practice of law cases

5/22/2018 Practice of Law Cases

1/54

A.M. No. 35 September 30, 1949

In re Attorney FELIX P. DAVID,petitioner.

Felix P. David in his own behalf.Office of the Solicitor General Felix Angelo Bautista and Solicitor Estrella Abad Santos for the Government.

REES, J.:

The respondent, Felix P. David, a member of a Philippine Bar, is charged with the malpractice for misappropriating fundsentrusted to him by his client, the complainant Briccio S. enson. !espondent having answered denying the charge, thecomplaint was referred to the Solicitor "eneral for investigation. #fter the investigation the Solicitor "eneral rendered hisreport finding the respondent guilty of professional misconduct and recommending disciplinary action. The Solicitor"eneral reports the following facts to have been conclusively established$

. . . that on February %&, %'(), respondent obtained P*(+ from his client Briccio enson to be applied to thepayment of inheritance and real estate taxes due from the estate of steban enson for %'(&, %'(- and %'() p./, t. s. n.0, for which he signed a receipt #nnex 1#12 p. /, t. s. n.0. 3n several occasions, complainant as4ed therespondent to show him the official tax receipt evidencing the payment of said taxes, to which the latter answeredthat he had already paid them, but the receipts were left with his friend in San Fernando. !espondent promised togive the receipt later. 5omplainant waited patiently for it but it was never delivered. #fter the respondent had failedto deliver the receipt, complainant became suspicious and in6uired from the provincial treasurer of Pampanga

about the matter. Said official gave the information that the taxes were never paid. 5onse6uently, complainantre6uested the respondent to refund the money given him for the payment of said taxes p. ), t. s. n., 3S"0, but hefailed to do so. !espondent made several promises to return the money which he never complied. 7either had hedone anything to transfer the titles of the land in the name of the heirs of steban enson up to the present p. ',t. s. n.0. 8n view of this failure of the respondent, the complainant was ultimately forced to pay the taxes out of hisown poc4et p. *, t.s.n.0.

!e6uired to answer the complaint formulated by the Solicitor "eneral on the basis of his report, respondent failed to doso. #nd despite due notice he li4ewise failed to appear at the hearing before this 5ourt. 8ndeed, we note from the Solicitor"eneral1s report that respondent, instead of welcoming every opportunity for hearing, seems to have wanted to avoid it.3n this point the report says$

#t the hearing held on 9ay :-, %'(*, both parties appeared and the complainant had testified, the hearing wasset for continuance the following day. Both parties agreed in the presence of the investigator to postpone saidhearing for ;une &, %'(*. 3n ;une &, %'(*, complainant appeared, but respondent did not show up, so to give therespondent a chance, the investigator postponed the continuation of the hearing to ;une %). Both parties wereduly subpoenaed attached to the records0. 3n ;une %&th, respondent sent a letter attached to the records0 to

#ssistant Solicitor "eneral !uperto


2/54

P-/+ =>and taxes for %'(&=%'().

Failure on my part to deliver to him the official receipts corresponding to the above mentioned amount, 8promise to return to him the whole amount of P*(+ not later than #pril %-, %'() without any obligation onhis part.

# separate amount of one hundred and ten P%%+0 pesos and a sac4 of rice was paid to me for myexpenses and fee.

Sgd.0 #tty. F>8? D#@8D.

!espondent did not care to testify. But through his unverified answer, he would ma4e it appear that he was entitled to andhad been promised a legal fee for his services and that, as this promise was not complied with, he Asaw it fit to withholdsaid amount the P*(+ for taxes0 until he is paid.A This explanation is obviously an afterthought and clearly unfounded. Forthe established fact is that respondent at first made complainant believe that the sum in 6uestion had already beenapplied by him to the payment of taxes, and, as testified to by complainant, for the little that respondent was able to do inconnection with the case entrusted to him, he has already received his fee as shown by the above=copied receipt. Theconclusion is therefore irresistible that respondent misappropriated the money of his client. This ma4es him guilty ofunprofessional conduct.

8n view of the gravity of the misconduct committed, the respondent Felix P. David is hereby ordered suspended from thepractice of law for a period of five years from the date this decision become final, without preudice to a more severeaction if the sum misappropriated is not refunded within one month from the same date.

(oran$ ). *.$ O+aeta$ Feria$ Beng+on$ Padilla$ ,uason$ (ontema!or$ and ,orres$ **.$concur.

G. R. No. L-12426

[ G. R. No. L-12426, February 16, 1959 ]

PHILIPPINE LAWYER'S ASSOCIATION, PETITIONER, VS. CELEDONIO AGRAVA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS DIRECTOR

OF THE PHILIPPINES PATENT OFFICE, RESPONDENT.

D E C I S I O N

MONTEMAYOR, J.:

This is a petition filed by the Philippine Lawyer's Association for prohibition and injunction against Celedonio Agrava, in his capacity as Director

of the Philippines Patent Office.

On May 27, 1957, respondent Director issued a circular announcing that he had scheduled for June 27, 1957 an examination for the purpose

of determining who are qualified to practice as patent attorneys before the Philippines Patent Office, the said examination to cover patent law

and jurisprudence and the rules of practice before said office. According to the circular, members of the Philippine Bar, engineers and other

persons with sufficient scientific and technical training are qualified to take the said examination. It would appear that heretofore, respondent

Director has been holding similar examinations.

It is the contention of the petitioner Philippine Lawyer's Association that one who has passed the bar examinations and is licensed by the

Supreme Court to practice law in the Philippines and who is in good standing, is duly qualified to practice before the Philippines Patent Office,

and that consequently, the act of the respondent Director requiring members of the Philippine Bar in good standing to take and pass an

examination given by the Patent Office as a condition precedent to their being allowed to practice before said office, such as representing

applicants in the preparation and prosecution of applications for patent, is in excess of his jurisdiction and is in violation of the law.

In his answer, respondent Director, through the Solicitor General, maintains that the prosecution of patent cases "does not involve entirely or

purely the practice of law but includes the application of scientific and technical knowledge and training, so much so that, as a matter of actual

practice, the prosecution of patent cases may be handled not only by lawyers, but also by engineers and other persons with sufficient scientific

and technical training who pass the prescribed examinations as given by the Patent Office; * * * that the Rules of Court do not prohibit the

Patent Office, or any other quasi-judicial body from requiring further condition or qualification from those who would wish to handle cases

before such bodies, as in the prosecution of patent cases before the Patent Office which, as stated in the preceding paragraph, requires more

of an application of scientific and technical knowledge than the mere application of provisions of law; * * * that the action taken by the

respondent is in accordance with Republic Act No. 165, otherwise known as the Patent Law of the Philippines, which is similar to the United


3/54

States Patent Law, in accordance with which the United States Patent Office has also prescribed a similar examination aa that prescribed by

respondent. * * *."

Respondent further contends that just as the Patent Law of the United States of America authorizes the Commissioner of Patents to prescribe

examinations to determine as to who may practice before the United States Patent Office, the respondent, is similarly authorized to do so by

our Patent Law, Republic Act No. 165.

Although as already stated, the Director of Patents, in the past, would appear to have been holding tests or examinations the passing of which

was imposed as a required qualification to practice before the Patent Office, to our knowledge, this is the first time that the right of the Director

of Patents to do so, specially as regards members of the bar, has been questioned formally, or otherwise put in issue. And we have given it

careful thought and consideration.

The Supreme Court has the exclusive and constitutional power with respect to admission to the practice of law in the Philippines[1]and any

member of the Philippine Bar in good standing may practice law anywhere and before any entity, whether judicial or quasi-judicial or

administrative, in the Philippines. Naturally, the question arises as to whether or not appearance before the Patent Office and the preparation

and prosecution of patent applications. etc., constitutes or is included in the practice of law.

"The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation m court;it embraces the preparation of pleadings and other papers

incident to actions and special proceedings, the management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients before judges and courts,

and in addition, conveying. In general, all advice to clients, and all action taken for them in matters connected with the law incorporation

sendees, assessment and condemnation services contemplating an appearance before a judicial body, the foreclosure of a mortgage,

enforcement of a creditor's claim in bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings, and conducting proceedings in attachment, and in matters of

estate and guardianship have been held to constitute law practice, as do the preparation and drafting of legal instruments,where the work

done involves the determination by the trained legal mind of the legal effect of facts and conditions."(5 Am. Jur. p. 262, 263). (Italics suplied)

"Practice of lawunder modern conditions consists in no small part of work performed outside of any court and having no immediate relation to

proceedings in court. It embraces conveyancing, the giving of legal advice on a large variety of subjects, and the preparation and execution of

legal instruments covering an extensive field of business and trust relations and other affairs.Although these transactions may have no

direct connection with court proceedings, they are always subject to become involved in litigation.They require in many aspects a high degree

of legal skill, a wide experience with men and affairs, and great capacity for adaptation to difficult and complex situations. These customary

functions of an attorney or counselor at law bear an intimate relation to the administration of justice by the courts. No valid distinction, so far

as concerns the question set forth in the order, can be drawn between that part of the work of the lawyer which involves appearance in court

and that part which involves advice and drafting of instruments in his office. It is of importance to the welfare of the public that these

manifold customary functions be performed by persons possessed of adequate learning and skill, of sound moral character, and acting at all

times under the heavy trust obligations to clients which rests upon all attorneys." (Moran, Comments on the Rules of Court, Vol. 3 (1953

ed.), p. 66S--666, citing In re Opinion of the Justices (Mass.), 194 N. E. 313, quoted in Rhode Is. Bar Assotf.vs.Automobile Service Assoc.

(R. I.) 179 A. 139, 144). (Italics ours)

In our opinion, the practice of law includes such appear ance before the Patent Office, the representation of applicants, oppositors, and other

persons, and the prosecution of their applications for patent, their oppositions thereto, or the enforcement of their rights in patent cases. In

the first place, although the transaction of business in the Patent Office involves the use and application of technical and scientific knowledge

and training, still, all such business has to be conducted and all orders and decisions of the Director of Patents have to be rendered in

accordance with the Patent Law, as well as other laws, including the Rules and Regulations promulgated by the Patent Office in accordance

with law. Not only this, but practice before', the Patent Office involves the interpretation and application of other laws and legal principles, as

well as the existence of facts to be established in accordance with the law of evidence and procedure. For instance: Section 8 of our Patent

Law provides that an invention shall not be patentable if it is contrary to public order or morals, or to public health or welfare. Section 9 says

that an invention shall not be considered new or patentable if it was known or used by others in the Philippines before the invention thereof by

the inventor named in the application for patent, or if it was patented or described in any printed publica tion in the Philippines or any foreign

country more than one year before the application for a patent therefor, or if it had been in public use or on sale in the Philippines for more than

one year before the application for the patent therefor. Section 10 provides that the right to the patent belongs to the true and actual inventor,

his heirs, legal representatives or assigns, and Section 12 says that an application for a patent may be filed only by the inventor, his heirs,

legal representatives or assigns. Sections 25 and 26 refer to correction of any mistake in a patent. Section 28 enumerates the grounds for


4/54

cancellation of a patent; that although any person may apply for such cancellation, under Section 29, the Solicitor General is authorized to

petition for the cancellation of a patent. Section 30 mentions the requirements of a petition for cancellation. Sections 31 and 32 provide for a

notice of hearing of the petition for cancellation of the patent by the Director of Patents in case the said cancellation is warranted. Under

Section 34, at any time after the expiration of three years from the day the patent was granted, any person may apply for the grant of a license

under a particular patent on several grounds, such as, if the patented invention is not being worked in the Philippines on a commercial scale,

or if the demand for the patented article in the Philippines is not being met to an adequate extent and reasonable terms, or if by reason of the

patentee's refusal to grant a license on reasonable terms or by reason of the conditions attached by him to the license, purchase, lease or use

of the patented article or working of the patented process or machine of production, the establishment of a new trade or industry in the

Philippines is prevented; or if the patent or invention relates to food or medicine or is necessary to public health or public safety. All these

things involve the application of laws, legal principles, practice and procedure. They call for legal knowledge, training and experience for which

a member of the bar has been prepared.

In support of the proposition that much of the business and many of the acts, orders and decisions of the Patent Director involve questions of

law or a reasonable and correct evaluation of facts, the very Patent Law, Republic Act No. 165, Section 61, provides that:

"* * * the applicant for a patent or for the registration of a design, any party to a proceeding to cancel a patent or to obtain a compulsory

license, and any party to any other proceeding in the Office may appeal to the Supreme Court from any final order or decision of the Director."

In other words, the appeal is taken tp this Tribunal. If the transaction of business in the Patent Office and the acts, orders and decisions of the

Patent Director involved exclusively or mostly technical and scientific knowledge and training, then logically, the appeal should be taken not to a

court or judicial body, but rather to a board of scientists, engineers or technical men, which is not the case.

Another aspect of the question involves the consideration of the nature of the functions and acts of the Head of the Patent Office.

"* * * commissioner in issuing or withholding patents, in reissues, interferences, and extensions, exercisesquasi-judicialjunctions. Patents

are public records, and it is the duty of the Commissioner to give authenticated copies to any person, on payment of the legal fees." (40

Am. Jur. 537). (Italics supplied).

"* * *. The Commissioner has the only original initiatory" jurisdiction that exists up to the granting and delivering of a patent, and it is his duty

to decide whether the patent is new and whether it is the proper subject of a patent; and his action in awarding or refusing a patent is

ajudicial junction. In passing on an application the commissioner should decide not onlyquestions of law, but also questions of fact, as

whether there has been a prior public use or sale of the article invented. * * *." (60 C.J.S. 460). (Italics supplied).

The Director of Patents, exercising as he does judicial or quasi-judicial functions, it is reasonable to hold that a member of the bar, because

of his legal knowledge and training, should be allowed to practice before the Patent Office, without further examination or other qualification. Of

course, the Director of Patents, if he deems it advisable or necessary, may require that members of the bar practising before him enlist the

assistance of technical men and scientists in the preparation of papers and documents, such as, the drawing or technical description of an

invention or machine sought to be patented, in the same way that a lawyer filing an application for the registration of a parcel of land on behalf

of his client, is required to submit a plan and technical description of said land, prepared by a licensed surveyor.

But respondent Director claims that he is expressly authorized by the law to require persons desiring to practice or to do business before him

to submit to an examination, even if they are already members of the bar. He contends that our Patent Law, Republic Act No. 165, is

patterned after the United States Patent Law; and that the U. S. Patent Office in its Rules of Practice of the United States Patent Office in

Patent Cases prescribes an examination similar to that which he (respondent) has prescribed and scheduled. He invites our attention to the

following provisions of said Rules of Practice:

"Registration of attorneys and agents. A register of attorneys and a register of agents are kept in the Patent Office on which are entered the

names of all persons recognized as entitled to represent applicants before the Patent Office in the preparation and prosecution of applications

for patent. Registration in the Patent Office under the provisions of these rules shall only entitle the person registered to practice before the

Patent Office.

"(a)Attorneys at law. Any attorney at law in good standing admitted to practice before any United States Court or the highest court of any

State or Territory of the United States who fulfills the requirements and complied with the provisions of these rules may be admitted to practice

before the Patent Office and have his name entered on the register of attorneys.


5/54

*******

"(c)Requirement for registration. No person will be admitted to practice and register unless he shall apply to the Commissioner of Patents in

writing on a prescribed form supplied by the Commissioner and furnish all requested information and material; and shall establish to the

satisfaction of the Commissioner that he is of good moral character and of good repute and possessed of the legal and scientific and

technical qualifications necessary to enable him to render applicants for patent valuable service, and is otherwise competent to advise and

assist him in the presentation and prosecution of their application before the Patent Office. In order that the Commissioner may determine

whether a person seeking to have his name placed upon either of the registers has the qualifications specified, satisfactory proof of good

moral character and repute, and of sufficient basic training in scientific and technical matters must be submitted and an examination which is

held from time to time must be taken and passed. The taking of an examination may be waived in the case of any person who has served

for three years in the examining corps of the Patent Office."

Respondent states that the promulgation of the Rules of Practice of the United States Patent Office in Patent Cases is authorized by the

United States Patent Law itself, which reads as follows:

"The Commissioner of Patents, subject to the approval of the Secretary of Commerce may prescribe rules and regulations governing

therecognition of agents, attorneys, or other persona representing applicants or other parties before his office, and may require of such

persons, agents, or attorneys,before being recognized as representatives of applicants or other persons, that they shall show they are of

good moral character and in good repute, arepossessed of the necessary qualifications to enable them to render to applicants or other

persons valuable service, and are likewise competent to advise and assist applicants or other persons in the presentation or prosecutionof

their applications or other business before the Office. The Commissioner of Patents may, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, suspend or

exclude, either generally or in any particular case, from further practice before his office any person, agent, or attorney shown to be

incompetent or disreputable, or guilty of gross misconduct, or who refuses to comply with the said rules and regulations, or who shall, with

intent to defraud in any manner, deceive, mislead, or threaten any applicant or prospective applicant, or other person having immediate or

prospective business before the office, by word, circular, letter, or by advertising. The reasons for any such suspension or exclusion shall be

duly recorded. The action of the Commissioner may be reviewed upon the petition of the person so refused recognition or so suspended or

excluded by the district court of the United States for the District of Columbia under such conditions and upon such proceedings as the said

court may by its rules determine." (Italics supplied).

Respondent Director concludes that Section 78 of Republic Act No. 165 being: similar to the provisions of law just reproduced, then he is

authorized to prescribe the rules and regulations requiring that persons desiring to practice before him should submit to and pass an

examination. We reproduce said Section 78, Republic Act No. 165, for purposes of comparison:

"Sec. 78.Rules and regulations. The Director subject to the approval of the Secretary of Justice, shall promulgate the necessary rules and

regulations, not inconsistent with law, for the conduct of all business in the Patent Office."

The above provisions of Section 78 certainly and by fary are different from the provisions of the United States Patent Law as regards authority

to hold examinations to determine the qualifications of those allowed to practice before the Patent Office. While the U. S. Patent Law

authorizes the Commissioner of Patents to require attorneys to show that they possess the necessary qualifications and competence to render

valuable service to and advise and assist their clients in patent cases, which showing may take the form of a test or examination to be held by

the Commissioner, our Patent Law, Section 78, is silent on this important point. Our attention has not been called to any express provision

of our Patent Law, giving such authority to determine the qualifications of persons allowed to practice before the Patent Office.

Section 551 of the Revised Administrative Code authorizes every chief of bureau to prescribe forms and make regulations or general orders not

inconsistent with law, to secure the harmonious and efficient administration of his branch of the service and to carry into full effect the laws

relating to matters within the jurisdiction of his bureau. Section 608 of Republic Act 1937, known as the Tariff and Customs Code of the

Philippines, provides that the Commissioner of Customs shall, subject to the approval of the Department Head, make all rules and regulations

necessary to enforce the provisions of said code. Section 338 of the National Internal Revenue Code, Commonwealth Act No. 466 as

amended, states that the Secretary of Finance, upon recommendation of the Collector of Internal Revenue, shall promulgate all needful rules

and regulations for the effective enforcement of the provisions of the code. We understand that rules and regulations have been promulgated

not only for the Bureaus of Customs and Internal Revenue, but also for other bureaus of the Government, to govern the transaction of business

in and to enforce the law for said bureaus.

Were we to allow the Patent Office, in the absence of an express and clear provision of law giving the necessary sanction, to require lawyers to

submit to and pass on examination prescribed by it before they are allowed to practice before said Patent Office, then there would be no


6/54

reason why other bureaus specially the Bureaus of Internal Revenue and Customs, where the business in the same area are more or less

complicated, such as the presentation of books of accounts, balance sheets, etc., assessments exemptions, depreciation, these as regards

the Bureau of Internal Revenue, and the classification of goods, imposition of customs duties, seizures, confiscation, etc., as regards the

Bureau of Customs, may not also require that any lawyer practising before them or otherwise transacting business with them on behalf of

clients, shall first pass an examination to qualify.

In conclusion, we hold that under the present law, members of the Philippine Bar authorized by this Tribunal to practice law, and in good

standing, may practice their profession before the Patent Office, for the reason that much of the business in said office involves the

interpretation and determination of the scope and application of the Patent Law and other laws applicable, as well as the presentation of

evidence to establish facts involved; that part of the functions of the Patent Director are judicial or quasijudicial, so much so that appeals from

his orders and decisions are, under the law, taken to the Supreme Court.

Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Padilla, Reyes A., Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L.,andEndencia, JJ.,concur.

G. R. No. L-19450

[ G. R. No. L-19450, May 27, 1965 ]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE. VS.SIMPLICIO VILLANUEVA, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

D E C I S I O N

PAREDES, J.:

On September 4, 1959, the Chief of Police of Alaminos, Laguna, charged Simplicio Villanuea !ith the crime of

"alicious "ischief, before the #ustice of the Peace Court of said municipalit$% Said accused !as represented b$

counsel de oficio, but later on replaced b$ counsel de parte% &he complainant in the same case !as represented

b$ Cit$ Attorne$Ariston 'ule of San Pablo Cit$, haing entered his appearance as priate(prosecutor, after

securing the permission of the Secretar$ of #ustice% &he condition of his appearance as such, !as that eer$

time he !ould appear at the trial of the case, he !ould be considered on official leae of absence, and that he

!ould not receie an$ pa$ment for his serices% &he appearance of Cit$ Attorne$ 'ule as priate prosecutor !as

)uestioned b$ the counsel for the accused, ino*ing the case of A)uino, et al% s% +lanco, et al, 9 Phil% -4

!herein it !as ruled that .!hen an attorne$ had been appointed to the position of Assistant Proincial 'iscal or

Cit$ 'iscal and therein )ualified, b$ operation of la!, he ceased to engage in priate la! practice%. Counsel then

argued that the #P Court in entertaining the appearance of Cit$ Attorne$ 'ule in the case is a iolation of the

aboe ruling, On /ecember 1, 19-0 the #P issued an order sustaining the legalit$ of the appearance of Cit$

Attorne$ 'ule%

nder date of #anuar$ 4, 19-1, counsel for the accused presented a ."otion to 2nhibit 'iscal'ule from Acting as

Priate Prosecutor in this Case,. this time ino*ing Section 3, ule 1, no! Sec% 35, ule 136, eised ules,


7/54

!hich bars certain attorne$s from practicing% Counsel claims that Cit$ Attorne$ 'ule falls under 7his limitation%

&he #P Court ruled on the motion b$ upholding the right of 'ule to appear and further stating that he 7'ule8 !as

not actuall$ engaged in priate la! practice% &his Order !as appealed to the C'2 of Laguna, presided b$ the

on% ilarion % #arencio, !hich rendered :udgment on /ecember 0, 19-1, the pertinent portions of !hich

read;

.&he present case is one for malicious mischief% &here being no reseration b$ the offended part$ of the ciil

liabilit$, the ciil action !as deemed impliedl$ instituted !ith the criminal action% &he offended part$ had,

therefore, the right to interene in the case and lie represented b$ a legal counsel because of her interest in the

ciil liabilit$ of the accused%

.Sec% 31, ule 1 of the ules of Court proides that in the court of a :ustice of the peace a part$ ma$ conduct

his litigation in person, !ith the aid of an agent or friend appointed b$ him for that purpose, or !ith the aid of

an attorne$% Assistant Cit$ Attorne$ 'ule appeared in the #ustice of the Peace Court as ah agent or friend of the

offended part$% 2t does not appear that he !as being paid for his serices or that his appearance !as in a

professional capacit$% As Assistant Cit$ Attorne$ of Sail Pablo he had no control or interention !hatsoeer in

the prosecution of crimes committed in the municipalit$ of Alaminos, Laguna, because the prosecution of

criminal cases coming from Alaminos are handled b$ the Office of the Proincial 'iscal and not b$ the Cit$

Attorne$ of San Pablo% &here could be no possible conflict in the duties of Assistant Cit$ Attorne$ 'ule us

Assistant Cit$ Attorne$ of San Pablo and as priate prosecutor in this criminal case% On the other hand, us

alread$ pointed out, the offended part$ in this criminal case had a right to be represented b$ an agent or a

friend to protect her rights in the ciil action !hich !as impliedl$ instituted together !ith the criminal action%

.2n ie! of the foregoing, this Court holds that Asst% Cit$ Attorne$ Ariston /% 'ule ma$ appear before the #ustice

of the Peace Court in Alaminos, Lagunu as priate prosecutor in this criminal case as an agent or a friend of the

offended part$%

.


8/54

the bar or gie professional adice to clients%. he claims that Cit$ Attorne$ 'ule, in appearing as priate

prosecutor in the case !as engaging in priate practice%


9/54

petition0 and to perpetually prohibit persons or entities from ma4ing advertisements

pertaining to the exercise of the law profession other than those allowed by law.A

The advertisements complained of by herein petitioner are as follows$

#nnex #

S5!T 9#!!8#"C

P&-+.++ for a valid marriage.

8nfo on D8@3!5. #BS75.

#77>97T. @8S#.

T Please call$ &:%=+)-)

>"#> &:%):/:, &:::+(%

5>8785, 875. 8:30 am - 6:00 pm

)=Flr. @ictoria Bldg.

7 #ve., Mla.

#nnex B

"#9DIVORCE

D37 P#! rmita, 9anila nr. S mbassy

5>8785, 875. E% Tel. 521-7232

&:%=):&%

&::=:+(%

&:%=+)-)

8t is the submission of petitioner that the advertisements above reproduced arechampertous,

unethical, demeaning of the law profession, and destructive of the confidence of the community in the
http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn1http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn1


10/54

integrity of the members of the bar and that, as a member of the legal profession, he is ashamed and

offended by the said advertisements, hence the reliefs sought in his petition as hereinbefore 6uoted.

8n its answer to the petition, respondent admits the fact of publication of said advertisements at its

instance, but claims that it is not engaged in the practice of law but in the rendering of Alegal support

servicesA through paralegals with the use of modern computers and electronic machines. !espondent

further argues that assuming that the services advertised are legal services, the act of advertising

these services should be allowed supposedly in the light of the case of ;ohn !. Bates and

@an 31Steen vs. State Bar of #riGona.E:reportedly decided by the United States Supreme

Court on June 7, 1977.

5onsidering the critical implications on the legal profession of the issues raised herein, we re6uired

the .%0 8ntegrated Bar of the Philippines 8BP0, :0 Philippine Bar #ssociation PB#0, /0 Philippine

>awyers1 #ssociation P>#0, (0 .P. Homen >awyers1 5ircle H8>3580, &0 Homen >awyers

#ssociation of the, Philippines H>#P0, and -0Federacion 8nternational de #bogadas F8D#0 to

submit their respective position papers on the controversy and, thereafter, their memoranda. E/The

said bar associations readily responded and extended their valuable services and

cooperation of which this Court takes note with appreciation and gratitude.

The main issues posed for resolution before the 5ourt are whether or not the services offered by

respondent, The >egal 5linic, 8nc., as advertised by it constitutes practice of law and, in either case,

whether the same can properly be the subect of the advertisements herein complained of.

Before proceeding with an in=depth analysis of the merits of this case, we deem it proper and

enlightening to present hereunder, excerpts from the respective position papers adopted by the

aforementioned bar associations and the memoranda submitted by them on the issues involved in

this bar matter.

%. 8ntegrated Bar of thePhilippines:

? ? ?

7otwithstanding the subtle manner by which respondent endeavored to distinguish the two terms, i.e., Alegal

support servicesA vis=a=vis Alegal servicesA, common sense would readily dictate that the same are essentially

without substantial distinction. For who could deny that document search, evidence gathering, assistance to

layman in need of basic institutional services from government or non=government agencies li4e birth,

marriage, property, or business registration, obtaining documents li4e clearance, passports, local or foreign

visas, constitute practice of lawC
http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn2http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn3http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn2http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn3


11/54

x x x

The 8ntegrated Bar of the Philippines 8BP0 does not wish to ma4e issue with respondent1s foreign citations.

Suffice it to state that the 8BP has made its position manifest, to wit, that it strongly opposes the view espoused

by respondent to the effect that today it is alright to advertise one1s legal services0.

The 8BP accordingly declares in no uncertain terms its opposition to respondent1s act of establishing a Alegal

clinicA and of concomitantly advertising the same through newspaper publications.

The 8BP would therefore invo4e the administrative supervision of this onorable 5ourt to perpetually restrain

respondent from underta4ing highly unethical activities in the field of law practice as aforedescribed.E(

? ? ?

#. The use of the name AThe >egal 5linic, 8nc.A gives the impression that respondent corporation is being

operated by lawyers and that it renders legal services.

Hhile the respondent repeatedly denies that it offers legal services to the public, the advertisements in

6uestion give the impression that respondent is offering legal services. The Petition in fact simply assumes this

to be so, as earlier mentioned, apparently because this is0 the effect that the advertisements have on the

reading public.

The impression created by the advertisements in 6uestion can be traced, first of all, to the very name being

used by respondent = AThe >egal 5linic, 8nc.A Such a name, it is respectfully submitted connotes the rendering

of legal services for legal problems, ust li4e a medical clinic connotes medical services for medical problems.

9ore importantly, the term A>egal 5linicA connotes lawyers, as the term medical clinic connotes doctors.

Furthermore, the respondent1s name, as published in the advertisements subect of the present case, appears

with the0 scales0 of ustice, which all the more reinforces the impression that it is being operated by members

of the bar and that it offers legal services. 8n addition, the advertisements in 6uestion appear with a picture and

name of a person being represented as a lawyer fromGuam, and this practically removes

whatever doubt may still remain as to the nature of the service or services being

offered.

8t thus becomes irrelevant whether respondent is merely offering Alegal support servicesA as claimed by it, or

whether it offers legal services as any lawyer actively engaged in law practice does. #nd it becomes

unnecessary to ma4e a distinction between Alegal servicesA and Alegal support services,A as the respondent

would have it. The advertisements in 6uestion leave no room for doubt in the minds of the reading public that

legal services are being offered by lawyers, whether true or not.


12/54

B. The advertisements in 6uestion are meant to induce the performance of acts contrary to law, morals, public

order and public policy.

8t may be conceded that, as the respondent claims, the advertisements in 6uestion are only meant to inform

the general public of the services being offered by it. Said advertisements, however, emphasiGe

aGuam divorce, and any law student ought to know that under the Family Code, there

is only one instance when a foreign divorce is recognized, and that is:

#rticle :-. x x x.

Hhere a marriage between a Filipino citiGen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter

validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have

capacity to remarry under Philippine >aw.

8t must not be forgotten, too, that the Family 5ode defines0 a marriage as follows$

#rticle %. 9arriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in

accordance with law for the establishment of conugal and family life. 8t is thefoundation of the family and an

inviolable social institution whose nature, conse6uences, and incidents are governed by law and not subect .to

stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property relation during the marriage within the limits

provided by this 5ode.

By simply reading the 6uestioned advertisements, it is obvious that the message being conveyed is

that Filipinos can avoid the legal conse6uences of a marriage celebrated in accordance with our law,

by simply going toGuam for a divorce. This is not only misleading, but encourages, or

serves to induce, violation of Philippine law. At the very least, this can be considered

"the dark side" of legal practice, where certain defects in Philippine laws are exploited

for the sake of profit. At worst, this is outright malpractice.

!ule %.+:. = # lawyer, shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessening

confidence in the legal system.

8n addition, it may also be relevant to point out that advertisements such as that shown in #nnex A#A

of the Petition, which contains a cartoon of a motor vehicle with the words A;ust 9arriedA on its

bumper and seems to address those planning a Asecret marriage,A if not suggesting a Asecret

marriage,A ma4es light of the Aspecial contract of permanent union,A the inviolable social institution,A

which is how the Family 5ode describes marriage, obviously to emphasiGe its sanctity and

inviolability. Horse, this particular advertisement appears to encourage marriages celebrated in

secrecy, which is suggestive of immoral publication of applications for a marriage license.


13/54

8f the article A!x for >egal ProblemsA is to be reviewed, it can readily be concluded that the above

impressions one may gather from the advertisements in 6uestion are accurate. The Sharon 5uneta=

"abby 5oncepcion example alone confirms what the advertisements suggest. ere it can be seen

that criminal acts are being encouraged or committed a bigamous marriage in ong as

@egas0 with impunity simply because the urisdiction of Philippine courts does not extend to the place

where the, crime is committed.

ven if it be assumed, arguendo, that0 the Alegal support servicesA respondent offers do not

constitute legal services as commonly understood, the advertisements in 6uestion give the

impression that respondent corporation is being operated by 1lawyers and that it offers legal services,

as earlier discussed. Thus, the only logical conse6uence is that, in the eyes of an ordinary newspaper

reader, members of the bar themselves are encouraging or inducing the performance of acts which

are contrary to law, morals, good customs and the public good, thereby destroying and demeaning

the integrity of the Bar.

x x x

8t is respectfully submitted that respondent should be enoined from causing the publication of the

advertisements in 6uestion, or any other advertisements similar thereto. 8t is also submitted that

respondent should be prohibited from further performing or offering some of the services it presently

offers, or, at the very least, from offering such services to the public in general.

The 8BP is aware of the fact that providing computeriGed legal research, electronic data gathering,

storage and retrieval, standardiGed legal forms, investigators for gathering of evidence, and li4e

services will greatly benefit the legal profession and should not be stifled but instead encouraged.

owever, when the conduct of such business by non=members of the Bar encroaches upon the

practice of law, there can be no choice but to prohibit such business.

#dmittedly, many of the services involved in the case at bar can be better performed by=specialists in

other fields, such as computer experts, who by reason of their having devoted time and effort

exclusively to such field cannot fulfill the exacting re6uirements for admission to the Bar. To prohibit

them from AencroachingA upon the legal profession will deny the profession of the great benefits and

advantages of modern technology. 8ndeed, a lawyer using a computer will be doing better than a

lawyer using a typewriter, even if both are e6ual0 in s4ill.

Both the Bench and the Bar, however, should be careful not to allow or tolerate the illegal practice of

law in any form, not only for the protection of members of the Bar but also, and more importantly, for


14/54

the protection of the public. Technological development in the profession may be encouraged without

tolerating, but instead ensuring prevention of, illegal practice.

There might be nothing obectionable if respondent is allowed to perform all of its services, but only if

such services are made available exclusively to members of the Bench and Bar. !espondent would

then be offering technical assistance, not legal services. #lternatively, the more difficult tas4 of

carefully distinguishing between which service may be offered to the public in general and which

should be made available exclusively to members of the Bar may be underta4en. This, however, may

re6uire further proceedings because of the factual considerations involved.

8t must be emphasiGed, however, that some of respondent1s services ought to be prohibited outright,

such as acts which tend to suggest or induce celebration abroad of marriages which are bigamous or

otherwise illegal and void under Philippine law. Hhile respondent may not be prohibited from simply

disseminating information regarding such matters, it must be re6uired to include, in the information

given, a disclaimer that it is not authoriGed to practice law, that certain course of action may be illegal

under Philippine law, that it is not authoriGed or capable of rendering a legal opinion, that a lawyer

should be consulted before deciding on which course of action to ta4e, and that it cannot recommend

any particular lawyer without subecting itself to possible sanctions for illegal practice of law.

8f respondent is allowed to advertise, advertising should be directed exclusively at members of the

Bar, with a clear and unmista4able disclaimer that it is not authoriGed to practice law or perform legal

services.

The benefits of being assisted by paralegals cannot be ignored. But nobody should be allowed to

represent himself as a AparalegalA for profit, without such term being clearly defined by rule or

regulation, and without any ade6uate and effective means of regulating his activities. #lso, law

practice in a corporate form may prove to be advantageous to the legal profession, but before

allowance of such practice may be considered, the corporation1s #rticles of 8ncorporation and By=laws

must conform to each and every provision of the 5ode of Professional !esponsibility and the !ules of

5ourt.E&

:. Philippine Bar #ssociation$

???

!espondent asserts that it Ais not engaged in the practice of law but engaged in giving legal support

services to lawyers and laymen, through experienced paralegals, with the use of modern computers

and electronic machinesA pars. : and /, 5omment0. This is absurd. n6uestionably, respondent1s


15/54

acts of holding out itself to the public under the trade name AThe >egal 5linic, 8nc.,A and soliciting

employment for its enumerated services fall within the realm of a practice which thus yields itself to

the regulatory powers of the Supreme 5ourt. For respondent to say that it is merely engaged in

paralegal wor4 is to 1 stretch credulity. !espondent1s own commercial advertisement which

announces a. certain#tty. Don Par4inson to be handling the fields of law belies its pretense. From all

indications, respondent AThe >egal 5linic, 8nc.A is offering and rendering legal servicesthrough its

reserve of lawyers. 8t has been held that the practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases in

court, but includes drawing of deeds, incorporation, rendering opinions, and advising clients as to

their legal rights and then ta4e them to an attorney and as4 the latter to loo4 after their case in

court See 9artin, >egal and ;udicial thics, %'*( ed., P. /'0.

8t is apt to recall that only natural persons can engage in the practice of law, and such limitation

cannot be evaded by a corporation employing competent lawyers to practice for it. 3bviously, this is

the scheme or device by which respondent AThe >egal 5linic, 8nc.A holds out itself to the public and

solicits employment of its legal services. 8t is an odious vehicle for deception, especially so when the

public cannot ventilate any grievance formalpractice against the business conduit. Precisely, the

limitation of practice of law to persons who have been duly admitted as members of the Bar Sec. %,

!ule %/*, !evised !ules of 5ourt0 is to subect the members to the discipline of the Supreme 5ourt.

#lthough respondent uses its business name, the persons and the lawyers who act for it are subect

to court discipline. The practice of law is not a profession open to all who wish to engage in it nor can

it be assigned to another See & #m. ;ur. :)+0. 8t is a personal right limited to persons who have

6ualified themselves under the law. 8t follows that not only respondent but also all the persons who

are acting for respondent are the persons engaged in unethical law practice. E-

/. Philippine >awyersA #ssociation$

The Philippine >awyers1 #ssociation1s position, in answer to the issues stated herein, are, to wit$

%. The >egal 5linic is engaged in the practice of law2

:. Such practice is unauthoriGed2

/. The advertisements complained of are not only unethical, but also misleading and patently immoral2 and

(. The onorable Supreme 5ourt has the power to suppress and punish the >egal 5linic and its corporate

officers for its unauthoriGed practice of law and for its unethical, misleading and immoral advertising.

? ? ?


16/54

!espondent posits that it is not engaged in the practice of law. 8t claims that it merely renders Alegal

support servicesA to lawyers, litigants and the general public as enunciated in the Primary Purpose

5lause of its #rticles0 of 8ncorporation. See pages : to & of !espondent1s 5omment0. But its

advertised services, as enumerated above, clearly and convincingly show that it is indeed engaged in

law practice, albeit outside of court.

#s advertised, it offers the general public its advisory services on Persons and Family !elations >aw,

particularly regarding foreign divorces, annulment of marriages, secret marriages, absence and

adoption2 8mmigration >aws, particularly on visa related problems, immigration problems2 the

8nvestment >aw of thePhilippines and such other related laws.

8ts advertised services unmista4ably re6uire the application of the aforesaid laws, the legal principles

and procedures related thereto, the legal advices based thereon and which activities call for legal

training, 4nowledge and experience.

#pplying the test laid down by the 5ourt in the aforecited #grava 5ase, the activities of respondent

fall s6uarely and are embraced in what lawyers and laymen e6ually term as Athe practice of law.A E)

(. .P. Homen >awyers1 5ircle$

8n resolving the issues before this onorable 5ourt, paramount consideration should be given to the

protection of the general public from the danger of being, exploited by un6ualified persons or entities

who may be engaged in the practice of law.

#t present, becoming a lawyer re6uires one to ta4e a rigorous four=year course of study on top of a

four=year bachelor of arts or sciences course and then to ta4e and pass the bar examinations. 3nly

then, is a lawyer 6ualified to practice law.

Hhile the use of a paralegal is sanctioned in many urisdictions as an aid to the administration of

ustice, there are in those urisdictions, courses of study andIor standards which would 6ualify these

paralegals to deal with the general public as such. Hhile it may now be the opportune time to

establish these courses of study andIor standards, the fact remains that at present, these do not exist

in thePhilippines. In the meantime, this Honorable Court may decide to take measures

to protect the general public from being exploited by those who may be dealing with the

general public in the guise of being "paralegals" without being qualified to do so.

8n the same manner, the general public should also be protected from the dangers which may be

brought about by advertising of legal services. Hhile it appears that lawyers are prohibited under the

present 5ode of Professional !esponsibility from advertising, it appears in the instant case that legal


17/54

services are being advertised not by lawyers but, by an entity staffed by Aparalegals.A 5learly,

measures should be ta4en to protect the general public from falling prey to those who advertise legal

services without being 6ualified to offer such services.A E*

# perusal of the 6uestioned advertisements of !espondent, however, seems to give the impression

that information regarding validity of marriages, divorce, annulment of marriage, immigration, visa

extensions, declaration of absence, adoption and foreign investment, which are in essence, legal

matters, will be given to them if they avail of its services. The !espondent1s name = The >egal 5linic,

8nc. = does not help matters. 8t gives the impression again that !espondent will or can cure the legal

problems brought to them. #ssuming that !espondent is, as claimed, staffed purely by paralegals, it

also gives the misleading impression that there are lawyers involved in The >egal 5linic, 8nc., as there

are doctors in any medical clinic, when only AparalegalsA are involved in The >egal 5linic, 8nc.

!espondent1s allegations are further belied by the very admissions of its President and maority

stoc4holder, #tty. 7ogales, who gave an insight on the structure and main purpose of !espondent

corporation in the aforementioned AStarwee4A article.A E'

&. Homen >awyer1s #ssociation of thePhilippines:

#nnexes A#A and ABA of the petition are clearly advertisements to solicit, cases for the purpose of gain

which, as provided for under the above cited law, are0 illegal and against the 5ode of Professional

!esponsibility of lawyers in this country.

#nnex A#A of the petition is not only illegal in that it is an advertisement to solicit cases, but it is illegal

in that in bold letters it announces that the >egal 5linic, 8nc., could wor4 outIcause the celebration of a

secret marriage=which is not only illegal but immoral in this country. Hhile it is advertised that one has

to go to said agency and pay P&-+ for a valid marriage it is certainly fooling the public for valid

marriages in thePhilippines are solemnized only by officers authorized to do so under the

law. And to employ an agency for said purpose of contracting marriage is not

necessary.

7o amount of reasoning that in the. S#, 5anada and other countries the trend is towards allowing

lawyers to advertise their special s4ills to enable people to obtain from 6ualified practitioners legal

services for their particular needs can ustify the use of advertisements such as are the subect matter

of this petition, for one cannot0 ustify an illegal act even by whatever merit the illegal act may serve.

The law has yet to be amended so that such as act could become ustifiable.
http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn8http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn9http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn8http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn9


18/54

He submit further that these advertisements that seem to proect that secret marriages and divorce

are possible in this country for a fee, when in fact it is not so, are highly reprehensible.

8t would encourage people to consult this clinic about how they could go about having a secret

marriage here, when it cannot nor should ever be attempted, and see4 advice on divorce, where in

this country there is none, except under the 5ode of 9uslim Personal >aws in the Philippines. It is

also against good morals and is deceitful because it falsely represents to the public to

be able to do that which by our laws cannot be done (and) by our Code of Morals

should not be done.

8n the case of0 8n re Taguda, &/ Phil. /), the Supreme 5ourt held that solicitation for clients by an

attorney by circulars of advertisements, is unprofessional, and offenses of this character ustify

permanent elimination from the Bar.E%+

-. Federacion 8nternacional de #bogadas$

???

%.) That entities admittedly not engaged in the practice of law, such as management consultancy

firms or travel agencies, whether run by lawyers or not, perform the services rendered by !espondent

does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that !espondent is not unlawfully practicing law. 8n the

same vein, however, the fact that the business of respondent assuming it can be engaged in

independently of the practice of law0 involves 4nowledge of the law does not necessarily ma4e

respondent guilty of unlawful practice of law.

Ax x x 3f necessity, no one x x x acting as a consultant can render effective service unless he is familiar with

such statutes and regulations. e must be careful not to suggest a course of conduct which the law forbids. 8t

seems x x x clear that the consultant1s0 4nowledge of the law, and his use of that 4nowledge as a factor in

determining what measures he shall recommend, do not constitute the practice of law x x x. 8t is not only

presumed that all men 4now the law, but it is a fact that most men have considerable ac6uaintance with the

broad features of the law x xx. 3ur 4nowledge of the law = accurate or inaccurate = moulds our conduct not only

when we are acting for ourselves, but when we are serving others. Ban4ers, li6uor dealers and laymen

generally possess rather precise 4nowledge of the laws touching their particular business or profession. # good

example is the architect, who must be familiar with Goning, building and fire prevention codes, factory and

tenement house statutes, and who draws plans and specifications in harmony with the law. This is not

practicing law.


19/54

ABut suppose the architect, as4ed by his client to omit a fire tower, replies that it is re6uired by the statute. 3r

the industrial relations expert cites, in support of some measure that he recommends, a decision of the

7ational >abor !elations Board. #re they practicing lawC 8n my opinion, they are not, provided no separate fee

is charged for the legal advice or information, and the legal 6uestion is subordinate and incidental to a maor

non=legal problem.

A8t is largely a matter of degree and of custom.

A8f it were usual for one intending to erect a building on his land to engage a lawyer to advise him and the

architect in respect to the building code and the li4e, then an architect who performed this function would

probably be considered to be trespassing on territory reserved for licensed attorneys. >i4ewise, if the industrial

relations field had been pre=empted by lawyers, or custom placed a lawyer always at the elbow of the lay

personnel man. But this is not the case. The most important body of industrial relations experts are the officers

and business agents of the labor unions and few of them are lawyers. #mong the larger corporate employers, it

has been the practice for some years to delegate special responsibility in employee matters to a management

group chosen for their practical 4nowledge and s4ill in such matters, and without regard to legal training or lac4

of it. 9ore recently, consultants li4e the defendant have tendered to the smaller employers the same service

that the larger employers get from their own specialiGed staff.

AThe handling of industrial relations is growing into a recogniGed profession for which appropriate courses are

offered by our leading universities. The court should be very cautious about declaring Ethat a widespread, well=

established method of conducting business is unlawful, or that the considerable class of men who customarily

perform a certain function have no right to do so, or that the technical education given by our schools cannot

be used by the graduates in their business.

J8n determining whether a man is practicing law we should consider his wor4 for any particular client or

customer, as a whole. I can imagine defendant being engaged primarily to advise as to the

law defining his client's obligations to his employees, to guide his client along the path

charted by law. This, of course, would be the practice of the law. But such is not the

fact in the case before me. Defendant's primary efforts are along economic and

psychological lines. The law only provides the frame within which he must work, just as

the zoning code limits the kind of building the architect may plan. The incidental legal

advice or information defendant may give, does not transform his activities into the

practice of law. Let me add that if, even as a minor feature of his work, he performed


20/54

services which are customarily reserved to members of the bar, he would be practicing

law. For instance, if as part of a welfare program, he drew employees wills.

A#nother branch of defendant1s wor4 is the representation of the employer in the adustment of grievances and

in collective bargaining, with or without a mediator. This is not per se the practice of law. #nyone may use an

agent for negotiations and may select an agent particularly s4illed in the subect under discussion, and the

person appointed is free to accept the employment whether or not he is a member of the bar. ere, however,

there may be an exception where the business turns on a 6uestion of law. 9ost real estate sales are

negotiated by bro4ers who are not lawyers. But if the value of the land depends on a disputed right=of=way and

the principal role of the negotiator is to assess the probable outcome of the dispute and persuade the opposite

party to the same opinion, then it may be that only a lawyer can accept the assignment. 3r if a controversy

between an employer and his men grows from differing interpretations of a contract, or of a statute, it is 6uite

li4ely that defendant should not handle it. But 8 need not reach a definite conclusion here, since the situation is

not presented by the proofs.

ADefendant also appears to represent the employer before administrative agencies of the federal government,

especially before trial examiners of the 7ational >abor !elations Board. #n agency of the federal government,

acting by virtue of an authority granted by the 5ongress, may regulate the representation of parties before

such agency. The State ofNew Jersey is without power to interfere with such determination

or to forbid representation before the agency by one whom the agency admits. The

rules of the National Labor Relations Board give to a party the right to appear 'in

person, or by counsel, or by other representative. Rules and Regulations, September

11th, 1946, S. 203.31. Counsel here means a licensed attorney, and 'other

representative' one not a lawyer. In this phase of his work, defendant may lawfully do

whatever the Labor Board allows, even arguing questions purely legal." (Auerbacher v.

Wood, 53 A. 2d 800, cited in Statsky, Introduction to Paralegalism [1974], at pp. 154-

156.)

%.* From the foregoing, it can be said that a person engaged in a lawful calling which may involve

4nowledge of the law0 is not engaged in the practice of law provided that$

a0 The legal 6uestion is subordinate and incidental to a maor non=legal problem2

b0 The services performed are not customarily reserved to members of the bar2

c0 7o separate fee is charged for the legal advice or information.

#ll these must be considered in relation to the wor4 for any particular client as a whole.


21/54

%.'. 8f the person involved is both lawyer and non=lawyer, the 5ode of Professional !esponsibility

succinctly states the rule of conduct$

A!ule %&.+* = # lawyer who is engaged in another profession or occupation concurrently with the practice of

law shall ma4e clear to his client whether he is acting as a lawyer or in another capacity.A

%.%+. 8n the present case, the >egal 5linic appears to render wedding services See #nnex A#A,

Petition0. Services on routine, straightforward marriages, li4e securing a marriage license, and ma4ing

arrangements with a priest or a udge, may not constitute practice of law. owever, if the problem is

as complicated as that described in A!x for >egal ProblemsA on the Sharon 5uneta=

"abby 5oncepcion=!ichard "omeG case, then what may be involved is actually the practice of law. 8f

a non=lawyer, such as the >egal 5linic, renders such services, then it is engaged in the unauthoriGed

practice of law.

%.%%. The >egal 5linic also appears to give information on divorce, absence, annulment of marriage

and visas See #nnexes A#A and ABA, Petition0. Purely giving informational materials may not

constitute practice of law. The business is similar to that of a boo4store where the customer buys

materials on the subect and determines by himself what courses of action to ta4e.

8t is not entirely improbable, however, that aside from purely giving information, the >egal 5linic1s

paralegals may apply the law to the particular problem of the client, and give legal advice. Such would

constitute unauthoriGed practice of law.

A8t cannot be claimed that the publication of a legal text which purports to say what the law is amounts to legal

practice. #nd the mere fact that the principles or rules stated in the text may be accepted by a particular reader

as a solution to his problem does not affect this. x x x #pparently it is urged that the conoining of these two,

that is, the text and the forms, with advice as to how the forms should be filled out, constitutes the unlawful

practice of law. But that is the situation with many approved and accepted texts. Dacey1s boo4 is sold to the

public at large. There is no personal contact or relationship with a particular individual. 7or does there exist

that relation of confidence and trust so necessary to the status of attorney and client. T8S 8S T

SS7T8#> 3F >"#> P!#5T85 = T !P!S7T#T837 #7D #D@8S87" 3F # P#!T85>#! P!S37

87 # P#!T85>#! S8T#T837. #t most the boo4 assumes to offer general advice on common problems, and

does not purport to give personal advice on a specific problem peculiar to a designated or readily identified

person. Similarly the defendant1s publication does not purport to give personal advice on a specific problem

peculiar, to a designated or readily identified person in a particular situation = in the publication and sale of the

4its, such publication and sale did not constitute the unlawful practice of law x x x. There being no legal


22/54

impediment under the statute to the sale of the 4it, there was no proper basis for the inunction against

defendant maintaining an office for the purpose of selling to persons see4ing a divorce, separation, annulment

or separation agreement any printed material or writings relating to matrimonial law or the prohibition in the

memorandum of modification of the udgment against defendant having an interest in any publishing house

publishing his manuscript on divorce and against his having any personal contact with any prospective

purchaser. The record does fully support, however, the finding that for the charge of K)& or K%++ for the 4it, the

defendant gave legal advice in the course of personal contacts concerning particular problems which might

arise in the preparation and presentation of the purchaser1s asserted matrimonial cause of action or pursuit of

other legal remedies and assistance in the preparation of necessary documents The inunction therefore

sought to0 enoin conduct constituting the practice of law, particularly with reference to the giving of advice and

counsel by the defendant, relating to specific problems of particular individuals in connection with a divorce,

separation, annulment of separation agreement sought and should be affirmed.A State v. Hinder, /(*, 7LS :d

:)+ E%')/, cited in Stats4y, supra at p. %+%.0

%.%:. !espondent, of course, states that its services are Astrictly non=diagnostic, non=advisory.A 8t is

not controverted, however, that if the services Jinvolve giving legal advice orcounselling,A such would

constitute practice of law 5omment, par. -.:0. 8t is in this light that F8D# submits that a factual in6uiry

may be necessary for the udicious disposition of this case.

x x x

:.%+. #nnex A#A may be ethically obectionable in that it can give the impression or perpetuate the

wrong notion0 that there is a secret marriage. Hith all the solemnities, formalities and other re6uisites

of marriages See #rticles :, et se6., Family 5ode0, no Philippine marriage can be secret.

:.%%. #nnex ABA may li4ewise be ethically obectionable. The second paragraph thereof which is not

necessarily related to the first paragraph0 fails to state the limitation that only Aparalegal servicesA or

Alegal support servicesA, and not legal services, are available.A E%%

# prefatory discussion on the meaning of the phrase Apractice of lawA becomes exigent for a proper

determination of the issues raised by the petition at bar. 3n this score, we note that the clause

Apractice of lawA has long been the subect of udicial construction and interpretation. The courts have

laid down general principles and doctrines explaining the meaning and scope of the term, some of

which we now ta4e into account.

Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which re6uires the application of law, legal

procedures, 4nowledge, training and experience. To engage in the practice of law is to perform those


23/54

acts which are characteristic of the profession. "enerally, to practice law is to give advice or render

any 4ind of service that involves legal 4nowledge or s4ill. E%:

The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases in court. 8t includes legal advice and counsel,

and the preparation of legal instruments and contracts by which legal rights are secured, although

such matter may or may not be pending in a court. E%/

8n the practice of his profession, a licensed attorney at law generally engages in three principal types

of professional activity$ legal advice and instructions to clients to inform them of their rights and

obligations, preparation for clients of documents re6uiring 4nowledge of legal principles not

possessed by ordinary layman, and appearance for clients before public tribunals which possess

power and authority to determine rights of life, liberty, and property according to law, in order to assist

in proper interpretation and enforcement of law.E%(

Hhen a person participates in a trial and advertises himself as a lawyer, he is in the practice of law.

E%&One who confers with clients, advises them as to their legal rights and then takes the

business to an attorney and asks the latter to look after the case in court, is also

practicing law.E%-Giving advice for compensation regarding the legal status and rights of

another and the conduct with respect thereto constitutes a practice of law.E%)One who

renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of a statute, and receives pay for it,

is, to that extent, practicing law.E%*

8n the recent case of 5ayetano vs. 9onsod. E%'after citing the doctrines in several cases, we

laid down the test to determine whether certain acts constitute "practice of law," thus:

Blac4 defines Apractice of lawA as$

AThe rendition of services re6uiring the 4nowledge and the application of legal principles and techni6ue to

serve the interest of 1 another with his consent. 8t is not limited to appearing in court, or advising and assisting

in the conduct of litigation, but embraces the preparation of pleadings, and other papers incident to .actions

and special proceedings, conveyancing, the preparation of legal instruments of all 4inds, and the giving of all

legal advice to clients. 8t embraces all advice to clients and all actions ta4en for them in matters connected with

the law.A

The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases in court. >and Title #bstract and Trust 5o.

v. Dwor4en,129 Ohio St. 23, 193 N.E. 650). A person is also considered to be in the

practice of law when he:
http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn12http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn13http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn14http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn15http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn16http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn17http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn18http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn19http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn12http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn13http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn14http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn15http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn16http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn17http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn18http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/31396#_ftn19


24/54

Ax x x for valuable consideration engages in the business of advising persons, firms, associations or

corporations as to their rights under the law, or appears in a representative capacity as an advocate in

proceedings, pending or prospective, before any court, commissioner, referee, board, body, committee, or

commission constituted by law or authoriGed to settle controversies and there, in such representative capacity,

performs any act or acts for the purpose of obtaining or defending the rights of their clients under the law.

3therwise stated, one who, in a representative capacity, engages in the business of advising clients as to their

rights under the law, or while so engaged performs any act or acts either in court or outside of court for that

purpose, is engaged in the practice of law. State ex. rel.9c4ittric4 v. 5.S. Dudley and 5o., %+: S.H. :d *'&,

/(+ 9o. *&:0.A

This 5ourt, in the case of Philippine >awyers #ssociation v. #grava %+& Phil. %)/, %)-=%))0, stated$

AThe practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court2 it embraces the preparation of

pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, the management of such actions and

proceedings on behalf of clients before udges and courts, and in addition, conveying. 8n general, all advice to

clients, and all action ta4en for them in matters connected with the law incorporation services, assessment and

condemnation services contemplating an appearance before a udicial body, the foreclosure of a mortgage,

enforcement of a creditor1s claim in ban4ruptcy and insolvency proceedings, and conducting proceedings in

attachment, and in matters of estate and guardianship have been held to constitute law practice, as do the

preparation and drafting of legal instruments, where the wor4 done involves the determination by the trained

legal mind of the legal effect of facts and conditions. 5 Am. Jr. p. 262, 263).

APractice of law under modern conditions consists in no small part of wor4 performed outside of any court and

having no immediate relation to proceedings in court. 8t embraces conveyancing, the giving of legal advice on a

large variety of subects, and the preparation and execution of legal instruments covering an extensive field of

business and trust relations and other affairs. #lthough these transactions may have no direct connection with

court proceedings, they are always subect to become involved in litigation. They re6uire in many aspects a

high degree of legal s4ill, a wide experience with men and affairs, and great capacity for adaptation to difficult

and complex situations. These customary functions of an attorney or counselor at law bear an intimate relation

to the administration of ustice by the courts. 7o valid distinction, so far as concerns the 6uestion set forth in

the order, can be drawn between that part of the wor4 of the lawyer which involves appearance in court and

that part which involves advice and drafting of instruments in his office. 8t is of importance to the welfare of the

public that these manifold customary functions be performed by persons possessed of ade6uate learning and

s4ill, of sound moral character, and acting at all times under the heavy trust obligations to clients which rests


25/54

upon all attorneys. 9oran, 5omments on the !ules of 5ourt, @ol. / E%')/ ed., pp. --&=---, citing 8n !e

3pinion of the ;ustices E9ass., %'( 7.. /%/, 6uoted in !hode 8s. Bar #ssoc. v. #utomobile Service #ssoc.

E!.8. %)' #. %/', %((0.A

The practice of law, therefore, covers a wide range of activities in and out of court. #pplying the

aforementioned criteria to the case at bar, we agree with the perceptive findings and observations of

the aforestated bar associations that the activities of respondent, as advertised, constitute Apractice of

law.A

The contention of respondent that it merely offers legal support services can neither be seriously

considered nor sustained. Said proposition is belied by respondent1s own description of the services it

has been offering, to wit$

A>egal support services basically consist of giving ready information by trained paralegals to laymen

and lawyers, which are strictly non=diagnostic, non=advisory, through the extensive use of computers

and modern information technology in the gathering, processing, storage, transmission and

reproduction of information and, communication, such as computeriGed, legal research2 encoding and

reproduction of. documents and pleadings prepared by laymen or lawyers2 document search2

evidence gathering2 locating parties or witnesses to a case2 fact finding investigations2 and assistance

to laymen in need of basic institutional services from government or non=government agencies, li4e

birth, marriage, property, or business registrations2 educational or employment records or

certifications, obtaining documentation li4e clearances, passports, local or foreign visas2 giving

information about laws of other countries that they may find useful, li4e foreign divorce, marriage or

adoption laws that they can avail of preparatory to emigration to that foreign country, and other

matters that do not involve representation of clients in court2 designing and installing computer

systems, programs, or software for the efficient management of law offices, corporate legal

departments, courts, and other entities engaged in dispensing or administering legal services.A E:+

Hhile some of the services being offered by respondent corporation merely involve mechanical and

technical 4now=how, such as the installation of computer systems and programs for the efficient

management of law offices, or the computeriGation of research aids and materials, these will not

suffice to ustify an exception to the general rule.

Hhat is palpably clear is that respondent corporation gives out legal information to laymen and

lawyers. 8ts contention that such function is non=advisory and non=diagnostic is more apparent than

real. 8n providing information, for example, about foreign laws on marriage, divorce and adoption, it


26/54

strains the credulity of this 5ourt that all that respondent corporation will simply do is loo4 for the law,

furnish a copy thereof to the client, and stop there as if it were merely a boo4store. Hith its attorneys

and so called paralegals, it will necessarily have to explain to the client the intricacies of the law and

advise him or her on the proper course of action to be ta4en as may be provided for by said law. That

is what its advertisements represent and for which services it will conse6uently charge and be paid.

That activity falls s6uarely within the urisprudential definition of Apractice of law.A Such a conclusion

will not be altered by the fact that respondent corporation does not represent clients in court since law

practice, as the weight of authority holds, is not limited merely to court appearances but extends to

legal research, giving legal advice, contract drafting, and so forth.

The aforesaid conclusion is further strengthened by an article published in theJanuary 13,

1991 issue of the Starweek /The Sunday Magazine of the Philippine Star, entitled "Rx

for Legal Problems," where an insight into the structure, main purpose and operations

of respondent corporation was given by its own "proprietor," Atty. Rogelio P. Nogales:

This is the 4ind of business that is transacted everyday at The >egal 5linic, with offices on the

seventh floor of theVictoria Building along U.N. Avenue in Manila. No matter what the

client's problem, and even if it is as complicated as the Cuneta-Concepcion domestic

situation, Atty. Nogales and his staff of lawyers, who, like doctors, are "specialists" in

various fields, can take care of it. The Legal Clinic, Inc. has specialists in taxation and

criminal law, medico-legal problems, labor, litigation and family law. These specialists

are backed up by a battery of paralegals, counsellors and attorneys.

#tty. 7ogales set up The >egal 5linic in %'*(. 8nspired by the trend in the medical field toward

specialiGation, it caters to clients who cannot afford the services of the big law firms.

The >egal 5linic has regular and wal4=in clients. AHhen they come, we start by analyGing the

problem. That1s what doctors do also. They as4 you how you contracted what1s bothering you, they

ta4e your temperature, they observe you for the symptoms, and so on. That1s how we operate, too.

#nd once the problem has been categoriGed, then it1s referred to one of our specialists.A

There are cases which do not, in medical terms, re6uire surgery or, follow=up treatment. These The

>egal 5linic disposes of in a matter of minutes. AThings li4e preparing a simple deed of sale or an

affidavit of loss can be ta4en care of by our staff or, if this were a hospital, the residents or the interns.

He can ta4e care of these matters on a while you wait basis. #gain, 4ung baga sa ospital, out=

patient, hindi 4ailangang ma=confine. 8t1s ust li4e a common cold or diarrhea,A explains #tty. 7ogales.


27/54

Those cases which re6uire more extensive AtreatmentA are dealt with accordingly. A8f you had a rich

relative who died and named you her sole heir, and you stand to inherit millions of pesos of property,

we would refer you to a specialist in taxation. There would be real estate taxes and arrears which

would need to be put in order, and your relative is even taxed by the state for the right to transfer her

property, and only a specialist in taxation would be properly trained to deal with that problem. 7ow, if

there were other heirs contesting your rich relative1s will, then you would need a litigator, who 4nows

how to arrange the problem for presentation in court, and gather evidence to support the case.A E:%

That fact that the corporation employs paralegals to carry Mout its services is not controlling. Hhat is

important is that it is engaged in the practice of law by virtue of the nature of the services it renders

which thereby brings it within the ambit of the statutory prohibitions against the advertisements which

it has caused to be published and are now assailed in this proceeding.

Further, as correctly and appropriately pointed out by the .P. H8>358, said reported facts, sufficiently

establish that the main purpose of respondent is to serve as a one=stop=shop of sorts for various legal

problems wherein a client may=avail of legal services from simple documentation to complex litigation

and corporate underta4ings. 9ost of these services are undoubtedly beyond the domain of

paralegals, but rather, are exclusive functions of lawyers engaged in the practice of law.E::

8t should be noted that in our urisdiction the services being offered by private respondent which

constitute practice of law cannot be performed by paralegals. 3nly a person duly admit

practice of law cases

Documents