ADMINISTRATIVE LIABILITIES

Practice of law is a privilege and burdened with conditions:

Officer of the court
Courts have inherent powers to preserve its integrity and facilitate the
exercise of their functions
Membership may be suspended or removed
Lawyers are subject to scrutiny
Even private activities may be at anytime the subject of inquiry
Gross misconduct
WARNING act or fact or putting one of his guard against an impending
danger, evil consequences or penalties
ADMONITION gentle or friendly reproof, mild rebuke, warning or reminder,
counseling, on a fault, error or oversight
REPRIMAND of more severe nature; public and formal censure or severe
reproof, administered to a person in fault by his superior officer, or a body to
which he belongs
CENSURE -

an official reprimand

CONCEPT OF SUSPENSION - temporary withholding of a lawyers privilege to

practice for a certain period or for an indefinite period of time
-an act of the court in prohibiting an attorney from practicing law for a
definite period
DISBARMENT act of Phil. Supreme Court in withdrawing from an attorney
the privilege to practice law. Prefix ATTY is removed; neither can he sign a
pleading
CONTEMPT vs DISBARMENT the exercise of one does not exclude the
exercise of the other
POWER TO DISCIPLINE ERRANT LAWYERS:
Supreme Court full authority and power to warn, admonish, reprimand,
suspend and disbar
Court of Appeals and RTC also warn, admonish, reprimand and suspend an
atty who appears before them for any of the causes mentioned in Section 27
Rule 138. BUT THEY CANNOT DISBAR A LAWYER
An RTC JUDGE cannot summarily suspend a lawyer as punishment for indirect
contempt.

The INFERIOR COURTS are not empowered even to suspend an attorney,

although they may cite or hold a lawyer in contempt of court
JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT may not be disbarred unless and until
they shall have been first IMPEACHED. Same with impeachable officers who
are members of the bar.
OBJECTS OF DISBARMENT:
1.
To compel attorney to deal fairly and honestly with his clients
2.
To remove from the profession a person whose misconduct has proved
him unfit to be entrusted with duties and responsibilities
3.
Punitive
4.
Set an example
5.
Safeguard admin of justice from incompetence and dishonesty
6.
Protect the public
POWER TO DISCIPLINE LAWYERS IS JUDICIAL IN NATURE
Can only be exercised by the courts
It cannot be defeated by legislation or executive departments
Rooted on the SC prerogative to regulate the practice of law
DISBARMENT IS SUI GENERIS
A class by itself
1.
It is neither a civil or a criminal proceeding
2.
Double jeopardy cannot be availed of in a disbarment proceeding, NOT
a criminal proceeding ex. Falsification
3.
Can be initiated MOTU PROPRIO by SC or IBP. Even without a complaint
4.
Can proceed regardless of internet or lack of which of the complainant if
so warranted
5.
Imprescriptible. Statute of limitations has no application
6.
Conducted confidentially
7.
It is itself DUE PROCESS OF LAW
8.
Decision in disbarment cannot be a source of right that may be
enforced in another action. Ex. reconveyance and damages
Penalty cannot be in the alternative
NAVARRO VS MENESES III
Suspension or Disbarment?
RESTRICTIONS ON THE POWER TO SUSPEND not arbitrary or despotic
one to be exercised and the pleasure or in the form of passion, prejudice of
personal hostility. Exercised wisely that the rights and independence of the
bar will be scrupulously guarded and maintained by the court as the rights
and dignity of the court itself
To bar or suspend

Disbarment should never be decreed where any lesser penalty would

accomplish the end desired
Always exercised with great caution
Reputation is likened to a plant of tender growth and it bloom, once lost,
is not easily restored
GROUND FOR SUSPENSION (R.O.C.)
1.
Deceit
2.
Malpractice and other gross misconduct in office
3.
Gross immorality
4.
Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude
5.
Violation of oath of office
6.
Willful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court
7.
Corrupt or willful appearance as an attorney for a party without
authority to do so
CONDUCT not limited to one exhibited in connection with the performance
of the lawyers professional duties. Includes gross misconduct not connected
with his profession which shows him to be unfit for office and unworthy of the
privilege
Professional or private capacity which puts his moral character in serious
doubt as member
CONCEPT OF DECEIT
Misrepresentation or assertion of falsehood, or in the creation of a false
impression by words or acts, or trick or device
False representation as to a matter of fact
Concealing or omitting material facts in obtaining the consent of a party
Act is performed with deliberate intent
Fraudulent and deceptive misrepresentation, artifice or device used to
deceive and trick another who is ignorant of the true facts
Untrue and made with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless and
conscious ignorance thereof
MALPRACTICE OR OTHER GROSS MISCONCUCT IN OFFICE
Concept malfeasance or dereliction of duty
Legal malpractice failure to use such skill, prudence and diligence as
lawyers or ordinary skill and capacity commonly possessed and exercised in
performance of tasks which they undertake, and when such failure
proximately causes damage, gives rise to an action in tort
Instances of GROSS MISCONDUCT AND MALPRACTICE
1.
Period to appeal allowed to lapse
2.
Failure to submit clients brief

3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.

Preparation and notarization of an immoral contract or agreement

False affidavit
Solicitation of case thru paid agents
Abandonment
Delay in filing clients case
Notary public faking appearance of client before him
Acknowledging SPA in the absence of one with the parties
Compromising a clients cause without consent
Notarizing after his commission has expired
Representing conflicting interests
Conversion of clients money to his
Encroaching upon the business of another
Advertising lawyers skill
Notarizing ones affidavit
Attempting to mislead SC by raising issues long laid to rest
Unwarranted obstinacy in evading payment of debt

GROSS IMMORALITY
flexible standard
what appears to be unconventional to the straight faced may not be
immoral
WILLFUL FLAGRANT OR SHAMELESS AND WHICH SHOWS A MORAL
INDIFFERENCE TO THE OPINION OF THE GOOD AND RESPECTABLE MEMBERS
OF THE COMMUNITY
Sexual intimacy not immoral per se
CONVICTION OF A CRIME INVOLVING MORAL TURPITUDE
See violation of the lawyers oath
WILLFUL DISOBEDIANCE OF ANY LAWFUL ORDER OF A SUPERIOR
COURT
Ex. Failure to surrender records or appear as counsel de officio to comment
on a matter pending
CORRUPT OR WILLFUL APPEARANCE FOR A CLIENT WITHOUT BEING
EMPLOYED
Must obtain leave of court
No written authority is required but on motion, may be required to
prove authority
DISBARMENT OR SUSPENSION OF A FILIPINO LAWYER IN A FOREIGN
COUNTRY
Effects:
May also be used as a ground if included in the grounds under Rule 138,
Section 27

PRIMA FACCIE evidence

SPECIAL DISABILITIES OF LAWYERS

-purchase of property or rights of clients subject of litigation PROHIBITED;
purchase is void
Art. 1491, CC prohibits persons by reason of the relation of trust or their
peculiar control over the property from acquiring such property in their trust
and control, directly or indirectly, even at a public or judicial auction:
guardians, agents, administrators, public officers and employees,
judicial officers and employees, prosecuting attorneys, lawyers
Castans opinion violates public policy and such sale is INEXISTENT
AND VOID AB INITIO
Purchase cannot be ratified, definite and permanent
Lawyer holding the property in trust cannot even acquire it by
prescription
Client can recover the property and fruits but he must return the
purchase price
There is violation even if the lawyers did not pay money for it
Prohibition EXTENDS to SALES IN LEGAL REDEMPTION,COMPROMISES
AND RENUNCIATIONS
1648 LEASING of clients property subject of litigation
WHEN PURCHASE IS NOT VIOLATION:
Property is not subject to litigation
Acquired it before he became counsel
After the case involving the property has been terminated
BETRAYAL OF TRUST
Lawyer takes the defense of opposing party in the same case
PRESENTATION OF INADMISSIBLE AFFIDAVITS
On facts which are not of direct knowledge of the affiants
Not admissible in evidence
Outside competence of affiants to testify upon
CIVIL LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES
Lawyer cannot insure victory
Not bound to exercise extraordinary care
BUT (Art. 1170) liable for fraud, negligence or delay resulting in clients
prejudice
REQUISITES FOR LIABILITY
Lawyer-client relationship
Want of reasonable care and diligence
Injury was suffered (proximate cause)

EXCEPTION (SALONGA V CA)

SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE where the efforts are palpably real, albeit, bereft of
zeal
LAWYERS MISTAKE BINDS CLIENT, NOT A HARDFAST RULE
Only where thru reckless imprudence and gross negligence client is
deprived of due process
When it results in the outright deprivation of property through
technicality
PROCEDURE IN THE DISBARMENT AND OTHER DISCIPLINARY
PROCEEDING
JUDICIAL IN NATURE
Conducted by Supreme Court, IBP or authorized body
Lawyer as respondent is accorded due process of law
Authority to decide disbarment rests on the SUPREME COURT alone
Presumption of innocence exists
Preponderance of evidence is required
Burden of proof rests upon the complainant
Disbarment is not punishment but intended to protect administration of
justice
RES IPSO LOQUITOR
APPLICABLE TO LAWYERS AND JUDGES
For gross misconduct and inefficiency
Blatant disrespect for the court
Want of good moral character
Violation of lawyers oath
(RICHARDS VS ASOY)
Respondents side had been fully heard in the pleading. A trial type
hearing is NON DE REQUEUR
Requirements of due process had been satisfied
FILING OF COMPLAINT AND INVESTIGATION
Officers Authorized:
Supreme Court
IBP through its Commission on Bar Discipline or Authorized Investigators
SolGen
CA and RTC can investigate and take action ONLY against lawyers who
appeal for litigants in cases pending before them
June 1, 1988 The Revised Rules of Court (Rule 139-B), the IBP was granted
power and authority to initiation motu proprio the investigation and

prosecution of erring lawyers or upon verified complaint of any person, or

referral by the SC of an IBP Chapter Board of Officers
CA and RTC may suspend BUT NOT DISBAR
WHERE TO FILE COMPLAINTS FOR DISBARMENT:
Supreme Court
IBP National Office
IBP Chapter
- the MLRC and POEA have no jurisdiction
Zaldivar vs Gonzales referral of disbarment (filed or initiated by the
Supreme Court) is not mandatory
How Complainant is Instituted?
Before the SC motu proprio
Of by the IBP upon a verified complaint
The IBP Board of Governors (motu or referral) may prosecute
Six (6) copies filed before any secretary of any chapter
August 1988 Commission on Bar Discipline was created to take the place of
NATIONAL GRIEVANCE INVESTIGATIONS
Upon recommendation of the COMMITTEE ON BAR RESPONSIBILITY,
DISCIPLINE AND DISBARMENT
BOARD OF GOVERNORS 9 REGIONS
Decision of the CBD (?) and IBP are merely recommendatory IF FOR
SUSPENSION OR DISBARMENT
IF LEESS, decision is final and executor if no party appeals the case to
the SC within 15 days from notice of Boards resolution
IBP should resolve cases on time
Application for extension of time should be filed w/ the SC
Disqualifications of Commissioner / Investigator
Relationship within 4 civil degrees
Pecuniary interest
Personal bias
For having acted as counsel for either
UNLESS parties sign and enter upon record their consent
If he does not disqualify himself, a party may appeal to Governor or IBP
Who may file Disbarment Case:
Any party aggrieved by the misconduct

Any person even if not aggrieved but knows of the misconduct, unlawful
or unethical act
A DISBARMENT INVOLVES NO PRIVATE INTEREST
Justices and judges are not contemplated in the clause including those in
the government service
Confidentiality of proceedings
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Good faith in the acquisition of property
Independence of a lawyer
Age
Apology
Lack of intention
AFFIDAVITS OF DESISTANCE, SETTLEMENT, COMPROMISE,
RESTITUTION, WITHDRAWAL OF CHARGES OR FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE
No investigation shall be interrupted or terminated by reason of the
above unless the SC finds no compelling reason to continue
Affidavit of Desistance will cause the dismissal if there is nothing more
which could substantiate the charge
Withdrawal of complaint same
Lack of interest to prosecute same
PREJUDICIAL QUESTION:
IS SUBJECT MATTER IS ALSO THE SUBJECT OF, OR IS INTERTWINEDIN
THE SUBJECT MATTER IN ANOTHER PENDING CASE, AND THE RESOLUTION OF
WHICH IS DETERMINATIVE OF THE QUILT OR INNOCNESE OF THE
RESPONDENT, IT MAY BE HELD IN ABEYANCE PENDING RESOLUTION OF THE
OTHER CASE
Ramos v Miculob
-In re: Brillantes (criminal case pending)