Code of Professional

Responsibility
GROUP 3
CANON 10
A lawyer owes candor, fairness and good faith to the
court.

*A lawyer is an officer of the court exercising a privilege,

which is indispensable in the administration of justice.
*Courts are entitled to expect only complete honesty from
lawyers appearing before them.
*Like the court itself, he is an instrument to advance its
ends – the speedy, efficient, and impartial adjudication of
cases.
Rule 10.01

A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in Court, nor
shall he mislead or allow the Court to be misled by an artifice
*A lawyer swore, upon his admission to the practice, that he will do no falsehood and conduct
himself according to the best of his knowledge and discretion with all good fidelity to the court
and to his client; never to seek to mislead the courts by an artifice or false statement of fact or
law.
*A lawyer should not conceal the truth from the court, nor mislead the court in any manner no
matter how demanding his duties to his client may be.
*No client is entitled to receive from the lawyer any service involving dishonesty to the courts.
*A lawyers should neither endeavor by dishonest means to mislead the court or the adverse
party nor make false allegations in a pleading.
*It is improper for counsel of the accused to ask him to plead guilty to an offense which counsel
knows his client did not commit.
 Case:

A STATEMENT BY THE FACULTY OF

THE UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES COLLEGE
OF LAW
ON THE ALLEGATIONS OF PLAGIARISM AND
MISREPRESENTATION
IN THE SUPREME COURT
The actual concern of the Court was to determine by respondents’ explanations whether or not respondent
members of the Bar have crossed the line of decency and acceptable professional conduct and speech and
violated the Rules of Court through improper intervention or interference as third parties to a pending case.

The Court could hardly perceive any reasonable purpose for the faculty’s less than objective comments except
to discredit the April 28, 2010 Decision in the Vinuya case and undermine the Court’s honesty, integrity and
competence in addressing the motion for its reconsideration. This runs contrary to their obligation as law
professors and officers of the Court to be the first to uphold the dignity and authority of this Court, to which
they owe fidelity according to the oath they have taken as attorneys, and not to promote distrust in the
administration of justice.

In sum, the Court likewise finds Dean Leonen’s Compliance unsatisfactory for submitting a "dummy" that was
not a true and faithful reproduction of the signed Statement. However, the Court is willing to ascribe these
isolated lapses in judgment of Dean Leonen to his misplaced zeal in pursuit of his objectives. In due
consideration of Dean Leonen’s professed good intentions, the Court deems it sufficient to admonish Dean
Leonen for failing to observe full candor and honesty in his dealings with the Court as required under Canon
10.
 CANON
10
A LAWYER SHOULD NOT MISQUOTE NOR
MISREPRESENT
Rule 10.02
A lawyer shall not knowingly
misquote or misrepresent the contents
of a paper, the language or argument
of opposing counsel, or the text of a
decision or authority, or knowingly cite
as law a provisional ready rendered
inoperative by repeal or amendment,
or assert as a fact that which has not
been proved.
In citing the Court's decisions and rulings, it is the
bounden duty of courts, judges and lawyers to
reproduce or copy the same word-for-word and
punctuation mark-for-punctuation mark
 Only from the Supreme Court’s decisions and rulings do all
other courts, as well as lawyers and litigants, take their
bearings. This is because the decisions referred to in Article
8 of the Civil Code which reads, “Judicial decisions applying
or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part
of the legal system of the Philippines.”

Insular Life Assurance Co. Employees Association v. Insular Life Assurance Co.
37 SCRA 244
 COMELEC v. NOYNAY
292 SCRA 254
A lawyer who deliberately made it appear that the
quotations in his motion for reconsideration were findings
of the Supreme Court, when they were just part of the
memorandum of the Court Administrator, and who
misspelled the name of the complainant and made the
wrong citation of authority is guilty of violation of Rule
10.02 of the Code.
 ADEZ REALTY vs. CA
215 SCRA 301 (1992)

The legal profession demands that all lawyers thoroughly

go over pleadings, motions, and other documents
dictated or prepared by them, typed or transcribed by
their secretaries or clerks, before filing them with the
court. If a client is bound by the acts of his counsel, with
more reasons should counsel be bound by the acts of his
secretary who merely follows his orders.
Rule 10.03
A lawyer shall observe the rules of
procedure and shall not misuse them to
defeat the ends of justice.
 Macias v. Uy Kim
45 SCRA 251 (1970)

Filing of multiple petitions constitutes abuse of the

court’s processes.
 PEPSI COLA PRODUCTS PHILS.,
INC. v. CA
299 SCRA 518
A judicious study of the facts and the law should
advise them when a case should not be permitted
to be filed to merely clutter the already
congested judicial dockets. They do not advance
the cause of law or their clients by commencing
litigations that for sheer lack of merit do not
deserve the attention of the courts.
 Gomez vs. Presiding Judge
249 SCRA 432 (1995)

As an officer of the court, a lawyer should not

misuse the rules of procedure to defeat the ends
of justice or unduly delay or impede the execution
of final judgment, otherwise he may be subjected
to disciplinary sanctions.
 BANOGON v. ZERNA
154 SCRA 593

Lawyers must not intentionally misread nor

misinterpret the law to the point of distortion in
cunning effort to achieve their purpose.
 CANON
11
A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND MAINTAIN THE
RESPECT DUE TO THE COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL
OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST ON SIMILAR
CONDUCT BY OTHERS.
Rule 11.01 A lawyer shall appear in court
properly attired.

* Respect begins with the lawyer’s outward physical appearance in court.

Sloppy or informal attire adversely reflects on the lawyer and demeans the dignity
and solemnity of court proceedings. (Agpalo)
 Traditional attires (1) Males: Long-sleeve Barong
Tagalog or coat and tie (2) Females: Semi-formal
attires. (3) Judges also appear in the same attire in
addition to black robes.
 Courts have ordered a male attorney to wear a
necktie and have prohibited a female attorney
from wearing a hat. However, the permission of a
dress with a hemline five inches above the knee
was held to be acceptable as such “had become
an accepted mode of dress even in places of
worship” [Aguirre]

A lawyer who dresses improperly may be cited

with contempt (Agpalo)
Rule 11.02
A lawyer shall punctually appear at
court hearings.
MARIA LOURDES PAREDES-GARCIA vs. COURT
OF APPEALS and HON. ESCOLASTICO M.
CRUZ, JR.
As a lawyer, she is bound by her oath to conduct herself as a
lawyer according to the best of her knowledge and discretion
with all good fidelity as well to the courts as to her client. She
should never forget that punctuality is not only a practice
mandated by the Code of Professional Responsibility[34] and
Canons of Professional Ethics,[35] it is a virtue which must be
faithfully maintained as part of her contribution in the task of
ensuring a speedy, efficient, and effective administration of
justice. If the petitioner then had committed a breach of her
duty to the court she should accordingly be dealt with but in
accordance with established procedure. The right to do so is
hereby reserved to the respondent Judge.
 She should never forget that punctuality is not only a
practice mandated by the Code of Professional
Responsibility and Canons of Professional Ethics, it is a
virtue which must be faithfully maintained as part of her
contribution in the task of ensuring a speedy, efficient,
and effective administration of justice. If the petitioner
then had committed a breach of her duty to the court
she should accordingly be dealt with but in accordance
with established procedure. The right to do so is hereby
reserved to the respondent Judge.
Rule 11.03
A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous,
offensive or menacing language or
behavior before the Courts.
Judge Rene B. Baculi vs Atty.
Melchor A. Battung
Commissioner De la Rama found that the
respondent failed to observe Canon 11 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility that requires a
lawyer to observe and maintain respect due the
courts and judicial officers.
What the respondent should have done was to file
an action before the Office of the Court
Administrator if he believed that Judge Baculi did
not act according to the norms of judicial
conduct.
 Rule 11.04A lawyer shall not attribute to a judge
motives not supported by the record or
having no materiality to the case.

The rule allows such criticism so long as it is supported by the record or it is material
to the case. A lawyer’s right to criticize the acts of courts and judges in a proper and
respectful way and through legitimate channels is well recognized. [Agpalo]
 [Zaldivar v. Gonzales (1989)]

The cardinal condition of all such criticism is that it

shall be bona fide, and not spill over the wall of
decency and propriety.
 [Go v. Abrogar, 485 SCRA 457]

Any serious accusation against a judicial officer that is

utterly baseless, unsubstantiated and unjustified shall not
be countenanced.
 Rule 11.05 A lawyer shall submit grievances
against a Judge to the proper
authorities only.

Note: An administrative complaint is not an appropriate

remedy where judicial recourse is still available, such as a
motion for reconsideration, an appeal, or a petition for
certiorari, unless the assailed order or decision is tainted with
fraud, malice, or dishonesty.
(Santiago III v. Justice Enriquez, Jr. A.M. No. CA-09-47-J, February 13, 2009)
A lawyer can demand that the misbehavior of a
judge be put on record.
Lawyers must be courageous enough to expose
arbitrariness and injustice of courts and judges.
A lawyer may submit grievances against judges in
the Supreme Court, Ombudsman, or Congress (for
impeachment of SC judges only).
 RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF A LAWYER TO
CRITICIZE COURTS
1. The fact that a person is a lawyer does not deprive him
of the rights, enjoyed by every citizen, to comment on
and criticize the actuations of a judge subject to ethical
standard.
2. The court, in a pending litigation; must be shielded from
embarrassment or influence in its all-important duty of
deciding the case. Once litigation is concluded, the
judge who decided it is subject to the same criticisms as
any other public official because his ruling becomes
public property and is thrown open to public
consumption.
3. It is the cardinal condition of all such criticism that it shall
be bona fide, and shall not spill over the walls of decency
and propriety.
4. The duty of the bar to support the judge against unjust
criticism and clamor does not, however, preclude a lawyer
from filing administrative complaints against erring judges or
from acting as counsel for clients who have legitimate
grievances against them. But the lawyer should file charges
against the judge before the proper authorities only and
only after the proper circumspection and without the use of
disrespectful language and offensive personalities so as not
to unduly burden the court in the discharge of its function.
 CANON
12
“A lawyer shall exert every effort and consider it his
duty to assist in the speedy and efficient
administration of justice.”
1987 Constitution, Art. III, Sec 6.
Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec 20(g). Duties of attorneys.

All persons shall have the right to a speedy

disposition of their cases before all judicial, quasi-
judicial, or administrative bodies
 It is the duty of an attorney…
[Siy Lim v. Montano (2006)]

g) not to encourage either the commencement or the

continuance of an action or proceeding or delay any man’s
cause from any corrupt motive or interest. The filing of another
action containing the same subject matter, in violation of the
doctrine of res judicata, runs contrary to this Canon.
Rule 12.01
A lawyer shall not appear for trial unless he
has adequately prepared himself on the law
and the facts of his case, the evidence he will
adduce and the order of its preference. He
should also be ready with the original
documents for comparison with the copies.
Without adequate preparation, the lawyer
may not be able to effectively assist the court
in the efficient administration of justice.
Non-observance of this rule might result in:
(a) The postponement of the pre-trial or hearing,
which would thus entail delay in the early
disposition of the case
(b) The judge may consider the client non-suited
or in default
(c) The judge may consider the case deemed
submitted for decision without client’s evidence,
to his prejudice. [Agpalo]
 [Martin’ s Legal Ethics, p. 47, 1988 ed.]

Half of the work of the lawyer is done in the office.

It is spent in the study and research. Inadequate
preparation obstructs the administration of justice.
 [Villasis v. CA (1974)]
A newly hired counsel who appears in a case in
the midstream is presumed and obliged to
acquaint himself with all the antecedent
processes and proceedings that have transpired
in the record prior to his takeover.
Rule 12.03
A lawyer shall not, after obtaining
extensions of time to file pleadings,
memoranda or briefs, let the period
lapse without submitting the same or
offering an explanation for his failure to
do so.
ARSENIA T. BERGONIA vs. Atty.
ARSENIO A. MERRERA
[A.C. No. 5024. February 20, 2003]

A lawyer who requests an extension must do so in good faith and

with a genuine intent to file the required pleading within the
extended period. In granting the request, the court acts on the
presumption that the applicant has a justifiable reason for failing to
comply with the period allowed. Without this implied trust, the
motion for extension will be deemed to be a mere ruse to delay or
thwart the appealed decision. The motion will thus be regarded as
a means of preventing the judgment from attaining finality and
execution and of enabling the movant to trifle with procedure and
mock the administration of justice.
 Mariveles v. Mallari
[A.M. No. 3294. February 17, 1993.]

"It is true that the failure of counsel to file brief for the
appellant which led to the dismissal of the appeal does
not necessarily warrant the reinstatement thereof.
However, where the negligence of counsel is so great
that the rights of the accused are prejudiced and he is
prevented from presenting his defense, especially where
the appellant raises issues which place in serious doubt
the correctness of the trial court’s judgment of
conviction, the aforesaid rule must not be rigidly applied
to avoid a miscarriage of justice. These teachings of
jurisprudence are present in the case at bar.”
 CANON
13
A lawyer shall rely upon the merits of his cause and
refrain from any impropriety which tends to influence or
gives the appearance of influencing the court.
Rule 13.01 A lawyer shall not extend
extraordinary attention or hospitality to,
nor seek opportunity for cultivating
familiarity with Judges.
Code of Professional Ethics Canon 3
A lawyer should avoid marked attention and
unusual hospitality to a judge uncalled for by the
personal relations of the parties because they
subject him and the judge to misconceptions of
motives.
Report of IBP Committee
page 70

In order not to subject both the judge and the

lawyer to suspicion, the common practice of
some lawyers of making judges and prosecutors
godfathers of their children to enhance their
influence and their law practice should be
avoided by the judges and lawyers alike.
 AUSTRIA V. MASAQUEL
(1967)

It is improper for a litigant or counsel to see a

judge in chambers and talk to him about a matter
related to the case pending in the court of said
judge.
Rule 13.02
A lawyer shall not make public
statements in the media regarding a
pending case tending to arouse public
opinion for or against the party
 Suspention of Rogelio Z. Bagabuyo,
former senior state procecutor
ADM. Case 7006
Mindanao Gold Star Daily- August 18,2003
" Senior procecutor lambasts Surigao judge for allowing
murder suspect to bail out“
Senior state procecutor Rogelio Bagabuyo lambasted
Judge Manuel Tan of RTC Branch 29 based in Surigao City
for ruling on a motion that sought a bailbond for Luis
Plaza who stands charge with murder of a policeman...
Bagabuyo said he would contest Tans decision
before the Court of Appeals and would file
criminal and administrative charges of certiorari
against the judge..
February 8, 2004
Suspended from the practice of law
Imprisonment for 90 days to be serve at the Surigao City
Jail
Pay the maximum fine of thirty thousand pesos

" If my mind has changed at all, it is that I ensure that all

judges who are ignorant of the law should be disbarred..
Thats it"
Rule 13.03
A lawyer shall not brook nor invite
interference by another branch or
agency of the government in the normal
course of judicial proceedings.
fin