05.13-Ulep v. Legal Clinic PDF

EN BANC
[B.M. No. 553 . June 17, 1993.]
MAURICIO C. ULEP, petitioner, vs. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC.,

respondent.
SYLLABUS
1. LEGAL AND JUDICIAL ETHICS; PRACTICE OF LAW, MEANING AND EXTENT OF.
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. 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. In 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
requiring knowledge 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. When a person
participates in a trial and advertises himself as a lawyer, he is in the practice of
law. 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. Giving advice for compensation regarding the legal
status and rights of another and the conduct with respect thereto constitutes a
practice of law. One who renders an opinion as to the proper interpretation of a
statute, and receives pay for it, is, to that extent, practicing law.
2. ID.; ID.; LEGAL SUPPORT SERVICES IN CASE AT BAR CONSTITUTE PRACTICE
OF LAW. 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 ndings and observations of the aforestated bar associations
that the activities of respondent, as advertised, constitute "practice of law." The
contention of respondent that it merely oers 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 oering, to wit: . . . While some of the
services being oered by respondent corporation merely involve mechanical and
technical know-how, such as the installation of computer systems and programs
for the ecient management of law oces, or the computerization of research
aids and materials, these will not suce to justify an exception to the general
rule. What is palpably clear is that respondent corporation gives out legal
information to laymen and lawyers. Its contention that such function is non-
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2016 cdasiaonline.com
advisory and non-diagnostic is more apparent than real. In providing information,
for example, about foreign laws on marriage, divorce and adoptation, 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
denition 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: . . .
3. ID.; ID.; ID.; PARALEGAL OR LEGAL ASSISTANT; CONCEPT IN THE UNITED
STATES. Paralegals in the United States are trained professionals. As admitted
by respondent, there are schools and universities there which oer studies and
degrees in paralegal education, while there are none in the Philippines. As the
concept of the "paralegal" or "legal assistant" evolved in the United States,
standards and guidelines also evolved to protect the general public. One of the
major standards or guidelines was developed by the American Bar Association
which set up Guidelines for the Approval of Legal Assistant Education Programs
(1973). Legislation has even been proposed to certify legal assistants. There are
also associations of paralegals in the United States with their own code of
professional ethics, such as the National Association of Legal Assistants, Inc. and
the American Paralegal Association.
4. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; CONCEPT IN THE PHILIPPINES. In the Philippines, we still
have a restricted concept and limited acceptance of what may be considered as
paralegal service. As pointed out by FIDA, some persons not duly licensed to
practice law are or have been allowed limited representation in behalf of another
or to render legal services, but such allowable services are limited in scope and
extent by the law, rules or regulations granting permission therefor.
(Illustrations: . . .)
5. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL POLICY ON PARALEGAL. We have to
necessarily and denitely reject respondent's position that the concept in the
United States of paralegals as an occupation separate from the law profession be
adopted in this jurisdiction. Whatever may be its merits, respondent cannot but
be aware that this should rst be a matter for judicial rules or legislative action,
and not of unilateral adoption as it has done. . . . 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. 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.
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 oered 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. . . .
7. ID.; ADVERTISEMENT BY LAWYER; RULE. 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,
dignied and objective information or statement of facts. He is not supposed to
use or permit the use of any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignied,
self-laudatory or unfair statement or claim regarding his qualications or legal
services. 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.
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.
8. ID.; ID.; ID.; CHARACTER AND CONDUCT AS BEST ADVERTISEMENT. 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 delity to trust,
which must be earned as the outcome of character and conduct. Good and
ecient 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
eective service which is right and proper. A good and reputable lawyer needs no
articial stimulus to generate it and to magnify his success. He easily sees the
dierence between a normal by-product of able service and the unwholesome
result of propaganda.
9. ID.; ID.; ID.; PROHIBITION ON ADVERTISEMENT OF TALENT OR SKILL. 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.
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. . . .
10. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; EXCEPTIONS. The rst 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 oces; posts of honor; legal
authorships; legal teaching positions; memberships and oces in bar
associations and committees thereof, in legal and scientic 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 rm 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 rm or of changes in the partnership, associates, rm name or
oce 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 nd and so hold that the same denitely 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. vs. 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.
vs. State Bar of Arizona, which is repeatedly invoked and constitutes the
justication 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 specic 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 signicantly with respect to these characteristics of lawyers: . . .
Secondly, it is our rm 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 eorts to regain the high esteem formerly accorded to
the legal profession.
RESOLUTION
REGALADO, J : p
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 À' 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." cdrep
The advertisements complained of by herein petitioner are as follows:

Annex A
SECRET MARRIAGE?
P560.00 for a valid marriage.
Info on DIVORCE. ABSENCE.
ANNULMENT. VISA.
THE Please call: 521-0767,
LEGAL 5217232, 5222041
CLINIC, INC. 8:30 am-6:00 pm
7-Flr. Victoria Bldg. UN Ave., Mla.
Annex B
GUAM DIVORCE
DON PARKINSON
an Attorney in Guam, is giving FREE BOOKS on Guam Divorce through
The Legal Clinic beginning Monday to Friday during oce hours.
Guam divorce. Annulment of Marriage. Immigration Problems, Visa Ext.
Quota/Non-quota Res. & Special Retiree's Visa. Declaration of Absence.
Remarriage to Filipina Fiancees. Adoption. Investment in the Phil.
US/Foreign Visa for Filipina Spouse/Children. Call Marivic.
THE 7 F Victoria Bldg. 429 UN Ave.
LEGAL Ermita, Manila nr. US Embassy
CLINIC, INC. 1 Tel. 521-7232521-7251
522-2041; 521-0767
It is the submission of petitioner that the advertisements above reproduced are
champertous, unethical, demeaning of the law profession, and destructive of the
condence of the community in the integrity of the members of the bar and
that, as a member of the legal profession, he is ashamed and oended by the
said advertisements, hence the reliefs sought in his petition as herein before
quoted. cdphil
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 vs. 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 oered 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. cdphil
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.
1. Integrated Bar of the Philippines:
xxx xxx xxx
Notwithstanding the subtle manner by which respondent endeavored to
distinguish the two terms, i.e., "legal support services" vis-a-vis "legal
services", 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
like birth, marriage, property, or business registration, obtaining
documents like clearance, passports, local or foreign visas, constitute
practice of law?
xxx xxx xxx
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) does not wish to make issue
with respondent's foreign citations. Suce it to state that the IBP has
made its position manifest, to wit, that it strongly opposes the view
espoused by respondent (to the eect that today it is alright to advertise
one's legal services).
The IBP accordingly declares in no uncertain terms its opposition to
respondent's act of establishing a "legal clinic" and of concomitantly
advertising the same through newspaper publications.
The IBP would therefore invoke the administrative supervision of this
Honorable Court to perpetually restrain respondent from undertaking
highly unethical activities in the eld of law practice as aforedescribed 4 .
xxx xxx xxx
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 oers legal services to the
public, the advertisements in question give the impression that
respondent is oering legal services. The Petition in fact simply assumes
this to be so, as earlier mentioned, apparently because this (is) the eect
that the advertisements have on the reading public.
The impression created by the advertisements in question can be traced,
rst of all, to the very name being used by respondent "The Legal
Clinic, Inc." Such a name, it is respectfully submitted connotes the
rendering of legal services for legal problems, just like a medical clinic
connotes medical services for medical problems. More importantly, the
term "Legal Clinic" connotes lawyers, as the term medical clinic connotes
doctors.
Furthermore, the respondent's name, as published in the advertisements

subject of the present case, appears with (the) scale(s) of justice, which
all the more reinforces the impression that it is being operated by
members of the bar and that it oers legal services. In addition, the
advertisements in question appear with a picture and name of a person
being represented as a lawyer from Guam, and this practically removes
whatever doubt may still remain as to the nature of the service or
services being oered.
It thus becomes irrelevant whether respondent is merely oering "legal
support services" as claimed by it, or whether it oers legal services as
any lawyer actively engaged in law practice does. And it becomes
unnecessary to make a distinction between "legal services" and "legal
support services," as the respondent would have it. The advertisements
in question leave no room for doubt in the minds of the reading public
that legal services are being oered by lawyers, whether true or not.
B. The advertisements in question are meant to induce the performance

of acts contrary to law, morals, public order and public policy.
It may be conceded that, as the respondent claims, the advertisements in

question are only meant to inform the general public of the services being
oered by it. Said advertisements, however, emphasize a Guam 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:
Article 26. . . .
Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen 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 Law.
It must not be forgotten, too, that the Family Code (denes) a marriage
as follows:
Article 1. Marriage is a special contract of permanent union
between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law
for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation
of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature,
consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject
to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may x the
property relation during the marriage within the limits provided by
this Code.
By simply reading the questioned advertisements, it is obvious that the
message being conveyed is that Filipinos can avoid the legal
consequences of a marriage celebrated in accordance with our law, by
simply going to Guam 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 prot. At
worst, this is outright malpractice. LibLex
Rule 1.02. A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities

aimed at deance of the law or at lessening condence in the legal
system.
In addition, it may also be relevant to point out that advertisements such
as that shown in Annex "A" of the Petition, which contains a cartoon of a
motor vehicle with the words "Just Married" on its bumper and seems to
address those planning a "secret marriage," if not suggesting a "secret
marriage," makes light of the "special contract of permanent union," the
inviolable social institution," which is how the Family Code describes
marriage, obviously to emphasize its sanctity and inviolability. Worse, this
particular advertisement appears to encourage marriages celebrated in
secrecy, which is suggestive of immoral publication of applications for a
marriage license. LLpr
If the article "Rx for Legal Problems" is to be reviewed, it can readily be

concluded that the above impressions one may gather from the
advertisements in question are accurate. The Sharon Cuneta-Gabby
Concepcion example alone conrms what the advertisements suggest.
Here it can be seen that criminal acts are being encouraged or committed
(a bigamous marriage in Hong Kong or Las Vegas) with impunity simply
because the jurisdiction of Philippine courts does not extend to the place
where the crime is committed.
Even if it be assumed, arguendo, that the "legal support services"
respondent oers do not constitute legal services as commonly
understood, the advertisements in question give the impression that
respondent corporation is being operated by lawyers and that it oers
legal services, as earlier discussed. Thus, the only logical consequence 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.
xxx xxx xxx
It is respectfully submitted that respondent should be enjoined from

causing the publication of the advertisements in question, or any other
advertisements similar thereto. It is also submitted that respondent
should be prohibited from further performing or oering some of the
services it presently oers, or, at the very least, from oering such
services to the public in general.
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
benet the legal profession and should not be stied 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 elds, such as computer experts, who
by reason of their having devoted time and eort exclusively to such eld
cannot fulll the exacting requirements for admission to the Bar. To
prohibit them from "encroaching" upon the legal profession will deny the
profession of the great benets 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 oering
technical assistance, not legal services. Alternatively, the more dicult
task of carefully distinguishing between which service may be oered 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.
It must be emphasized, however, that some of respondent's 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. While respondent may not be
prohibited from simply disseminating information regarding such matters,
it must be required to include, in the information given, a disclaimer that it
is not authorized to practice law, that certain course of action may be
illegal under Philippine law, that it is not authorized or capable of rendering
a legal opinion, that a lawyer should be consulted before deciding on
which course of action to take, and that it cannot recommend any
particular lawyer without subjecting itself to possible sanctions for illegal
practice of law.
If respondent is allowed to advertise, advertising should be directed
exclusively at members of the Bar, with a clear and unmistakable
disclaimer that it is not authorized to practice law or perform legal
services. cdrep
The benets of being assisted by paralegals cannot be ignored. But

nobody should be allowed to represent himself as a "paralegal" for prot,
without such term being clearly dened by rule or regulation, and without
any adequate and eective means of regulating his activities. Also, 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
corporation's Articles of Incorporation and By-laws must conform to each
and every provision of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the
Rules of Court 5
2. Philippine Bar Association:
xxx xxx xxx
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 elds of law belies its pretense. From all
indications, respondent "The Legal Clinic, Inc." is oering 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 qualied 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. Philippine Lawyers' Association:

The Philippine Lawyers' Association's position, in answer to the issues
stated herein, are, to wit:
1. The Legal Clinic is engaged in the practice of law;
2. Such practice is unauthorized;
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 ocers for its
unauthorized practice of law and for its unethical, misleading and
immoral advertising.
xxx xxx xxx

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 oers 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.
Its advertised services unmistakably require the application of the

aforesaid laws, the legal principles and procedures related thereto, the
legal advises based thereon and which activities call for legal training,
knowledge and experience.
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
4. U.P. Women Lawyers' Circle:

In resolving the issues before this Honorable Court, paramount
consideration should be given to the protection of the general public from
the danger of being exploited by unqualied persons or entities who may
be engaged in the practice of law.
At present, becoming a lawyer requires one to take a rigorous four-year
course of study on top of a four-year bachelor of arts or sciences course
and then to take and pass the bar examinations. Only then, is a lawyer
qualied to practice law.
While the use of a paralegal is sanctioned in many jurisdictions as an aid

to the administration of justice, there are in those jurisdictions, courses of
study and/or standards which would qualify these paralegals to deal with
the general public as such. While it may now be the opportune time to
establish these courses of study and/or standards, the fact remains that
at present, these do not exist in the Philippines. 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 qualied to do so.
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
staed by "paralegals." Clearly, measures should be taken to protect the
general public from falling prey to those who advertise legal services
without being qualied to oer such services." 8
A perusal of the questioned advertisements of Respondent, 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 Respondent's name The Legal Clinic, Inc. does not help matters.
It gives the impression again that Respondent will or can cure the legal
problems brought to them. Assuming that Respondent is, as claimed,
staed purely by paralegals, it also gives the misleading impression that
there are lawyers involved in The Legal Clinic, Inc., as there are doctors in
any medical clinic, when only "paralegals" are involved in The Legal Clinic,
Inc.
Respondent's allegations are further belied by the very admissions of its

President and majority stockholder, Atty. Nogales, who gave an insight on
the structure and main purpose of Respondent corporation in the
aforementioned "Starweek" article." 9
5. Women Lawyer's Association of the Philippines:
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.
Annex "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
Legal Clinic, Inc., could work out/cause the celebration of a secret
marriage which is not only illegal but immoral in this country. While it is
advertised that one has to go to said agency and pay P560 for a valid
marriage it is certainly fooling the public for valid marriages in the
Philippines are solemnized only by ocers authorized to do so under the
law. And to employ an agency for said purpose of contracting marriage is
not necessary.
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 qualied 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 justiable. LLphil
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. LLjur
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 oenses of this character justify permanent
elimination from the Bar. 10
6. Federacion International de Abogadas:
xxx xxx xxx
1.7 That entities admittedly not engaged in the practice of law, such as
management consultancy rms 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.
". . . Of necessity, no one . . . acting as a consultant can
render eective service unless he is familiar with such statutes and
regulations. He must be careful not to suggest a course of conduct
which the law forbids. It seems . . . clear that (the consultant's)
knowledge of the law, and his use of that knowledge as a factor in
determining what measures he shall recommend, do not constitute
the practice of law . . .. It is not only presumed that all men know
the law, but it is a fact that most men have considerable
acquaintance with the broad features of the law . . .. Our
knowledge of the law accurate or inaccurate moulds our
conduct not only when we are acting for ourselves, but when we
are serving others. Bankers, liquor dealers and laymen generally
possess rather precise knowledge of the laws touching their
particular business or profession. A good example is the architect,
who must be familiar with zoning, building and re prevention
codes, factory and tenement house statutes, and who draws plans
and specications in harmony with the law. This is not practicing
law.
"But suppose the architect, asked by his client to omit a re
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.
"It is largely a matter of degree and of custom.
"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 eld 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 ocers 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
sta.
"The handling of industrial relations is growing into a

recognized profession for which appropriate courses are oered
by our leading universities. The court should be very cautious
about declaring [that] 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.
"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 dening 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 eorts 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.
"Another branch of defendant's work is the representation of

the employer in the adjustment of grievances and in collective
bargaining, with or without a mediator. This is not per se the
practice of law. Anyone may use an agent for negotiations and may
select an agent particularly skilled in the subject under discussion,
and the person appointed is free to accept the employment
whether or not he is a member of the bar. Here, however, there
may be an exception where the business turns on a question of
law. Most real estate sales are negotiated by brokers 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. Or if a controversy between an employer and his
men grows from diering interpretations of a contract, or of a
statute, it is quite likely that defendant should not handle it. But I
need not reach a denite conclusion here, since the situation is not
presented by the proofs. cdphil
"Defendant also appears to represent the employer before

administrative agencies of the federal government, especially
before trial examiners of the National Labor Relations Board. An
agency of the federal government, acting by virtue of an authority
granted by the Congress, may regulate the representation of
parties before such agency. The State of New 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 ìn person, or by counsel, or by other
representative.' Rules and Regulations, September 11th, 1946, S.
203.31. `Counsel' here means a licensed attorney, and òther
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.).
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:
(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;
(c) No separate fee is charged for the legal advice or

information.
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:
"Rule 15.08 A lawyer who is engaged in another profession
or occupation concurrently with the practice of law shall make clear
to his client whether he is acting as a lawyer or in another capacity."
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 is not entirely improbable, however, that aside from purely giving

information, the Legal Clinic's paralegals may apply the law to the
particular problem of the client, and give legal advice. Such would
constitute unauthorized practice of law.
"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 aect 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 lled 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 condence 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 oer general advice on common problems, and
does not purport to give personal advice on a specic problem
peculiar to a designated or readily identied person. Similarly the
defendant's publication does not purport `to give personal advice
on a specic problem peculiar to a designated or readily identied
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 oce 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
modication 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 nding 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 specic
problems of particular individuals in connection with a divorce,
separation, annulment of separation agreement sought and should
be armed." (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 rst paragraph)
fails to state the limitation that only "paralegal services" or "legal support
services", and not legal services, are available." 11
A prefatory discussion on the meaning of the phrase "practice of law" becomes

exigent for a proper determination of the issues raised by the petition at bar. On
this score, we note that the clause "practice of law" has long been the subject of
judicial 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 take into account. LLjur
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
In 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 requiring knowledge 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,
inorder to assist in proper interpretation and enforcement of law. 14
When a person participates in a trial and advertises himself as a lawyer, he is in
the practice of law. 15 One who confers with clients, advises them as to their
legal rights and then takes the business to an attorney and asks the later to look
after the case in court, is also practicing law. 16 Giving advice for compensation
regarding the legal status and rights of another and the conduct with respect
thereto constitutes a practice of law. 17 One who renders an opinion as to the
proper interpretation of a statute, and receives pay for it, is, to that extent,
practicing law. 18
In the recent case of Cayetano vs. Monsod, 19 after citing the doctrines in several
cases, we laid down the test to determine whether certain acts constitute
"practice of law," thus:
Black denes "practice of law" as:
"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."
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:
". . . for valuable consideration engages in the business of

advising persons, rms, 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 authorized 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. Otherwise 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. Mckittrick v. C.S. Dudley and Co., 102
S.W. 2d 895, 340 Mo. 852)."
This Court, in the case of Philippine Lawyers Association v. Agrava (105

Phil. 173, 176-177), stated:
"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
eect of facts and conditions. (5 Am. Jr. p. 262, 263).
"Practice of law under 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 eld of business and trust relations and
other aairs. 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 aairs, and
great capacity for adaptation to dicult 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 oce. 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 [1973
ed.], pp. 665-666, citing In Re Opinion of the Justices [Mass.], 194
N.E. 313, quoted in Rhode Is. Bar Assoc. v. Automobile Service
Assoc. [R.I.] 179 A. 139, 144)."
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 ndings and observations of the aforestated bar associations that the
activities of respondent, as advertised, constitute "practice of law."
The contention of respondent that it merely oers 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 oering, to wit:
"Legal 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 computerized legal research; encoding and reproduction of
documents and pleadings prepared by laymen or lawyers; document
search; evidence gathering; locating parties or witnesses to a case; fact
nding investigations; and assistance to laymen in need of basic
institutional services from government or non-government agencies, like
birth, marriage, property, or business registrations; educational or
employment records or certications, obtaining documentation like
clearances, passports, local or foreign visas; giving information about
laws of other countries that they may nd useful, like 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 court; designing and installing computer
systems, programs, or software for the ecient management of law
oces, corporate legal departments, courts, and other entities engaged
in dispensing or administering legal services." 20
While some of the services being oered by respondent corporation merely

involve mechanical and technical know-how, such as the installation of computer
systems and programs for the ecient management of law oces, or the
computerization of research aids and materials, these will not suce to justify an
exception to the general rule.
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
denition 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:
This is the kind of business that is transacted everyday at The Legal Clinic,
with oces on the seventh oor 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 sta of lawyers, who, like doctors, are "specialists" in various
elds, 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 eld toward specialization, it caters to clients who cannot aord
the services of the big law rms.
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."
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 adavit of loss
can be taken care of by our sta 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-
conne. 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. prcd
Further, as correctly and appropriately pointed out by the U.P. WILOCI, said
reported facts suciently 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 oered 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 qualied 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 specically 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 eect of
law. 26 The justication 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
We have to necessarily and denitely reject respondent's position that the
concept in the United States of paralegals as an occupation separate from the
law profession be adopted in this jurisdiction. Whatever may be its merits,
respondent cannot but be aware that this should rst be a matter for judicial
rules or legislative action, and not of unilateral adoption as it has done.
Paralegals in the United States are trained professionals. As admitted by
respondent, there are schools and universities there which oer studies and
degrees in paralegal education, while there are none in the Philippines. 28 As the
concept of the "paralegal" or "legal assistant" evolved in the United States,
standards and guidelines also evolved to protect the general public. One of the
major standards, or guidelines was developed by the American Bar Association
which set up Guidelines for the Approval of Legal Assistant Education Programs
(1973). Legislation has even been proposed to certify legal assistants. There are
also associations of paralegals in the United States with their own code of
professional ethics, such as the National Association of Legal Assistants, Inc. and
the American Paralegal Association. 29
In the Philippines, we still have a restricted concept and limited acceptance of
what may be considered, as paralegal service. As pointed out by FIDA, some
persons not duly licensed to practice law are or have been allowed limited
representation in behalf of another or to render legal services, but such allowable
services are limited in scope and extent by the law, rules or regulations granting
permission therefor. 30
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, dignied and objective information or
statement of facts. 33 He is not supposed to use or permit the use of any false,
fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignied, self-laudatory or unfair statement
or claim regarding his qualications 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 Aairs vs. 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:
It is undeniable that the advertisement in question was a agrant violation
by the respondent of the ethics of his profession, it being a brazen
solicitation of business from the public. Section 25 of Rule 127 expressly
provides among other things that "the practice of soliciting cases at law
for the purpose of gain, either personally or thru paid agents or brokers,
constitutes malpractice." It is highly unethical for an attorney to advertise
his talents or skill as a merchant advertises his wares. Law is a profession
and not a trade. The lawyer degrades himself and his profession who
stoops to and adopts the practices of mercantilism by advertising his
services or oering them to the public. As a member of the bar, he deles
the temple of justice with mercenary activities as the money-changers of
old deled the temple of Jehovah. The most worthy and eective
advertisement possible, even for a young lawyer, . . . is the establishment
of a well-merited reputation for professional capacity and delity to trust.
This cannot be forced but must be the outcome of character and
conduct." (Canon 27, Code of Ethics.)

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 delity to
trust, which must be earned as the outcome of character and conduct. Good and
ecient 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
eective service which is right and proper. A good and reputable lawyer needs no
articial stimulus to generate it and to magnify his success. He easily sees the
dierence 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 dene 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 rst 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 oces; posts of honor; legal authorships; legal teaching positions;
membership and oces in bar associations and committees thereof, in legal and
scientic 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 rm 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 rm or of
changes in the partnership, associates, rm name or oce 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 nd
and so hold that the time denitely do not and conclusively cannot fall under any
of the above-mentioned exceptions.
The ruling in the case of Bates, et al. vs. State Bar of Arizona, 45 which is
repeatedly invoked and constitutes the justication 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 specic 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.LLpr
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
signicantly 47 with respect to these characteristics of lawyers:
Trustworthy from 71% to 14%
Professional from 71% to 14%
Honest from 65% to 14%
Dignied from 45% to 14%
Secondly, it is our rm 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 eorts to regain the high esteem formerly accorded to
the legal profession.
In sum, it is undoubtedly a misbehavior on the part of the lawyer, subject to
disciplinary action, to advertise his services except in allowable instances 48 or to
aid a layman in the unauthorized practice of law. 49 Considering that Atty. Rogelio
P. Nogales, who is the prime incorporator, major stockholder and proprietor of The
Legal Clinic, Inc. is a member of the Philippine Bar, he is hereby reprimanded,
with a warning that a repetition of the same or similar acts which are involved in
this proceeding will be dealt with more severely.
While we deem it necessary that the question as to the legality or illegality of
the purpose/s for which the Legal Clinic, Inc. was created should be passed upon
and determined, we are constrained to refrain from lapsing into an obiter on that
aspect since it is clearly not within the adjudicative parameters of the present
proceeding which is merely administrative in nature. It is, of course, imperative
that this matter be promptly determined, albeit in a dierent proceeding and
forum, since, under the present state of our law and jurisprudence, a corporation
forum, since, under the present state of our law and jurisprudence, a corporation
cannot be organized for or engage in the practice of law in this country. This
interdiction, just like the rule against unethical advertising, cannot be subverted
by employing some so-called paralegals supposedly rendering the alleged support
services. llcd
The remedy for the apparent breach of this prohibition by respondent is the
concern and province of the Solicitor General who can institute the corresponding
quo warranto action, 50 after due ascertainment of the factual background and
basis for the grant of respondent's corporate charter, in light of the putative
misuse thereof. That spin-o from the instant bar matter is referred to the
Solicitor General for such action as may be necessary under the circumstances.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court Resolved to RESTRAIN and ENJOIN herein respondent,
The Legal Clinic, Inc., from issuing or causing the publication or dissemination of
any advertisement in any form which is of the same or similar tenor and purpose
as Annexes "A" and "B" of this petition, and from conducting, directly or
indirectly, any activity, operation or transaction proscribed by law or the Code of
Professional Ethics as indicated herein. Let copies of this resolution be furnished
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the Oce of the Bar Condant and the
Oce of the Solicitor General for appropriate action in accordance herewith.
Narvasa, C .J ., Cruz, Feliciano, Padilla, Bidin, Grio-Aquino, Davide, Jr., Romero,
Nocon, Bellosillo, Melo and Quiason, JJ ., concur.
Footnotes
1. Rollo, 5. A facsimile of the scales of justice is printed together with and on the left
side of "The Legal Clinic, Inc." in both advertisements which were published in a
newspaper of general circulation.
2. 433 U.S. 350, 53 L Ed 2d 810, 97 S Ct. 2691.

3. Resolution dated January 15, 1991, Rollo, 60; Resolution dated December 10, 1991,
Rollo, 328.
4. Position Paper prepared by Atty. Basilio H. Alo, IBP Director for Legal Aairs, 1, 10;
Rollo, 209, 218.
5. Memorandum prepared by Atty. Jose A. Grapilon, Chairman, Committee on Bar

Discipline, and Atty. Kenny H. Tantuico, 16-18, 27-29; Rollo 414-416, 425-427.
6. Position Paper prepared by Atty. Rafael D. Abiera, Jr., Chairman, Committee on
Lawyers' Rights and Legal Ethics, and Atty. Arturo M. del Rosario, President, 5-
6; Rollo, 241-242.
7. Position Paper prepared by Atty. Lorenzo Sumulong, President, and Atty. Mariano
M. Magsalin, Vice-President, 2, 4-5; Rollo, 93, 95-96.
8. Position Paper prepared by Atty. Victoria C. de los Reyes, 1-2; Rollo, 105-106.
9. Memorandum prepared by Atty. Victoria C. de los Reyes, 10-11; Rollo, 370-371.

10. Position Paper prepared by Atty. Leticia E. Sablan, Ocer-in-Charge, WLAP Free
Legal Aid Clinic, 1-2; Rollo, 169-170.
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.
12. Annotation: 111 ALR 23.
13. Howton vs. Morrow, 269 Hy. 1.

14. West Virginia State Bar vs. Earley, 109 S.E. 2d 423, 144 W. Va. 504; Rhode Is. Bar
Assoc. v. Automobile Service Assoc. (R.I.) 179 A. 139, 144.
15. People vs. Castleman, 88 Colo. 229.
16. Depew, et al. vs. Witchita Assn. of Credit Men., Inc., 142 Kan. 403.
17. Fitchette vs. Taylor, 94 ALR 356.
18. Mandelaum vs. Gilbert & Barker Mfg. Co., 290 NYS 46218.
19. 201 SCRA 210 (1991).

20. Comment of Respondent, 3; Rollo, 15.
21. Rollo, 130-131.
22. Memorandum of U.P. WILOCI, 12-13; Rollo, 372-373.

23. Sec. 1, Rule 138, Rules of Court.
24. Phil. Ass'n. of Free Labor Unions, et al. vs. Binalbagan-Isabela Sugar Co., et al., 42
SCRA 312 (1971).
25. 7 C.J.S., Attorney & Client, 863, 864.
26. Mounier vs. Regcinh, 170 So. 567.

27. Lowell Bar Ass'n. vs. Loeb. 52 N.E. 2d 27, 315 Mass. 176; 7 C.J.S., Attorney &
Client 64, 865.
28. Comment of Respondent, 2; Rollo, 14.
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 ocial 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 ocio 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 Oce (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 oce 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 sucient qualication
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 vs. U.S.,
102 Ct. Cl. 285.
32. Florida Bar vs. Brumbaugth, 355 So. 2d 1186.
33. Canon 3, Code of Professional Responsibility.

34. Rule 3.01, id.
35. Rule 3.04, id.
36. Canon 27, Canons of Professional Ethics.

37. People vs. Smith, 93 Am. St. Rep. 206.
38. 74 Phil. 579 (1944).
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 condential.
40. Agpalo, Legal Ethics, Fourth Edition (1989), 79-80.

41. Op. cit., 80.
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.
46. Id., 810, 825.
47. Position Paper of the Philippine Bar Association, 12, citing the American Bar
Association Journal, January, 1989, p. 60; Rollo, 248.
48. In re Tagorda, 53 Phil. 37 (1929); The Director of Religious Aairs vs. Bayot, supra,
Fn 38.
49. U.S. vs. Ney & Bosque, 8 Phil. 146 (1907); People vs. 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.

05.13-Ulep v. Legal Clinic PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

05.13-Ulep v. Legal Clinic PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

05.13-Ulep v. Legal Clinic PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EN BANC

[B.M. No. 553 . June 17, 1993.]

MAURICIO C. ULEP, petitioner, vs. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC.,

The advertisements complained of by herein petitioner are as follows:

Furthermore, the respondent's name, as published in the advertisements

B. The advertisements in question are meant to induce the performance

It may be conceded that, as the respondent claims, the advertisements in

Rule 1.02. A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities

If the article "Rx for Legal Problems" is to be reviewed, it can readily be

It is respectfully submitted that respondent should be enjoined from

The benets of being assisted by paralegals cannot be ignored. But

3. Philippine Lawyers' Association:

xxx xxx xxx

Its advertised services unmistakably require the application of the

4. U.P. Women Lawyers' Circle:

While the use of a paralegal is sanctioned in many jurisdictions as an aid

A perusal of the questioned advertisements of Respondent, however,

Respondent's allegations are further belied by the very admissions of its

5. Women Lawyer's Association of the Philippines:

Annex "A" of the petition is not only illegal in that it is an advertisement to

We submit further that these advertisements that seem to project that

xxx xxx xxx

"It is largely a matter of degree and of custom.

"If it were usual for one intending to erect a building on his

"The handling of industrial relations is growing into a

"Another branch of defendant's work is the representation of

"Defendant also appears to represent the employer before

(a) The legal question is subordinate and incidental to a major

(c) No separate fee is charged for the legal advice or

1.11. The Legal Clinic also appears to give information on divorce,

It is not entirely improbable, however, that aside from purely giving

2.11. Annex "B" may likewise be ethically objectionable. The second

A prefatory discussion on the meaning of the phrase "practice of law" becomes

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2016 cdasiaonline.com

"The rendition of services requiring the knowledge and the application of

". . . for valuable consideration engages in the business of

This Court, in the case of Philippine Lawyers Association v. Agrava (105

"The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or

"Practice of law under modern conditions consists in no small

While some of the services being oered by respondent corporation merely

There are cases which do not, in medical terms, require surgery or

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2016 cdasiaonline.com

It bears mention that in a survey conducted by the American Bar Association

2. 433 U.S. 350, 53 L Ed 2d 810, 97 S Ct. 2691.

5. Memorandum prepared by Atty. Jose A. Grapilon, Chairman, Committee on Bar

9. Memorandum prepared by Atty. Victoria C. de los Reyes, 10-11; Rollo, 370-371.

13. Howton vs. Morrow, 269 Hy. 1.

15. People vs. Castleman, 88 Colo. 229.

19. 201 SCRA 210 (1991).

22. Memorandum of U.P. WILOCI, 12-13; Rollo, 372-373.

26. Mounier vs. Regcinh, 170 So. 567.

33. Canon 3, Code of Professional Responsibility.

36. Canon 27, Canons of Professional Ethics.

40. Agpalo, Legal Ethics, Fourth Edition (1989), 79-80.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2016 cdasiaonline.com

You might also like