . includin$ structurin$ its $lobal operations. and pro*ect wor# of the "an#. p. ((. 'he challen$e for la!"ers .9 . Challen$in$ the validit" of the confir1ation b" the Co11ission on . he too8 his oath of office. Monsod wor#ed as an operations officer for about two years in Costa Rica and (ana)a. he 1ust. ser ed as chief e'ecuti e officer of an in est)ent ban# and subse-uently of a business con!lo)erate.. which conducted nu)erous hearin!s ?9::<@ and as a )e)ber of the Constitutional Co))ission ?9:=>-9:=.both of the bar and the bench.(). +n the field of ad ocacy. econo)ic.pril (=. petitioner as a citi2en and ta&pa"er. 1ana$in$ e&panded liabilit" e&posure. 8pon returnin! to the (hilippines in 9:.#<<K. 1an" !ould ad1it to i$norance of vast tracts of the financial la! territor". Petitioner opposed the no1ination because alle$edl" Monsod does not possess the re6uired 6ualification of havin$ been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. ())(.@ of 6AM7REL. in his personal capacity and as for)er Co-Chair)an of the "ishops "usiness)en$s Conference for Au)an %e elop)ent. Monsod$s wor# in ol ed bein! #nowled!eable in election law. On @une (*. Respondent Christian Monsod !as no1inated b" President Cora2on C. creatin$ ne! and varied interactions !ith public decision#1a8ers. >-. As for)er Secretary-General ?9:=>@ and 6ational Chair)an ?9:=.

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

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

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

. ulti1atel". he had not en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten . +.S. 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. other than as head or attorne" of a De$al Depart1ent of a corporation or a $overn1ental a$enc". 'he procedural barriers interposed b" respondents deserve scant consideration because. In other !ords.State vs# Cotner."ears. Moreover. certified public accountant !ho !or8s as a cler8. . on the basis of his stated 6ualifications and after due assess1ent thereof.C-. (7). 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 succession of acts of the sa)e #ind. PADI!!A.rt. concurrin$0 I concur !ith the decision of the 1a4orit" !ritten b" Mr. but I !as the sole vote for the issuance of a te1porar" restrainin$ order to en4oin respondent Monsod fro1 assu1in$ the position of COMEDEC Chair1an.s declared in An!ara . In the sa1e !a". )* N.. I a1 even 1ore convinced that the constitutional re6uire1ent of 9practice of law for at least ten ?9<@ years9 has not been 1et.. 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 . <::. hat constitutes practice of la!H .(=.ppoint1ents#that the appoint1ent of respondent Monsod as Chair1an of the Co11ission on Elections should. *.. I/. !hile the Court deliberated on his constitutional 6ualification for the office.(-. I voted not onl" to re6uire the respondents to co11ent on the Petition. p.9upon the 4udicial depart1ent is thro!n the sole1n and inescapable obli$ation of interpretin$ the Constitution and definin$ constitutional boundaries. . cannot be said to be in the 9practice of 1edicine. to e&ercise or pursue an e1plo"1ent or profession acti ely. cannot be said to be in the practice of la!. (.. 5r"an. a la!"er !ho is e1plo"ed as a business e&ecutive or a corporate 1ana$er. albeit onl" in the result? it does not appear to 1e that there has been an ade6uate sho!in$ that the challen$ed deter1ination b" the Co11ission on . .7 Phil. includin$ the Chair1an thereof to 9have been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten . dissentin$0 'he records of this case !ill sho! that !hen the Court first deliberated on the Petition at bar.9 It is the bounden dut" of this Court to ensure that such standard is 1et and co1plied !ith. .s aptl" held b" this Court in the case of (eople s. habitually.repeated or custo)ary action. I therefore vote to DENI the petition.State vs. Muestions involvin$ the construction of constitutional provisions are best left to 4udicial resolution. cannot be said to practice his profession as an accountant.C. it is fre6uent habitual e&ercise .E. ()*+ Constitution-. Dillanue a0 . J.NAR ASA.9 . (ractice is )ore than an isolated appearance for it consists in fre-uent or custo)ary actions. a doctor of 1edicine !ho is e1plo"ed and is habituall" perfor1in$ the tas8s of a nursin$ aide. 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... Section (. that is.1on$ these are that he 1ust have been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten .fter considerin$ carefull" respondent Monsod%s co11ent."ears. 1eans..>>. 'herefore. 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. or an" profession for that 1atter.e1phasis supplied-. J. ."ears prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an.9 . >: DR..(=. 1 'o 9practice9 la!.s co11onl" understood.*-. be confir1ed#!as attended b" error so $ross as to a1ount to $rave abuse of discretion and conse6uentl" 1erits nullification b" this Court in accordance !ith the second para$raph of Section (..9 'he Constitution has i1posed clear and specific standards for a COMEDEC Chair1an.rticle VIII of the Constitution. @ustice Paras. . M. . repeatedly or custo)arily. habitual. Electoral Co))ission. .>. *+ Nan.. (:+. > S.(=.>+.

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

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

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

sia and Middle East.70 M. Philippine Electric Corporation i. Philippine Electric Corporation >.6uaculture Corporation 8. Philippine Co11ercial Capital. . Inc. he has la!"ers !or8in$ for hi1. .6uaculture Corporation l. Instead of $ivin$ receivin$ that le$al advice of le$al services."ears. and Ph. C5D 'i1ber Corporation Me1ber of the 5oard of the Follo!in$0 a. ()+*#()*.. Datin .7#()+=0 orld 5an8 Eroup J Econo1ist. Visa"an . ()+=#()+70 Meralco Eroup J E&ecutive of various co1panies.(<..ppoint1ents sho! an effort to e6uate 9en$a$ed in the practice of la!9 !ith the use of le$al 8no!led$e in various fields of endeavor such as co11erce. Eui1aras .Rollo.6uaculture Corporation . First Philippine Ener$" Corporation c.e. Manila Electric Co1pan" $..Ph. Presentl"0 Chair1an of the 5oard and Chief E&ecutive Officer of the follo!in$ co1panies0 a. Philippine SCNs"ste1s Products.tte1pt J Me1ber ). in Econo1ics .. Eraphic . D.CE Container Philippines. d. ()+.( consist of the follo!in$0 (. Industr" Depart1ent? Operations. 'olon$ . Dataprep. b. (). International Finance Corporation 7. Inc. if appears that Mr.(#(). South .0 Euevent Eroup of Co1panies J Chief E&ecutive Officer +. i. :(#::'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. he !as the oneadvice and those services as an e&ecutive but not as a la!"er. Meralco Securities Corporation.0 Iu4uico Eroup J President. h. Respondent Monsod%s activities since his passin$ the 5ar e&a1inations in (). Inc. First Philippine 3oldin$s Corporation d. pp. Philippines c. First Philippine Industrial Corporation e. candidate-.#()*+0 Philippine Constitutional Co11ission J Me1ber *. D. ()*. ()*)#())(0 'he Fact#Findin$ Co11ission on the Dece1ber ()*) Coup . 'he deliberations before the Co11ission on .telier f. 'arlac Reforestation and Environ1ent Enterprises 4. Even then his la! practice 1ust have been e&tre1el" li1ited because he !as also !or8in$ for M.. ().(. In fact. 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 (. Fil#Capital Develop1ent Corporation and affiliated co1panies <.. 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. Instead of !or8in$ as a la!"er. ()+7#()+. Philippine Petroleu1 Corporation. Cniversit" of Penns"lvania :. En$ineerin$ Construction Corporation of the Philippines b. de$rees in Econo1ics at the Cniversit" of Penns"lvania durin$ that period.1erican Depart1ent? Division Chief. Se1irara Coal Corporation e.#()+*0 Finaciera Manila J Chief E&ecutive Officer .

*+ N. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . !e referred to it as bein$ substantiall" correct in (eople e' rel.industr".E. I re$ret that I cannot 4oin in pla"in$ fast and loose !ith a ter1. 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. fre6uentl" or custo1aril". ++ N. the le$al effect of !hich.E. (eople$s Stoc# 3ards State "an#. 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. contract or other instru1ent. 1ust be carefull" deter1ined. he finall" ans!ered0 9I have done about ever"thin$ that is on the boo8s as far as real estate is concerned.:. I don%t believe so. De$al 8no!led$e is useful if not necessar" for the business e&ecutive. ++.9 It is not satisfied !ith havin$ been 9a 1e1ber of the Philippine bar for at least ten "ears.1erican courts have defined the practice of la!. is the $ivin$ of advice or rendition of an" sort of service b" an" person. and student to na1e onl" a fe!.)7? (eople e' rel. (eople e' rel. Chica!o "ar Ass$n . (eople$s Stoc# 3ards State "an#. le$islator. follo!.:d . It !ould be difficult. 1ar8et vendor. fisher1an. N.:. far1er. . >. blue ribbon investi$ations.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. !here such 8no!led$e !ould be helpful. Schafer. &in#off.For one%s actions to co1e !ithin the purvie! of practice of law the" should not onl" be activities peculiar to the !or8 of a la!"er. 7>> Ill. under the facts and conditions involved. :*:. can these people honestl" assert that as such. teacher. etc. notes and the li8e. police1an. civic !or8.E.. 7>> Ill. to !it0 &&& &&& &&& Respondent%s ans!ers to 6uestions propounded to hi1 !ere rather evasive.9 ithout adoptin$ that definition. that is not a practice.9 Pressed further for an ans!er as to his practice in preparin$ contracts and deeds for parties !here he !as not the bro8er. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . Schafer.9 hen as8ed if it !ould be 1ore than half a do2en ti1es his ans!er !as I suppose. he ans!ered0 9I don%t recall e&actl" !hat !as said.9 So1e .People v. especiall" in dra!in$ of real#estate contracts. if not i1possible to la" do!n a for1ula or definition of !hat constitutes the practice of la!. )=(. *+ N.People v. 'here is no doubt but that he has en$a$ed in these practices over the "ears and has char$ed for his services in that connection.9 hen as8ed if he did not re1e1ber sa"in$ that he had 1ade a practice of preparin$ deeds. or appl" the la! at various ti1es in his life. as follo!s0 'he practice of la! involves not onl" appearance in court in connection !ith liti$ation but also services rendered out of court. . 3e !as as8ed !hether or not he ever prepared contracts for the parties in real#estate transactions !here he !as not the procurin$ a$ent.. :d ++7.9 &&& &&& &&& Respondent ta8es the position that because he is a real#estate bro8er he has a la!ful ri$ht to do an" le$al !or8 in connection !ith real#estate transactions. 7)) Ill. habituall". Ever" resident of this countr" !ho has reached the a$e of discern1ent has to 8no!. )=(. a$rarian refor1.(+. and it includes the $ivin$ of advice or the renderin$ of an" services re6uirin$ the use of le$al s8ill or 8no!led$e. 1ort$a$es. the" should also be perfor1ed.s8ed if he did not recall 1a8in$ the state1ent to several parties that he had prepared contracts in a lar$e nu1ber of instances. . >. :d ++7- . baran$a" captain. 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$e or s8ill. he ans!ered0 9 ell. and cases cited.E. he said0 9I have no Idea. such as preparin$ a !ill. . deeds.nd "et. !hich even an ordinar" la"1an accepts as havin$ a fa1iliar and custo1ar" !ell#defined 1eanin$. 9Practicin$ la!9 has been defined as 9Practicin$ as an attorne" or counselor at la! accordin$ to the la!s and custo1s of our courts. 1a"or. 3e ans!ered0 9Ver" seldo1. . N.(+.E.

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

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

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

3e can be so dee1ed !hen. li8e the draftin$ of le$al docu1ents and the renderin$ of le$al opinion or advice. J. . . Co1in$ no! to the 6ualifications of the private respondent.s observed b" the Solicitor Eeneral in (eople s. In Lue!o. as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. hile it 1a" be $ranted that he perfor1ed tas8s and activities !hich could be latitudinarianl" considered activities peculiar to the practice of la!. dissentin$0 I a1 sincerel" i1pressed b" the ponencia of 1" brother Paras but find I 1ust dissent 4ust the sa1e."ears prior to his appoint1ent to such position. I do not thin8 !e are inhibited fro1 e&a1inin$ the 6ualifications of the respondent si1pl" because his no1ination has been confir1ed b" the Co11ission on . It !as that 8ind of discretion that !e said could not be revie!ed.' DE. 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.5I'C. 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". CRU0..CCORDINEDI.ppoint1ents.ppoint1ents. In fact.(=. 1" vote is to ER. 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!. 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.IE.DDI FOR . a$ain $oin$ b" the definition.S' 'EN . !hich is cited in the ponencia. Deter1ination of the appointee%s credentials is 1ade on the basis of the established facts. such !ere isolated transactions or activities !hich do not 6ualif" his past endeavors as 9practice of la!.:. this is not a political 6uestion that !e are barred fro1 resolvin$. In 1" vie!. he did not do so AA"+&8ALL3 for at least ten ?9<@ years prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1an. he !ould still be . I fear that the ponencia 1a" have been too s!eepin$ in its definition of the phrase 9practice of la!9 as to render the 6ualification practicall" toothless. )=:#. !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. Did respondent perfor1 such tas8s custo1aril" or habituall"H 7. If he operates a public utilit" vehicle as his 1ain source of livelihood. or a succession of acts.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 . Even if it !ere. there 1ust be a continuity. I see no reason !h" !e cannot dis6ualified an appointee si1pl" because he has passed the Co11ission on . . '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.(=. Considerin$ the ra1ifications of the 1odern societ". the e&ercise of that discretion !ould still be sub4ect to our revie!. did he do so 3. 'o be$in !ith. 'hat covers ever" co1pan" or$ani2ed under the Corporation Code and re$ulated b" the SEC under P.D.9 'he la!"er is considered en$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. If a person elected b" no less than the soverei$n people 1a" be ousted b" this Court for lac8 of the re6uired 6ualifications. on his o!n. Dillanue a0 / Essentiall".ssu1in$ that he perfor1ed an" of such tas8s habituall". 'here are certain points on !hich I 1ust differ !ith hi1 !hile of course respectin$ hisvie!point. ho!ever peripherall". I a1 persuaded that if ever he did perfor1 an" of the tas8s !hich constitute the practice of la!.. there is hardl" an" activit" that is not affected b" so1e la! or $overn1ent re$ulation the business1an 1ust 8no! about and observe. Fro1 the nu1erous activities accepted as e1braced in the ter1. not the discretion of that bod".RS prior to his appoint1ent as COMEDEC Chair1anH Eiven the e1plo"1ent or 4ob histor" of respondent Monsod as appears fro1 the records.9 'o beco1e en$a$ed in the practice of la!. a la!"er does not even have to be part of a business concern to be considered a practitioner.

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

candidate-. in Econo1ics ..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.( consist of the follo!in$0 (. Se1irara Coal Corporation e. i. Philippine SCNs"ste1s Products.. ()*)#())(0 'he Fact#Findin$ Co11ission on the Dece1ber ()*) Coup . or e&te1poraneous. occasional.0 Euevent Eroup of Co1panies J Chief E&ecutive Officer +.ppoint1ents. e&cept that in one 4o"ful 1o1ent in the distant past.#()*+0 Philippine Constitutional Co11ission J Me1ber *. C5D 'i1ber Corporation Me1ber of the 5oard of the Follo!in$0 a.telier f. 1ana$in$ a business corporation.#()+*0 Finaciera Manila J Chief E&ecutive Officer . Fil#Capital Develop1ent Corporation and affiliated co1panies <. Respondent Monsod%s activities since his passin$ the 5ar e&a1inations in (). Inc. Presentl"0 Chair1an of the 5oard and Chief E&ecutive Officer of the follo!in$ co1panies0 a. the latter has not been en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears..(. incidental. In fact. b.tte1pt J Me1ber ). International Finance Corporation 7. !or8in$ in 1edia. Inc. 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 (. Philippines c. ()+*#()*. de$rees in Econo1ics at the Cniversit" of Penns"lvania durin$ that period. First Philippine 3oldin$s Corporation d. First Philippine Industrial Corporation e. servin$ in fact# findin$ co11ittee.Ph. South .e. . 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. seasonal. accidental. Philippine Co11ercial Capital. Datin . Eraphic . not isolated.CE Container Philippines.have if there 1ain occupation is sellin$ real estate. Philippine Electric Corporation >. the" happened to pass the bar e&a1inationsH 'he Constitution uses the phrase 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. (). ()+=#()+70 Meralco Eroup J E&ecutive of various co1panies.sia and Middle East. if appears that Mr. ()*. Cniversit" of Penns"lvania :. Dataprep.(#(). I a$ree !ith the petitioner that based on the bio#data sub1itted b" respondent Monsod to the Co11ission on .. Philippine Petroleu1 Corporation. Industr" Depart1ent? Operations. Meralco Securities Corporation. Even then his la! practice 1ust have been e&tre1el" li1ited because he !as also !or8in$ for M.9 'he deliberate choice of !ords sho!s that the practice envisioned is active and re$ular. En$ineerin$ Construction Corporation of the Philippines b. First Philippine Ener$" Corporation c. Philippine Electric Corporation . !hether in Eovern1ent or private practice. ()+7#()+.. inter1ittent.0 Iu4uico Eroup J President. or operatin$ a far1 !ith no active involve1ent in the la!.7#()+=0 orld 5an8 Eroup J Econo1ist. h. Manila Electric Co1pan" $. d. D. (). Inc.(<. D. It 1eans that one is occupied and involved in the enterprise? one is obli$ed or pled$ed to carr" it out !ith intent and attention durin$ the ten#"ear period.1erican Depart1ent? Division Chief. and Ph.

!e referred to it as bein$ substantiall" correct in (eople e' rel. ++. Schafer. habituall". (eople$s Stoc# 3ards State "an#. 9Practicin$ la!9 has been defined as 9Practicin$ as an attorne" or counselor at la! accordin$ to the la!s and custo1s of our courts.s8ed if he did not recall 1a8in$ the state1ent to several parties that he had prepared contracts in a lar$e nu1ber of instances. and student to na1e onl" a fe!.6uaculture Corporation 8. Visa"an . *+ N. 3e ans!ered0 9Ver" seldo1.9 In ans!er to the 6uestion as to ho! 1an" ti1es he had prepared contracts for the parties durin$ the t!ent"#one "ears of his business.1erican courts have defined the practice of la!. 7>> Ill.E. 'he deliberations before the Co11ission on .Rollo. :*:.People v. industr".nd "et. 'olon$ .(+. the" are en$a$ed in the practice of la!H 'he Constitution re6uires havin$ been 9en$a$ed in the practice of la! for at least ten "ears. N. pp.9 So1e .6uaculture Corporation . and cases cited.:d . a$rarian refor1. such as preparin$ a !ill. Instead of $ivin$ receivin$ that le$al advice of le$al services.9 ithout adoptin$ that definition. follo!. Eui1aras . and it includes the $ivin$ of advice or the renderin$ of an" services re6uirin$ the use of le$al s8ill or 8no!led$e. .)7? (eople e' rel. blue ribbon investi$ations. :d ++7. baran$a" captain. to !it0 &&& &&& &&& Respondent%s ans!ers to 6uestions propounded to hi1 !ere rather evasive. &in#off. I re$ret that I cannot 4oin in pla"in$ fast and loose !ith a ter1.i.E. . 3e !as as8ed !hether or not he ever prepared contracts for the parties in real#estate transactions !here he !as not the procurin$ a$ent. 'arlac Reforestation and Environ1ent Enterprises 4.6uaculture Corporation l. 1ar8et vendor. 1ust be carefull" deter1ined.ppoint1ents sho! an effort to e6uate 9en$a$ed in the practice of la!9 !ith the use of le$al 8no!led$e in various fields of endeavor such as co11erce.9 hen as8ed if he did not re1e1ber sa"in$ that he had 1ade a practice of preparin$ deeds. under the facts and conditions involved. he said0 9I have no Idea. is the $ivin$ of advice or rendition of an" sort of service b" an" person. as follo!s0 'he practice of la! involves not onl" appearance in court in connection !ith liti$ation but also services rendered out of court. It !ould be difficult. contract or other instru1ent. teacher. or appl" the la! at various ti1es in his life. >. Instead of !or8in$ as a la!"er. (eople e' rel.9 hen as8ed if it !ould be 1ore than half a do2en ti1es his ans!er !as I suppose. (eople$s Stoc# 3ards State "an#. fre6uentl" or custo1aril". 7>> Ill. the le$al effect of !hich.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.9 It is not satisfied !ith havin$ been 9a 1e1ber of the Philippine bar for at least ten "ears. fisher1an. police1an. )=(. >. !hich even an ordinar" la"1an accepts as havin$ a fa1iliar and custo1ar" !ell#defined 1eanin$. +llinois State "ar Ass$n . +llinois State "ar Ass$n . !here such 8no!led$e !ould be helpful. he !as the oneadvice and those services as an e&ecutive but not as a la!"er.E. if not i1possible to la" do!n a for1ula or definition of !hat constitutes the practice of la!. far1er. . 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$e or s8ill. civic !or8. De$al 8no!led$e is useful if not necessar" for the business e&ecutive. he has la!"ers !or8in$ for hi1.:. N. le$islator.:. 1a"or. Chica!o "ar Ass$n . 1ort$a$es and contracts and char$in$ a fee to the parties therefor . )=(. he ans!ered0 9I don%t recall e&actl" !hat !as said. etc. the" should also be perfor1ed. ++ N. can these people honestl" assert that as such. 7)) Ill.E.(+. Ever" resident of this countr" !ho has reached the a$e of discern1ent has to 8no!. :(#::'here is nothin$ 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

. p. P#=:#(.D <:(+:7:. >== SCR. Muebral. >(> SCR. 7=. P#=7#(. Anne' " EC.NNCDMEN'. @r.1oot#ote' ( Rollo.M. :( .ppeals. (= Iba" . J. .. 7 Rollo. >(7 SCR. R E SO D C ' I O N REGA!ADO.5SENCE. (: Supra. note (=. respondent.: 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. CN .ndal . vs.. '3E Please call0 <:(#=+. 1993 MAURICIO C. P#=>#(*:7. =+ October :==7.. ) .. <)+? Madrid . *07= a1J . p. INC. (=+. No! .NC +"r M"tter No.== for a valid 1arria$e.M. (=:. (? . . U!EP.r1ida. P#=(#(>+<. > No! . :=+.M. .RRI. P#=:#(<*(.9 and 959 . Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN 5. VIS. 'on$a. < Per resolution dated (( Septe1ber :==: of the Second Division of the Court. (+ October :==7. * Rollo. (( Re"es#Macabeo . p.pril :==7. p.M. .=. INC.ssociate @ustice of the Court of .<=. 7>= SCR.EEH P<. 333 J.of said petition. Mla. .ve. :* October :==7.0== p1 +#Flr..+ DEE. DON P.. No. Fernande2.6uino . THE !EGA! C!INIC.M.RNINSON .9 'he advertise1ents co1plained of b" herein petitioner are as follo!s0 Anne' A SECRE' M. (( Septe1ber :===.#e 18. Info on DIVORCE. >=( SCR. p. : Rollo. (> .)<.. >(7 SCR.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!. 7(.M. No. P#))#(7=). :7+. Victoria 5ld$.ssociate @ustice of the Court of . <:>. Valle. >+*? Cler8 of Court Muidilla. (: @ul" :==>. (7 Rollo.pril :==7. .. P#=7#(+>>.. :7*#:>(..ppeals.M DIVORCE. No. . (=+. pp. No.. petitioner. No. + Rollo. No. Di1. <:::=>( CDINIC. . =7 .

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

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

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

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

.See < . this 3onorable Court 1a" decide to 1a8e 1easures to . 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. especiall" so !hen the public cannot ventilate an" $rievance for )alpractice a$ainst the business conduit.(. 0o)en Lawyers$ Circle0 In resolvin$. 'he practice of la! is not a profession open to all !ho !ish to en$a$e in it nor can it be assi$ned to another .rticle. 8.9 8 >. 5ut its advertised services. (. It is a personal ri!ht li1ited to persons !ho have 6ualified the1selves under the la!. secret 1arria$es.s. Such practice is unauthori2ed? 7. the le$al principles and procedures related thereto. hile it 1a" no! be the opportune ti1e to establish these courses of stud" andLor standards. the activities of respondent fall s6uarel" and are e1braced in !hat la!"ers and la"1en e6uall" ter1 as 9the practice of la!. beco1in$ a la!"er re6uires one to ta8e a ri$orous four#"ear course of stud" on top of a four#"ear bachelor of arts or sciences course and then to ta8e and pass the bar e&a1inations.lthou$h respondent uses its business na)e. Onl" then. liti$ants and the $eneral public as enunciated in the Pri1ar" Purpose Clause of its . hile the use of a parale$al is sanctioned in 1an" 4urisdiction as an aid to the ad1inistration of 4ustice. i11i$ration proble1s? the Invest1ents Da! of the Philippines and such other related la!s. courses of stud" andLor standards !hich !ould 6ualif" these parale$als to deal !ith the $eneral public as such. . In the 1eanti1e. @ur. the li1itation of practice of la! to persons !ho have been dul" ad1itted as 1e1bers of the 5ar .s advertised. . in ans!er to the issues stated herein. It clai1s that it 1erel" renders 9le$al support services9 to ans!ers. 5 7. annul1ent of 1arria$es. are !it0 (.ppl"in$ the test laid do!n b" the Court in the aforecited . it offers the $eneral public its advisor" services on Persons and Fa1il" Relations Da!. Revised Rules of Court. the le$al advices based thereon and !hich activities call for le$al trainin$. but also 1isleadin$ and patentl" i11oral? and >. as enu1erated above.Sec. (hilippine Lawyers$ Association0 'he Philippine Da!"ers% . .$rava Case. It is an odious ehicle for deception. 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!. particularl" re$ardin$ forei$n divorces.of Incorporation. 1isleadin$ and i11oral advertisin$. 8no!led$e and e&perience. 'he advertise1ents co1plained of are not onl" unethical. 'he De$al Clinic is en$a$ed in the practice of la!? :. Precisel". Rule (7*.is to sub4ect the 1e1bers to the discipline of the Supre1e Court. clearl" and convincin$l" sho! that it is indeed en$a$ed in la! practice. there are in those 4urisdictions.holds out itself to the public and solicits e1plo"1ent of its le$al services. &&& &&& &&& Respondent posits that is it not en$a$ed in the practice of la!. . the issues before this 3onorable Court. is a la!"er 6ualified to practice la!.t present.See pa$es : to < of Respondent%s Co11ent-.1. the persons and the la!"ers !ho act for it are sub4ect to court discipline. Its advertised services un1ista8abl" re6uire the application of the aforesaid la!. absence and adoption? I11i$ration Da!s. the fact re1ains that at present.ssociation%s position. albeit outside of court. 'he 3onorable Supre1e Court has the po!er to supress and punish the De$al Clinic and its corporate officers for its unauthori2ed practice of la! and for its unethical. :+=-. these do not e&ist in the Philippines. particularl" on visa related proble1s.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful