Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence: Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence: Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence: Home Law Firm Law Library Laws Jurisprudence
Law Firm
Law Library
Laws
Jurisprudence
EN BANC
[B.M. No. 553. June 17, 1993.]
SYLLABUS
6. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; PRACTICE OF LAW IN CASE AT BAR CANNOT BE
PERFORMED BY PARALEGALS; REASON. — It should be noted that in our
jurisdiction the services being offered by private respondent which constitute
practice of law cannot be performed by paralegals. Only a person duly admitted
as a member of the bar, or hereafter admitted as such in accordance with the
provisions of the Rules of Court, and who is in good and regular standing, is
entitled to practice law. . . .
10. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; EXCEPTIONS. — The first of such exceptions is the
publication in reputable law lists, in a manner consistent with the standards of
conduct imposed by the canons, of brief biographical and informative data.
"Such data must not be misleading and may include only a statement of the
lawyer’s name and the names of his professional associates; addresses,
telephone numbers, cable addresses; branches of law practiced; date and place
of birth and admission to the bar; schools attended with dates of graduation,
degrees and other educational distinction; public or quasi-public offices; posts
of honor; legal authorships; legal teaching positions; memberships and offices
in bar associations and committees thereof, in legal and scientific societies and
legal fraternities; the fact of listings in other reputable law lists; the names and
addresses of references; and, with their written consent, the names of clients
regularly represented.." . . The use of an ordinary simple professional card is
also permitted. The card may contain only a statement of his name, the name
of the law firm which he is connected with, address, telephone number and
special branch of law practiced. The publication of a simple announcement of
the opening of a law firm or of changes in the partnership, associates, firm
name or office address, being for the convenience of the profession, is not
objectionable. He may likewise have his name listed in a telephone directory but
not under a designation of special branch of law.
11. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; REQUIREMENT FOR LAW LIST. — The law list must
be a reputable law list published primarily for that purpose; it cannot be a mere
supplemental feature of a paper, magazine, trade journal or periodical which is
published principally for other purposes. For that reason, a lawyer may not
properly publish his brief biographical and informative data in a daily paper,
magazine, trade journal or society program. Nor may a lawyer permit his name
to be published in a law list the conduct, management or contents of which are
calculated or likely to deceive or injure the public or the bar, or to lower the
dignity or standing of the profession.
12. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; CASE AT BAR. — Verily, taking into consideration the
nature and contents of the advertisements for which respondent is being taken
to task, which even includes a quotation of the fees charged by said respondent
corporation for services rendered, we find and so hold that the same definitely
do not and conclusively cannot fall under any of the above-mentioned
exceptions.
13. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; EXCEPTION IN BATES, ET AL. v. STATE BAR OF
ARIZONA (433 U.S. 350, 53 L Ed 2d 810, 97 S Ct. 2691) AS TO PUBLICATION
OF LEGAL FEES, NOT APPLICABLE; REASONS. — The ruling in the case of Bates,
Et. Al. v. State Bar of Arizona, which is repeatedly invoked and constitutes the
justification relied upon by respondent, is obviously not applicable to the case at
bar. Foremost is the fact that the disciplinary rule involved in said case explicitly
allows a lawyer, as an exception to the prohibition against advertisements by
lawyers, to publish a statement of legal fees for an initial consultation or the
availability upon request of a written schedule of fees or an estimate of the fee
to be charged for the specific services. No such exception is provided for,
expressly or impliedly, whether in our former Canons of Professional Ethics or
the present Code of Professional Responsibility. Besides, even the disciplinary
rule in the Bates case contains a proviso that the exceptions stated therein are
"not applicable in any state unless and until it is implemented by such authority
in that state." This goes to show that an exception to the general rule, such as
that being invoked by herein respondent, can be made only if and when the
canons expressly provide for such an exception. Otherwise, the prohibition
stands, as in the case at bar. It bears mention that in a survey conducted by
the American Bar Association after the decision in Bates, on the attitude of the
public about lawyers after viewing television commercials, it was found that
public opinion dropped significantly with respect to these characteristics of
lawyers: . . . Secondly, it is our firm belief that with the present situation of our
legal and judicial systems, to allow the publication of advertisements of the kind
used by respondent would only serve to aggravate what is already a
deteriorating public opinion of the legal profession whose integrity has
consistently been under attack lately by media and the community in general.
At this point in time, it is of utmost importance in the face of such negative,
even if unfair, criticisms at times, to adopt and maintain that level of
professional conduct which is beyond reproach, and to exert all efforts to regain
the high esteem formerly accorded to the legal profession.
RESOLUTION
REGALADO, J.:
Petitioner prays this Court "to order the respondent to cease and desist from
issuing advertisements similar to or of the same tenor as that of Annexes `A’
and `B’ (of said petition) and to perpetually prohibit persons or entities from
making advertisements pertaining to the exercise of the law profession other
than those allowed by law." chanrobles virtual lawlibrary
The advertisements complained of by herein petitioner are as follows: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
Annex A
SECRET MARRIAGE?
ANNULMENT. VISA.
Annex B
GUAM DIVORCE
DON PARKINSON
522-2041; 521-0767
In 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 "legal support services" through paralegals with
the use of modern computers and electronic machines. Respondent 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 John R. Bates and Van O’Steen v. State Bar of Arizona, 2 reportedly decided
by the United States Supreme Court on June 7, 1977.
Considering the critical implications on the legal profession of the issues raised
herein, we required the (1) Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), (2)
Philippine Bar Association (PBA), (3) Philippine Lawyers’ Association (PLA), (4)
U.P. Women Lawyers’ Circle (WILOCI), (5) Women Lawyers Association of the
Philippines (WLAP), and (6) Federation International de Abogadas (FIDA) to
submit their respective position papers on the controversy and, thereafter, their
memoranda. 3 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 Court are whether or not the
services offered by respondent, The Legal Clinic, Inc., as advertised by it
constitutes practice of law and, in either case, whether the same can properly
be the subject of the advertisements herein complained of. chanrobles virtual lawlibrary
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.
x x x
x x x
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) does not wish to make issue with
respondent’s foreign citations. Suffice it to state that the IBP 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 one’s legal
services).
The IBP would therefore invoke the administrative supervision of this Honorable
Court to perpetually restrain respondent from undertaking highly unethical
activities in the field of law practice as aforedescribed 4 .
x x x
A. The use of the name "The Legal Clinic, Inc." gives the impression that
respondent corporation is being operated by lawyers and that it renders legal
services.
While the respondent repeatedly denies that it offers legal services to the
public, the advertisements in question 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 (is) the effect that the
advertisements have on the reading public.
Article 26. . . .
It must not be forgotten, too, that the Family Code (defines) a marriage as
follows: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
The IBP is aware of the fact that providing computerized legal research,
electronic data gathering, storage and retrieval, standardized legal forms,
investigators for gathering of evidence, and like services will greatly benefit the
legal profession and should not be stifled but instead encouraged. However,
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.
Admittedly, 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 requirements for admission to the Bar. To prohibit them from
"encroaching" upon the legal profession will deny the profession of the great
benefits and advantages of modern technology. Indeed, a lawyer using a
computer will be doing better than a lawyer using a typewriter, even if both are
(equal) in skill.
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 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 objectionable 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. Respondent would then be offering technical assistance,
not legal services. Alternatively, the more difficult task 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
undertaken. This, however, may require further proceedings because of the
factual considerations involved.
x x x
Respondent asserts that it "is 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 machines" (pars. 2
and 3, Comment). This is absurd. Unquestionably, respondent’s acts of holding
out itself to the public under the trade name "The Legal Clinic, Inc.," 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 Court.
For respondent to say that it is merely engaged in paralegal work is to stretch
credulity. Respondent’s own commercial advertisement which announces a
certain Atty. Don Perkinson to be handling the fields of law belies its pretense.
From all indications, respondent "The Legal Clinic, Inc." is offering and
rendering legal services through its reserve of lawyers. It 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 take them to an attorney and ask the latter to look
after their case in court (See Martin, Legal and Judicial Ethics, 1948 ed., p. 39).
It 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. Obviously, this is the scheme or device by which
respondent "The Legal Clinic, Inc." holds out itself to the public and solicits
employment of its legal services. It is an odious vehicle for deception, especially
so when the public cannot ventilate any grievance for malpractice against the
business conduit. Precisely, the limitation of practice of law to persons who have
been duly admitted as members of the Bar (Sec. 1, Rule 138, Revised Rules of
Court) is to subject the members to the discipline of the Supreme Court.
Although respondent uses its business name, the persons and the lawyers who
act for it are subject 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 5
Am. Jur. 270). It is a personal right limited to persons who have qualified
themselves under the law. It follows that not only respondent but also all the
persons who are acting for respondent are the persons engaged in unethical law
practice. 6
3. The advertisements complained of are not only unethical, but also misleading
and patently immoral; and
4. The Honorable Supreme Court has the power to suppress and punish the
Legal Clinic and its corporate officers for its unauthorized practice of law and for
its unethical, misleading and immoral advertising.
x x x
Respondent posits that it is not engaged in the practice of law. It claims that it
merely renders "legal support services" to lawyers, litigants and the general
public as enunciated in the Primary Purpose Clause of its Article(s) of
Incorporation. (See pages 2 to 5 of Respondent’s Comment). But its advertised
services, as enumerated above, clearly and convincingly show that it is indeed
engaged in law practice, albeit outside the court.
As advertised, it offers the general public its advisory services on Persons and
Family Relations Law, particularly regarding foreign divorces, annulment of
marriages, secret marriages, absence and adoption; Immigration Laws,
particularly on visa related problems, immigration problems; the Investment
Law of the Philippines and such other related laws.
Applying the test laid down by the Court in the aforecited Agrava Case, the
activities of respondent fall squarely and are embraced in what lawyers and
laymen equally term as "the practice of law." 7
In the same manner, the general public should also be protected from the
dangers which may be brought about by advertising of legal services. While it
appears that lawyers are prohibited under the present Code of Professional
Responsibility from advertising, it appears in the instant case that legal services
are being advertised not by lawyers but by an entity staffed by "paralegals."
Clearly, measures should be taken to protect the general public from falling
prey to those who advertise legal services without being qualified to offer such
services." 8
Annexes "A" and "B" of the petition are clearly advertisements to solicit cases
for the purpose of gain which, as provided for under the above cited law, (are)
illegal and against the Code of Professional Responsibility of lawyers in this
country.
No amount of reasoning that in the USA, Canada and other countries the trend
is towards allowing lawyers to advertise their special skills to enable people to
obtain from qualified practitioners legal services for their particular needs can
justify the use of advertisements such as are the subject matter of this petition,
for one (cannot) justify 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
justifiable. chanrobles law library
We submit further that these advertisements that seem to project that secret
marriages and divorce are possible in this country for a fee, when in fact it is
not so, are highly reprehensible.
It 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 seek advice on divorce, where in this country there is none, except under
the Code of Muslim Personal Laws 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. chanrobles virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph
In the case (of) In re Taguda, 53 Phil. 37, the Supreme Court held that
solicitation for clients by an attorney by circulars of advertisements, is
unprofessional and offenses of this character justify permanent elimination from
the Bar. 10
x x x
1.7 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 Respondent does not necessarily lead to
the conclusion that Respondent is not unlawfully practicing law. In the same
vein, however, the fact that the business of respondent (assuming it can be
engaged in independently of the practice of law) involves knowledge of the law
does not necessarily make respondent guilty of unlawful practice of law.
"But suppose the architect, asked by his client to omit a fire tower, replies that
it is required by the statute. Or the industrial relations expert cites, in support
of some measure that he recommends, a decision of the National Labor
Relations Board. Are they practicing law? In my opinion, they are not, provided
no separate fee is charged for the legal advice or information, and the legal
question is subordinate and incidental to a major non-legal problem.
"If 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
like, then an architect who performed this function would probably be
considered to be trespassing on territory reserved for licensed attorneys.
Likewise, 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.
Among 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 knowledge and skill in such matters, and without
regard to legal training or lack of it. More recently, consultants like the
defendant have tendered to the smaller employers the same service that the
larger employers get from their own specialized staff.
"In determining whether a man is practicing law, we should consider his work
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 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.
1.8 From the foregoing, it can be said that a person engaged in a lawful calling
(which may involve knowledge of the law) is not engaged in the practice of law
provided that: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
(a) The legal question is subordinate and incidental to a major non-legal
problem;
(b) The services performed are not customarily reserved to members of the
bar;
All these must be considered in relation to the work for any particular client as a
whole.
1.9. If the person involved is both lawyer and non-lawyer, the Code of
Professional Responsibility succinctly states the rule of conduct: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
1.10. In the present case, the Legal Clinic appears to render wedding services
(See Annex "A", Petition). Services on routine, straightforward marriages, like
securing a marriage license, and making arrangements with a priest or a judge,
may not constitute practice of law. However, if the problem is as complicated as
that described in Rx for Legal Problems" on the Sharon Cuneta-Gabby
Concepcion-Richard Gomez case, then what may be involved is actually the
practice of law. If a non-lawyer, such as the Legal Clinic, renders such services,
then it is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.
1.11. The Legal Clinic also appears to give information on divorce, absence,
annulment of marriage and visas (See Annexes "A" and "B", Petition). Purely
giving informational materials may not constitute practice of law. The business
is similar to that of a bookstore where the customer buys materials on the
subject and determines by himself what courses of action to take.
"It cannot be claimed that the publication of a legal text which purports to say
what the law is amounts to legal practice. And 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. . . . Apparently it is urged that the
conjoining 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. Dacey’s book is sold to
the public at large. There is no personal contact or relationship with a particular
individual. Nor does there exist that relation of confidence and trust so
necessary to the status of attorney and client. THIS IS THE ESSENTIAL OF
LEGAL PRACTICE — THE REPRESENTATION AND ADVISING OF A PARTICULAR
PERSON IN A PARTICULAR SITUATION. At most the book 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 defendant’s 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 kits, such
publication and sale did not constitute the unlawful practice of law . . .. There
being no legal impediment under the statute to the sale of the kit, there was no
proper basis for the injunction against defendant maintaining an office for the
purpose of selling to persons seeking 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 judgment
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 $75 or $100 for the kit, the defendant gave legal advice in the
course of personal contacts concerning particular problems which might arise in
the preparation and presentation of the purchaser’s asserted matrimonial cause
of action or pursuit of other legal remedies and assistance in the preparation of
necessary documents (The injunction therefore sought to) enjoin 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." (State v. Winder, 348, NYS 2d 270
[1973], cited in Statsky, supra at p. 101.)
1.12. Respondent, of course, states that its services are "strictly non-diagnostic,
non-advisory." It is not controverted, however, that if the services "involve
giving legal advice or counselling," such would constitute practice of law
(Comment, par. 6.2). It is in this light that FIDA submits that a factual inquiry
may be necessary for the judicious disposition of this case.
2.10. Annex "A" may be ethically objectionable in that it can give the impression
(or perpetuate the wrong notion) that there is a secret marriage. With all the
solemnities, formalities and other requisites of marriages (See Articles 2, et
seq., Family Code), no Philippine marriage can be secret.
2.11. Annex "B" may likewise be ethically objectionable. The second paragraph
thereof (which is not necessarily related to the first paragraph) fails to state the
limitation that only "paralegal services" or "legal support services", and not
legal services, are available." 11
Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which requires the
application of law, legal procedures, knowledge, training and experience. To
engage in the practice of law is to perform those acts which are characteristic of
the profession. Generally, to practice law is to give advice or render any kind of
service that involves legal knowledge or skill. 12
The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of 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 a court. 13
"The rendition of services requiring the knowledge and the application of legal
principles and technique to serve the interest of another with his consent. It 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 kinds, and the giving of all legal advice to clients. It embraces
all advice to clients and all actions taken for them in matters connected with the
law." cralaw virtua1aw library
The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases in court. (Land Title
Abstract and Trust Co. v. Dworken, 129 Ohio St. 23, 193 N.E. 650). A person is
also considered to be in the practice of law when he: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
This Court, in the case of Philippine Lawyers Association v. Agrava (105 Phil.
173, 176-177), stated: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in 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 services, 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. Jr. p. 262, 263).
The practice of law, therefore, covers a wide range of activities in and out of
court. Applying 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 "practice of law." cralaw virtua1aw library
The contention of respondent that it merely offers legal support services can
neither be seriously considered nor sustained. Said proposition is belied by
respondent’s own description of the services it has been offering, to wit: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
What is palpably clear is that respondent corporation gives out legal information
to laymen and lawyers. Its contention that such function is non-advisory and
non-diagnostic is more apparent than real. In providing information, for
example, about foreign laws on marriage, divorce and adoption, it strains the
credulity of this Court that all that respondent corporation will simply do is look
for the law, furnish a copy thereof to the client, and stop there as if it were
merely a bookstore. With 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 taken as may be provided for by said
law. That is what its advertisements represent and for which services it will
consequently charge and be paid. That activity falls squarely within the
jurisprudential definition of "practice of law." 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 the
January 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: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
This is the kind of business that is transacted everyday at The Legal Clinic, with
offices on the seventh floor of the Victoria 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.
Atty. Nogales set up The Legal Clinic in 1984. Inspired by the trend in the
medical field toward specialization, it caters to clients who cannot afford the
services of the big law firms.
The Legal Clinic has regular and walk-in clients. "When they come, we start by
analyzing the problem. That’s what doctors do also. They ask you how you
contracted what’s bothering you, they take your temperature, they observe you
for the symptoms, and so on. That’s how we operate, too. And once the
problem has been categorized, then it’s referred to one of our specialists." cralaw virtua1aw library
There are cases which do not, in medical terms, require surgery or follow-up
treatment. These The Legal Clinic disposes of in a matter of minutes. "Things
like preparing a simple deed of sale or an affidavit of loss can be taken care of
by our staff or, if this were a hospital, the residents or the interns. We can take
care of these matters on a while you wait basis. Again, kung baga sa ospital,
out-patient, hindi kailangang ma-confine. It’s just like a common cold or
diarrhea," explains Atty. Nogales.
Those cases which require more extensive "treatment" are dealt with
accordingly. "If you had a rich realtive 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. Now, if there were other heirs contesting your
rich relative’s will, then you would need a litigator, who knows how to arrange
the problem for presentation in court, and gather evidence to support the case."
21
That fact that the corporation employs paralegals to carry out its services is not
controlling. What 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. chanrobles.com : virtual law library
Further, as correctly and appropriately pointed out by the U.P. WILOCI, 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 undertakings. Most of these services are undoubtedly beyond the
domain of paralegals, but rather, are exclusive functions of lawyers engaged in
the practice of law. 22
It should be noted that in our jurisdiction the services being offered by private
respondent which constitute practice of law cannot be performed by paralegals.
Only a person duly admitted as a member of the bar, or hereafter admitted as
such in accordance with the provisions of the Rules of Court, and who is in good
and regular standing, is entitled to practice law. 23
Public policy requires that the practice of law be limited to those individuals
found duly qualified in education and character. The permissive right conferred
on the lawyers is an individual and limited privilege subject to withdrawal if he
fails to maintain proper standards of moral and professional conduct. The
purpose is to protect the public, the court, the client and the bar from the
incompetence or dishonesty of those unlicensed to practice law and not subject
to the disciplinary control of the court. 24
The same rule is observed in the American jurisdiction where from respondent
would wish to draw support for his thesis. The doctrines there also stress that
the practice of law is limited to those who meet the requirements for, and have
been admitted to, the bar, and various statutes or rules specifically so provide.
25 The practice of law is not a lawful business except for members of the bar
who have complied with all the conditions required by statute and the rules of
court. Only those persons are allowed to practice law who, by reason of
attainments previously acquired through education and study, have been
recognized by the courts as possessing profound knowledge of legal science
entitling them to advise, counsel with, protect, or defend the rights, claims, or
liabilities of their clients, with respect to the construction, interpretation,
operation and effect of law. 26 The justification for excluding from the practice
of law those not admitted to the bar is found, not in the protection of the bar
from competition, but in the protection of the public from being advised and
represented in legal matters by incompetent and unreliable persons over whom
the judicial department can exercise little control. 27
Accordingly, we have adopted the American judicial policy that, in the absence
of constitutional or statutory authority, a person who has not been admitted as
an attorney cannot practice law for the proper administration of justice cannot
be hindered by the unwarranted intrusion of an unauthorized and unskilled
person into the practice of law. 31 That policy should continue to be one of
encouraging persons who are unsure of their legal rights and remedies to seek
legal assistance only from persons licensed to practice law in the state. 32
Anent the issue on the validity of the questioned advertisements, the Code of
Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer in making known his legal
services shall use only true, honest, fair, dignified and objective information or
statement of facts. 33 He is not supposed to use or permit the use of any false,
fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or unfair
statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services. 34 Nor shall he
pay or give something of value to representatives of the mass media in
anticipation of, or in return for, publicity to attract legal business. 35 Prior to
the adoption of the Code of Professional Responsibility, the Canons of
Professional Ethics had also warned that lawyers should not resort to indirect
advertisements for professional employment, such as furnishing or inspiring
newspaper comments, or procuring his photograph to be published in
connection with causes in which the lawyer has been or is engaged or
concerning the manner of their conduct, the magnitude of the interest involved,
the importance of the lawyer’s position, and all other like self-laudation. 36
The standards of the legal profession condemn the lawyer’s advertisement of his
talents. A lawyer cannot, without violating the ethics of his profession, advertise
his talents or skills as in a manner similar to a merchant advertising his goods.
37 The proscription against advertising of legal services or solicitation of legal
business rests on the fundamental postulate that the practice of law is a
profession. Thus, in the case of The Director of Religious Affairs v. Estanislao R.
Bavot 38 an advertisement, similar to those of respondent which are involved in
the present proceeding, 39 was held to constitute improper advertising or
solicitation.
The pertinent part of the decision therein reads: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
We repeat, the canons of the profession tell us that the best advertising
possible for a lawyer is a well-merited reputation for professional capacity and
fidelity to trust, which must be earned as the outcome of character and conduct.
Good and efficient service to a client as well as to the community has a way of
publicizing itself and catching public attention. That publicity is a normal by-
product of effective service which is right and proper. A good and reputable
lawyer needs no artificial stimulus to generate it and to magnify his success. He
easily sees the difference between a normal by-product of able service and the
unwholesome result of propaganda. 40
Of course, not all types of advertising or solicitation are prohibited. The canons
of the profession enumerate exceptions to the rule against advertising or
solicitation and define the extent to which they may be undertaken. The
exceptions are of two broad categories, namely, those which are expressly
allowed and those which are necessarily implied from the restrictions. 41
The first of such exceptions is the publication in reputable law lists, in a manner
consistent with the standards of conduct imposed by the canons, of brief
biographical and informative data. "Such data must not be misleading and may
include only a statement of the lawyer’s name and the names of his professional
associates; addresses, telephone numbers, cable addresses; branches of law
practiced; date and place of birth and admission to the bar; schools attended
with dates of graduation, degrees and other educational distinction; public or
quasi-public offices; posts of honor; legal authorships; legal teaching positions;
membership and offices in bar associations and committees thereof, in legal and
scientific societies and legal fraternities; the fact of listings in other reputable
law lists; the names and addresses of references; and, with their written
consent, the names of clients regularly represented." 42
The law list must be a reputable law list published primarily for that purpose; it
cannot be a mere supplemental feature of a paper, magazine, trade journal or
periodical which is published principally for other purposes. For that reason, a
lawyer may not properly publish his brief biographical and informative data in a
daily paper, magazine, trade journal or society program. Nor may a lawyer
permit his name to be published in a law list the conduct, management or
contents of which are calculated or likely to deceive or injure the public or the
bar, or to lower the dignity or standing of the profession. 43
The use of an ordinary simple professional card is also permitted. The card may
contain only a statement of his name, the name of the law firm which he is
connected with, address, telephone number and special branch of law practiced.
The publication of a simple announcement of the opening of a law firm or of
changes in the partnership, associates, firm name or office address, being for
the convenience of the profession, is not objectionable. He may likewise have
his name listed in a telephone directory but not under a designation of special
branch of law. 44
Verily, taking into consideration the nature and contents of the advertisements
for which respondent is being taken to task, which even includes a quotation of
the fees charged by said respondent corporation for services rendered, we find
and so hold that the time definitely do not and conclusively cannot fall under
any of the above-mentioned exceptions.
The ruling in the case of Bates, Et. Al. v. State Bar of Arizona, 45 which is
repeatedly invoked and constitutes the justification relied upon by respondent,
is obviously not applicable to the case at bar. Foremost is the fact that the
disciplinary rule involved in said case explicitly allows a lawyer, as an exception
to the prohibition against advertisements by lawyers, to publish a statement of
legal fees for an initial consultation or the availability upon request of a written
schedule of fees or an estimate of the fee to be charged for the specific
services. No such exception is provided for, expressly or impliedly, whether in
our former Canons of Professional Ethics or the present Code of Professional
Responsibility. Besides, even the disciplinary rule in the Bates case contains a
proviso that the exceptions stated therein are "not applicable in any state unless
and until it is implemented by such authority in that state." 46 This goes to
show that an exception to the general rule, such as that being invoked by
herein respondent, can be made only if and when the canons expressly provide
for such an exception. Otherwise, the prohibition stands, as in the case at bar. chanrobles law library :
red
Secondly, it is our firm belief that with the present situation of our legal and
judicial systems, to allow the publication of advertisements of the kind used by
respondent would only serve to aggravate what is already a deteriorating public
opinion of the legal profession whose integrity has consistently been under
attack lately by media and the community in general. At this point in time, it is
of utmost importance in the face of such negative, even if unfair, criticisms at
times, to adopt and maintain that level of professional conduct which is beyond
reproach, and to exert all efforts to regain the high esteem formerly accorded to
the legal profession.
Endnotes:
4. Position Paper prepared by Atty. Basilio H. Alo, IBP Director for Legal Affairs,
1, 10; Rollo, 209, 218.
8. Position Paper prepared by Atty. Victoria C. de los Reyes, 1-2; Rollo, 105-
106.
11. Position Paper prepared by Atty. Lily C. Limpe, President, and Atty. Barbara
Anne C. Migallos, 8-12, 23-24; Rollo, 139-143, 154-155.
14. West Virginia State Bar v. Earley, 109 S.E. 2d 423, 144 W. Va. 504; Rhode
Is. Bar Assoc. v. Automobile Service Assoc. (R.I.) 179 A. 139, 144.
16. Depew, Et. Al. v. Witchita Assn. of Credit Men., Inc., 142 Kan. 403.
18. Mandelaum v. Gilbert & Barker Mfg. Co., 290 NYS 46218.
24. Phil. Ass’n. of Free Labor Unions, Et. Al. v. Binalbagan-Isabela Sugar Co., Et
Al., 42 SCRA 312 (1971).
29. Position Paper, U.P. Women Lawyers’ Circle (WILOCI), 11-12, citing Statsky,
Introduction to Paralegalism, 214-224, West Publishing Co. (1974) and Shayne,
The Paralegal Profession, Oceana Publications, 1977, Appendix II & III; Rollo,
116-117.
30. Illustrations: (a) A law student who has successfully completed his third
year of the regular four-year prescribed law curriculum and is enrolled in a
recognized law school’s clinical legal education program approved by the
Supreme Court (Rule 138-A, Rules of Court);(b) An official or other person
appointed or designated in accordance with law to appear for the Government
of the Philippines in a case in which the government has an interest (Sec. 33,
Rule 138, id.);(c) An agent or friend who aids a party-litigant in a municipal
court for the purpose of conducting the litigation (Sec. 34, Rule 138; id.);(d) A
person, resident of the province and of good repute for probity and ability, who
is appointed counsel de oficio to defend the accused in localities where
members of the bar are not available (Sec. 4, Rule 116, id.);(e) Persons
registered or specially recognized to practice in the Philippine Patent Office (now
known as the Bureau of Patents, Trademarks and Technology Transfer) in
trademark, service mark and trade name cases (Rule 23, Rules of Practice in
Trademark Cases);(f) A non-lawyer who may appear before the National Labor
Relations Commission or any Labor Arbiter only if (1) he represents himself as a
party to the case; (2) he represents an organization or its members, provided
that he shall be made to present written proof that he is properly authorized; or
(3) he is a duly-accredited member of any legal aid office duly recognized by
the Department of Justice or the Integrated Bar of the Philippines in cases
referred thereto by the latter (New Rules of Procedure of the National Labor
Relations Commission);(g) An agent, not an attorney, representing the lot
owner or claimant in a case falling under the Cadastral Act (Sec. 9, Act No.
2259); and(h) Notaries public for municipalities where completion and passing
the studies of law in a reputable university or school of law is deemed sufficient
qualification for appointment (Sec. 233, Administrative Code of 1917). See
Rollo, 144-145.
31. 7 C.J.S., Attorney & Client, 866; Johnstown Coal & Coke Co. of New York v.
U.S., 102 Ct. Cl. 285.
39. The advertisement in said case was as follows: "Marriage license promptly
secured thru our assistance & the annoyance of delay or publicity avoided if
desired, and marriage arranged to wishes of parties. Consultation on any matter
free for the poor. Everything confidential.
42. Op. cit., 80, citing Canon 27, Canons of Professional Ethics.
43. Op. cit., 80, 81, citing A.B.A. Op. 69 (Mar. 19, 1932); A.B.A. Op. 133 (Mar.
13, 1935); A.B.A. Op. 24 (Jan. 24, 1930); and Canon 43, Canons of
Professional Ethics.
44. Op. cit., 81, citing A.B.A. Op. 11 (May 11, 1927); A.B.A. Op. 24 (Jan. 24,
1930); A.B.A. Ops. 53 (Dec. 14, 1931), 123 (Dec. 14, 1934), (July 12, 1941),
241 (Feb. 21, 1942), 284 (Aug. 1951); and 286 (Sept. 25, 1952).
45. Supra, Fn 2.
47. Position Paper of the Philippine Bar Association, 12, citing the American Bar
Association Journal, January, 1989, p. 60; Rollo, 248.
49. U.S. v. Ney & Bosque, 8 Phil. 146 (1907); People v. Luna, 102 Phil. 968
(1958).
50. Secs. 2 and 3, Rule 66, Rules of Court, in relation to Sec. 6(1), P.D. No.
902-A and Sec. 121, Corporation Code.