Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
5/13/2011
ar
es
an
bl
h
2
es
o
bl
an
h
an
Ba
R
o
H
Hadjula
vs. Madianda, A.C. No. 6711; July 3,
2007
Held: Complainant went to respondent, a lawyer
who incidentally was also then a friend, to bare
what she considered personal secrets
and sensitive
sec
documents for the purpose off obtaining
legal
obtain
advice and assistance. The moment
momen the
complainant approached
hed the then
th receptive
respondent to seek legall advice,
advi a variable lawyerclient relationship evolved
evolv d between the two. Such
relationship imposes
poses upon
up the lawyer certain
restrictions circumscribed
by the ethics of the
ircumsc
profession.
Ba
The Supreme
eme Court
Cour held that the Respondents act
ng advant
of taking
advantage of his office as the Registry of
Deeds and em
employing his knowledge of the rules
governing land registration for the benefit of his
relatives has clearly demonstrated his unfitnesss
not only to perform the functions of a civil servant
rvant
but also to retain his membership in the bar.
bl
es
an
ar
R
o
bl
es
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
Ba
r
10
The Sup
Supreme Court, however, held that the
seri
seriousness of respondents offense
notwithstanding, there is room for compassion,
absent compelling evidence that respondent acted
with ill will. At the end of the day it appears that
respondent was actuated by the urge to retaliate
at, in the process of
without perhaps realizing that,
giving vent to a negative sentiment,
ntiment, she was
entiality.
violating rule of confidentiality.
bl
11
Ba
es
h
an
o
bl
an
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
an
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
12
` Competence,
Diligence
Fidelity to Clients Cause
and
Ba
r
16
Ba
r
`
es
an
bl
h
14
17
Ba
es
o
bl
an
h
an
R
o
Ba
bl
es
h
an
R
o
bl
es
13
15
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
18
Ba
r
22
an
Ba
es
an
bl
h
20
23
es
o
bl
an
h
an
Ba
R
o
Bar
Barbuco
vs. Beltran
A.C. No. 5092; August 11, 2004
The fact that respondent was involved in
a vehicular accident and suffered physical
injuries as a result thereof cannot serve
to excuse him from filing his
hi pleadings on
time considering that he
e was a member of
a law firm composed off not just
one
j
lawyer. X x respondent
could have asked
ndent co
any of his partners in the law office to file
the Appellants Brie
Brief for
fo him or, at least,
to file a Motion
on for Extension of Time to
file the said
pleading.
d plead
bl
es
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
19
21
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
24
Ba
r
28
bl
26
29
Ba
o
bl
an
es
h
an
R
o
es
an
Ba
Ba
r
bl
es
an
R
o
es
25
27
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
30
Ba
r
34
bl
32
35
es
o
bl
an
h
an
Ba
R
o
es
an
Ba
Furthe
Furthermore,
by his own information, the Labor
Arbiter
was entertaining doubts on the true
A
identity of those who executed the quitclaims.
The High Court said that as an officer of the
court, a lawyer must assist in the
administration of justice, and
any conduct on
nd a
his part that tends to obstruct,
or
truct, perverts
pe
impedes the administration
tration of justice
constitutes misconduct.
Respondent lawyer
uct. Res
was found guilty of n
negligence
and gross
lig
misconduct was
from the practice
as suspended
suspe
of Law for 6 months.
months
bl
es
` Fernandez
z
vs. Cabrera
C
II
A.C. No.
o. 5623;
5623 December 11,
3
2003
Acceptance
of money from a
epta
client establishes an attorneyclient relationship and gives rise
to the duty of fidelity to the
clients cause. x x
Ba
r
an
R
o
bl
es
31
33
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
36
`
`
Ba
r
Court's Ruling:
Rule 15.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
provides:
A lawyer shall not represent conflicting
interests except by written consent of all
concerned given after a full disclosure of the
facts.
A lawyer may not, without being guilty of
professional misconduct, act as counsel for a person
whose interest conflicts with that of his present or
former client. The test is whether, on behalf of one client,
it is the lawyer's duty to contest for that which his duty to
another client requires him to oppose or when the
possibility of such situation will develop. The rule covers
not only cases in which confidential communications
have been confided, but also those in which no
confidence has been bestowed or will be used. In
addition, the rule holds even if the inconsistency is
remote or merely probable or the lawyer has acted in
good faith and with no intention to represent conflicting
interests.
40
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
37
38
41
bl
an
es
h
an
Ba
R
o
an
`
`
The termination
term
of attorney-client relation provides no
justification for a lawyer to represent an interest adverse
jjustific
to or in conflict with that of the former client. The
client's
confidence once reposed should not be divested
lie
by mere expiration of professional employment. Even
after the severance of the relation, a lawyer should not
do anything which will injuriously affect his former
client in any matter in which he previously represented
him nor should he disclose or use any of the client's
confidences acquired in the previous relation.
an
bl
es
Conflict of Interests
Inter
Rule 15.03
5.03 A lawyer shall
repres
not represent
conflicting
rest except by written
interests
consent of all concerned
re
given after a full disclosure
of the facts.
39
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
42
43
46
Ba
r
an
Ba
es
an
bl
44
47
Ba
es
h
an
bl
an
R
o
Termination
r
of the attorney-client relationship
precludes an attorney from representing a new
client whose interest is adverse to his former
client.
Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of the Code of Professional
all n
Responsibility- A lawyer shall
not represent
conflicting interests except byy wri
written consent
er a full
ful disclosure of
of all concerned given after
facts.
Profe
Canon 21 of the Code off Professional
er shall preserve the
Responsibility- A law
lawyer
d secre
confidences and
secrets of his client even after
the attorney-- client p
privilege is terminated.
bl
es
ion again
The prohibition
against representing conflicting
interests is founde
founded on principles of public
nd good taste.
ta
policy and
ooves lawyers
law
It behooves
not only to keep inviolate the
s confid
clients
confidence, but also to avoid the
rance of treachery and double dealing for
appearance
only then can litigants be encouraged to entrust
their secrets to their lawyers, which is of
paramount importance in the administration
n of
justice.
R
o
bl
es
Ba
r
45
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
48
Ba
r
52
Ba
r
`
bl
es
an
The representation
on of conflicting
c
interests made
nd with honest intention on the
in good faith and
awyer does
do not make the prohibition
part of the lawyer
inoperative.
ve.
It must
noted that the proscription against
ust be note
representation
sentatio of conflicting interests finds
application
ation where the conflicting interests arise
with respect to the same general matter however
slight the adverse interest may be. It applies
even if the conflict pertains to the lawyers
private activity or in the performance of a
function in a non-professional capacity. In the
process of determining whether there is a
conflict of interest, an important criterion
iterion is
probability, not certainty, of conflict.
flict.
bl
50
53
r
Ba
es
o
bl
Withdrawal of Services
Canon 22. A lawyer shall
withdraw his
ll withd
services only for good cause and
upon
a
notice appropriate in
n the circumstances.
cir
h
an
h
an
R
o
es
an
Ba
R
o
bl
es
49
51
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
54
`
`
Ba
r
Facts:
Complainant Wilfredo M. Catu is a co-owner of a lot and
the building erected thereon located at 959 San Andres
Street, Malate, Manila. His mother and brother, Regina
Catu and Antonio Catu, contested the possession of
Elizabeth C. Diaz-Catu and Antonio Pastor of one of the
units in the building. The latter ignored demands for
them to vacate the premises. Thus, a complaint was
initiated against them in the Lupong Tagapamayapa of
Barangay 723, Zone 79 of the 5th District of Manila
where the parties reside.
Respondent, as punong barangay of Barangay 723,
summoned the parties to conciliation meetings. When
the parties failed to arrive at an amicable settlement,
respondent issued a certification for the filing of the
appropriate action in court.
58
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
55
Ba
an
56
59
Ba
Ruling:
While certain local elective officials (like
ike govern
governors,
mayors, provincial board memberss and councilors)
are
coun
expressly subjected to a total or partial
to
artial proscription
pro
practice their profession or engage in an
any occupation, no
such interdiction is made on
punong barangay and
n the puno
the members of the sangguniang
barangay. Expressio
uniang b
unius est exclusio alterius.
Since they are excluded from
us. Sinc
any prohibition, the presumption
is that they are allowed
presump
to practice their profession.
rofession. And this stands to reason
because they are not mandated
to serve full time. In fact,
man
the sangguniang
barangay is supposed to hold regular
niang baran
sessions only
nly twice a month.
Accordingly, as p
punong barangay, respondent was not
forbidden to practice his profession. However, he
should have procured prior permission or
authorization from the head of his Department,
as required by civil service regulations.
an
o
bl
es
h
an
R
o
Therea
Thereafter,
Regina and Antonio filed a complaint for
ejectm
ejectment against Elizabeth and Antonio Pastor in the
Me
Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila, Branch 11.
Respondent entered his appearance as counsel for the
defendants in that case. In the course thereof, he
prepared and signed pleadings including the answer with
counterclaim, pre-trial brief, position paper and notice of
appeal.
Because of this, complainant filed
d the instant
ins
administrative complaint with the IBP, claiming
that
c
respondent committed an act off impr
impropriety as a lawyer
and as a public officer when
stood as counsel for the
hen he sto
defendants despite the factt that h
he presided over the
conciliation proceedings
between
the litigants as punong
ngs b
w
barangay.
Issue: Whether
er or not R
Respondent violated the Code of
Professional Resp
Responsibility when he acted as counsel for
Responsib
Elizabeth and Anto
Antonio
on Pastor.
le
bl
es
an
57
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
60
10
`
`
61
64
ar
r
Ba
es
an
bl
62
65
Ba
es
h
an
o
bl
an
R
o
bl
es
an
R
o
bl
es
Ba
r
63
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
66
11
Ba
r
70
Ba
r
C
Cojuangco,
Jr. vs. Palma
A
A.C. 2474 ; June 30, 2005
For the purpose of determining
whether a person is legally
free
leg
to
nd marriage,
marr
contract a second
a
tion that the first
judicial declaration
marriage was
as null
nu and void ab
initio is essential.
ssentia
bl
es
an
Ba
68
71
Ba
es
h
an
bl
an
R
o
bl
es
an
R
o
bl
es
67
69
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
72
12
Ba
r
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
73
Spou
Spouses
Olbes vs. Deciembre
A.C.
A.C No. 5365; April 27, 2005
A high standard of excellence and ethics
is expected and required of members of
the bar. Such conduct of nobility and
uprightness should remain with them,
r in their private
whether in their public or
lives. As officers of the courts and
keepers of the publics
ics faith, they are
burdened with the
e highest
highes degree of
social responsibility
and are thus
y an
mandated to behave
hav at all times in a
manner consistent
sistent with truth and honor.
bl
74
77
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
an
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
an
75
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
78
13
Ba
r
Ba
es
an
bl
h
80
83
Ba
es
h
an
o
bl
an
R
o
Further
Furthermore,
the Court noted that the affidavit of
he records custodian of the hospital where the
the
child was born stated that it was complainants
wife who supplied the information on the childs
paternity. The Court also observed that the
signature of complainant on her marriage
hat appearing
app
certificate was the same as that
on the
birth certificate.
ected respondents
resp
The Supreme Court rejected
n constitute gross
assertion that his acts did not
ct beca
immoral conduct
because they were supposedly
ndalous circumstances.
not under scandalous
bl
es
an
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
79
81
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
84
14
Ba
r
88
bl
es
Ba
es
an
bl
h
86
89
Ba
o
bl
Hernandez vs. Go
A.C. No. 1526; January 31,, 2005
(Respondents) acts off acquiring
for
acquir
himself complainants
to
ts lots entrusted
e
him are, by any standard,
ndard, acts
constituting gross
misconduct, a
s misc
grievous wrong,
act, a
ng, a forbidden
for
dereliction in duty, willful in character,
and implies
intent and not
ies a wrongful
wro
mere error
judgment. Such conduct
ror in ju
on the part
art of the respondent degrades
not only himself but also the name and
honor of the legal profession. x x
an
es
h
an
C
R
o
an
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
85
87
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
90
15
Ba
r
94
bl
es
an
92
95
r
Ba
es
bl
h
an
R
o
Shulz vs.
v Flores
A.C. No.
N 4219; December 8, 2003
Where
a client gives money to his lawyer for a specific
Wh
purpose, such as to file an action, appeal an adverse
judgment, consummate a settlement, or pay the
purchase price of a parcel of land, the lawyer should,
upon a failure to take such step and spend the money
for it, immediately return the money to his client. The
fact that a lawyer has a lien for his attorneys fees on the
money in his hands collected for his client does not
relieve him from the obligation to make a prompt
ntitl to unilaterally
accounting. Neither is a lawyer entitled
or himse
appropriate his clients money for
himself by the mere
atto
fact alone that the client owes him attorneys
fees.
The failure of an attorney to return tthe clients money
o the p
presu
upon demand gives rise to
presumption that he has
is own us
misappropriated it for his
use to the prejudice and
ed in him by the client. It is
violation of the trust reposed
on of the
he general
g
not only gross violation
morality as well
hics;; it
i also impairs public
as of professional ethics;
egal
g p
pro
confidence in the legal
profession and deserves
punishment. In short,, x x the unjustified withholding
ging
g
g to h
of money belonging
his client, as in this case,
mpositio
mp
warrants the imposition
of disciplinary action.
ar
an
Respondent lawyers
ers failure
failu to turn over the
plainti despite demand gives
money to the plaintiff
presump
rise to the presumption
that he had
ted the money
m
converted
for his personal use and
it. This, is a gross violation of general
benefit.
ity as well as of professional ethics,
morality
impairing public confidence in the legal
profession. More specifically, it renders
respondent lawyer liable not only for
violating the Code of Professional
pt, as
Responsibility but also for contempt,
stated in Section 25, Rule 138 off the Rules
Rule of
Court:
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
91
93
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
96
16
Ba
r
an
bl
es
Candor, Fairness
rness and Respect to Court,
es and Opposing
O
Colleagues
Party
n 10 - A llawyer owes candor,
Canon
ess and good faith to the court.
fairness
10 1 - A lawyer shall not do any
Rule 10.1
o
falsehood, nor consent to the doing of
r
any in court; nor shall he mislead or
y
allow the court to be misled by any
artifice.
Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in
ral or
unlawful, dishonest, immoral
deceitful conduct.
Ba
bl
e
an
98
10
1
Ba
o
bl
an
es
h
an
R
o
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
97
99
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
10
2
17
In Re Almacen
31 SCRA 562 [1970]
x x [D]isciplinary proceedings x x are sui
generis. Neither purely civil nor purely
criminal, this proceeding is not and does not
involve a trial of an action or a suit, but is
rather an investigation by the Court into the
conduct of its officers. Not being intended to
inflict punishment, it is in no sense a criminal
prosecution. Accordingly, there is neither a
plaintiff nor a prosecutor therein. It may be
initiated by the Court motu proprio. Public
interest is its primary objective, and the real
question for determination is whether or not the
attorney is still a fit person to be allowed the
privileges as such. x x
Ba
r
Ba
r
an
R
o
bl
es
10
3
Can
Canon
8 A lawyer shall conduct himself
with courtesy, fairness, and candor toward
his professional colleagues, and shall avoid
harassing tactics against opposing counsel.
Rule 8.01 A lawyer shall not, in his
e language
langu
professional dealings, use
which
otherwi
is abusive, offensive or otherwise
improper.
bl
10
4
10
7
Ba
le
s
h
an
`
`
an
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
10
5
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
10
8
18
`
`
Ba
r
Ruling:
While a lawyer is entitled to present his case
with vigor and courage, such enthusiasm does not justify
the use of offensive and abusive language. Language
abounds with countless possibilities for one to be emphatic
but respectful, convincing but not derogatory, illuminating
but not offensive.
On many occasions, the Supreme Court has reminded
members of the Bar to abstain from all offensive
personality and top advance no fact prejudicial to the
honor or reputation of a party or witness, unless required
by the justice of the cause with which he is charged. In
keeping with the dignity of the legal profession, a lawyer's
language even in his pleadings must be dignified.
It is of no consequence that the allegedly malicious
statements of respondent were made not before a court but
before the BSP.
Utterances, petitions and motions in the course of
judicial proceedings have consistently been considered as
ayy
absolutely privileged, however false or malicious they may
be, but only for so long as they as pertinent and relevant to
the subject inquiry.
Ba
r
Ba
an
bl
11
0
11
3
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
R
o
Re : L
Letter dated February 21, 2005 of Atty. Noel
S. Sorreda (A.M. No. 05 3 04- SC ; July 22,
2005)
Mr. Chief Justice, I believe the manner the Court
comported itself in the aforesaid case is totally
execrable and atrocious, entirely unworthy of
the majesty and office of the highest tribunal of
m
the land. It is the action not off men
of reason or
e of law
those who believe in the rule
law, but rather of
m
bullies and tyrants from whom might
is right .
gh Court, for
g
f shoving
I say, shame on the High
r s throat a ruling which,
down a hapless suitor
coul not justify.
from all appearances, it could
no only unjust; that is
Mr. Chief Justice, th
that is not
ce, to d
craven cowardice,
deal with an adversary like
somethin I would have expected
that . It is not something
preme judges
ju
from the supreme
of the land.
bl
es
Canon 11 - A lawye
lawyer shall observe and
resp
maintain the respect
due to the courts
o judicial officers and should insist
and to
milar conduct
c
on similar
by others.
Rule 11
11.0303 A lawyer shall refrain from
scandalous, offensive and menacing
ts.
language or behavior before the courts.
Rule 11.04- Lawyers shall not attribute
bute to
y the
a judge motives not supported by
ty to the
record or having no materiality
case.
an
R
o
bl
es
10
9
an
Canon 13
Rule 13.02: A lawyer shall not make
public statements in the media
regarding a pending case tending to
arouse public opinion for and against
a party.
11
1
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
11
4
19
Ba
r
Supreme Court :
Unfounded accusations or allegations
or words tending to embarrass the
court or to bring it into disrepute have
no place in a pleading. Their
employment serves no useful purpose.
On the contrary, they constitute direct
contempt of court or contempt in facie
curiae and a violation of the lawyers
oath and a transgression of the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
Ba
r
le
an
11
6
11
9
es
h
an
Ba
R
o
Ba
bl
es
an
R
o
bl
es
11
5
an
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
12
0
20
Ba
r
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
12
1
an
Ba
es
an
bl
h
12
2
12
5
Ba
es
h
an
an
o
bl
R
o
bl
es
12
3
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
12
6
21
Ba
r
Siy vs NLRC
G.R. No. 158971; August 25, 2005
A finding of contempt on the part of a lawyer does not
preclude the imposition of disciplinary sanctions
against him for his contravention of the ethics of
legal profession.
. . . The power to punish for contempt and the power
to disbar are separate and distinct, and that the
exercise of one does not exclude the exercise of the
other. A contempt proceeding for misbehavior in
court is designed to vindicate the authority of the
court ; on the other hand , the object of a disciplinary
proceeding is to deal with the fitness of the courts
officer to continue in that office, to preserve and
protect the court and the public from the official
ministrations of persons unfit or unworthy to hold
such office
13
0
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
12
7
bl
12
8
13
1
es
an
o
bl
h
an
Ba
R
o
es
an
Ba
uld be em
It should
emphasized that a finding of
n the c
guilt in
criminal case will not
il result in a finding of liability in
necessarily
the administrative case. Conversely,
arily
respondents acquittal does not necessarily
exculpate him administratively.
bl
es
an
12
9
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
13
2
22
Ba
r
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
13
3
Privile
Privileged
Communication
Secti
Section 24(b), Rule 130, Rules of Court:
Sec. 24. Disqualification by reason of
privileged communication. The following
persons cannot testify as to matters learned in
confidence in the following cases:
(b) An attorney cannot, without the consent of
y communication
his client, be examined as to any
made by the client to him, or his ad
advice given
thereon in the course of, or
r with a view to,
professional employment,
nt, can an attorney's
secretary, stenographer,
clerk be examined,
her, or cl
without the consent off the cli
client and his
employer, concerning
n any
ny
y ffact the knowledge of
which has been acquired
in
quir
i such capacity;
bl
13
4
13
7
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
an
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
an
Testifying for
r the clie
client
law
Rule 12.08 A lawyer
shall avoid
ng in beh
testifying
behalf of his client, except:
a) on formal matters, such as the
ng, authentication
au
mailing,
or custody of an
instrument and the like;
b) on substantial matters, in cases where
ere
his testimony is essential to the ends of
ring
justice, in which event he must, during
ca
his testimony, entrust the trial of the case
to another counsel.
Canon 17 - A law
lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of
his client and he shall be mindful of the trust and
confidence reposed in him.
13
5
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
13
8
23
Ba
r
14
2
bl
es
an
Ba
R
Regala
vs. Sandiganbayan
G.R. Nos. 105938 & 108113; Sept. 20, 1996
bl
es
an
14
3
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
Exceptions:
an
R
o
14
0
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
13
9
14
1
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
14
4
24
Ba
r
14
8
Ba
r
bl
14
6
14
9
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
an
Attorneys Fees
`
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
an
R
o
bl
es
14
5
14
7
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
15
0
25
Ba
r
The
h practice of law is not limited to the conduct
of the cases in court. It 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 court.
ofes
The standards of the legal profession
condemn
tal
the lawyers advertisement off his talents.
A
lating
g tthe ethics of his
lawyer cannot, without violating
lents or skills as in a
profession, advertise his talents
merchan advertising his
manner similar to a merchant
n agai
g
goods. The proscription
against
advertising legal
tio off le
services or solicitation
legal business rests on
postu
the fundamentall postulate
that the practice of
ion.
law is a profession.
bl
15
2
15
5
Ba
o
bl
es
h
an
an
(c)
(b)
(a)
R
o
es
an
Ba
bl
es
an
Respondent lawyers
awyer admission that
d the le
he divided
legal fees with two
a referral fee did not
other people as
se him from liability. Rule 9.02
release
of the C
Code of Professional
yer
Responsibility provides that a lawyer
ide
shall not divide or stipulate to divide
rsons
a fee for legal services with persons
w except in
not licensed to practice law
certain cases, to wit:
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
15
1
15
3
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
15
6
26
IBP Dues
Letter of Atty. Cecilio Y. Arevalo, Jr.,
Requesting Exemption from Payment of
IBP Dues
B.M. No. 1370; May 9, 2005
x x Payment of dues is a necessary
consequence of membership in the IBP, of
which no one is exempt. This means that
the compulsory nature of payment of dues
subsists for as long as ones membership in
the IBP remains regardless of the lack of
practice of, or the type of practice, the
member is engaged in.
Ba
r
bl
es
an
In re Atty. Marcial
al Edillon
Edil
Augus 3, 1978
A.C. No. 1928; August
er the p
x x Whether
practice of law is a property
n the sens
right, in
sense of its being one that entitles
older of a license to practice a profession,
the holder
her pause to consider at length, as
we do not here
it [is] clear that under the police power of the
State, and under the necessary powers granted
to the Court to perpetuate its existence, the
respondents right to practice law before the
he
courts of this country should be and is a matter
subject to regulation and inquiry. And,, if the
power to impose the fee as a regulatory
measure is recognized, then a penalty
designed
y desig
to enforce its payments, which penalty
may be
nalty
y ma
avoided altogether by payment,
void as
t, is not vo
unreasonable or arbitrary.
es
an
bl
15
8
16
1
es
o
bl
an
h
an
Ba
R
o
Ba
Ba
r
R
o
bl
es
15
7
15
9
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
16
2
27
Ba
r
bl
16
4
16
7
Ba
o
bl
an
es
h
an
C
R
o
es
an
Ba
Ba
r
16
6
bl
es
an
R
o
es
16
3
16
5
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
16
8
28
Ba
r
Ba
R
o
bl
es
16
9
es
an
bl
bl
es
an
Ba
o
bl
es
an
Ba
17
0
an
www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
29