LEGAL ETHICS | MAURICIO C. ULEP VS. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC Bar Matter No. 553. June 17, 1993
MAURICIO
C. ULEP VS. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC
Bar
Matter No. 553. June 17, 1993
TOPIC/DOCTRINES/WORDS
AND PHRASES
1.
Words and Phrases; Meaning of “Practice of Law”—Practice of law, as
defined by the Supreme Court, 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.
2.
Same; Instances when a person considered in a Practice 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. The practice of giving out legal
information constitutes practice of law.
3.
Same; Liability for Unauthorized Practice of Law —A person practicing law
without authority is liable for indirect contempt under Section 3(e) Rule 71 of
the Rules of Civil Procedure, which provides that a person assuming to be an
attorney or an officer of the court, and acting as such without authority, is
liable for indirect contempt of court.1
4.
Words and Phrases; Meaning of “Paralegal” —According to the
American Bar Association (ABA)2 a paralegal is a
person, qualified by education, training or work experience who is employed or
retained by a lawyer, law office, corporation, governmental agency or other
entity and who performs specifically delegated substantive legal work for which
a lawyer is responsible.2
5.
Paralegal Service in The Philippines; Not
Authorized Practice of Law; Still Has Restrictive Concept and Limited
Acceptance
—In
the Philippines, we still have a restricted concept and limited acceptance of
what may be considered as paralegal service. In its comment, the Federacion
Internacional de Abogados said: 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.
Illustrative Examples:
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.
6.
Same; Nobody Should Be Allowed to Represent
Himself as A “Paralegal” For Profit, Without Such Term Being Clearly Defined by
Rule or Regulation, And Without Any Adequate and Effective Means of Regulating
His Activities
—In
its comment, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) said: the benefits of
being assisted by paralegals cannot be ignored. But nobody should be
allowed to represent himself as a “paralegal” for profit, without such term
being clearly defined by rule or regulation, and without any adequate and
effective means of regulating his activities.
7.
Same; 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 —[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.
8.
Same; No Courses of Study And/or
Standards for Paralegals in The Philippines — In its comment, the
University of the Philippines (U.P.) Women Lawyer’s Circle said: 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 make measures to protect the general public from being exploited by
those who may be dealing with the general public in the guise of being "paralegals"
without being qualified to do so.
9.
Same; Paralegals in The United States V. in The
Philippines
—Paralegals
in the United States are trained professionals. As admitted by respondent,
there are schools and universities there which offer 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.
10.
Services
Similar to Ulep Case; Paralegals
in the Philippines today engage in: (i) education on
human rights, constitutional rights and provisions, and legal rights and
procedures; (ii) legal
research/investigation/documentation or casework proper;
(iii) mediation in
conflict-resolution or dispute-processing venues, especially the village-level barangay justice system (BJS); (iv) representation in certain
quasi-judicial dispute resolution tribunals; (v) law enforcement as bantay gubat (forest guards)
and bantay dagat (municipal
water guards); (vi) policy
advocacy around local ordinances and national laws, policies,
and programs; and (vii) organization and
mobilization of people to more effectively address their justice concerns by
making claims based on legal rights.3
FACTS
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.”
It is the submission of
petitioner that the advertisements [above] reproduced are champertous,
unethical, demeaning of the law profession, and destructive of the confidence
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 offended by the said
advertisements, hence the reliefs sought in his petition as hereinbefore
quoted.
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. What is palpably clear is that
respondent corporation gives out legal information to laymen and lawyers but it
contents that such function is non-advisory and non-diagnostic. In providing
information, for example, about foreign laws on marriage, divorce and adoption,
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.
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, reportedly
decided by the United States Supreme Court on June 7, 1977.
ISSUE(S)
1.
Whether
the services offered by respondent, The Legal Clinic, Inc., as advertised by
respondent it constitutes practice of law and, in either case, whether the same can
properly be the subject of the advertisements herein complained of.
2.
Whether paralegals here [in the Philippine Jurisdiction]
can perform the services offered by respondent. (NO, in the absence of
constitutional or statutory authority)
RULING
1.
Yes,
the services advertised by respondent constitute practice of law.
The
court held that 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.
Here,
the court held that 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 [the] 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. Hence, that
activity falls squarely within the jurisprudential definition of “practice of
law.”
As
to advertisement of such services, the court held that 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.
2.
No,
as to the second issue.
The
court held that [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. Nobody should be allowed to
represent himself as a “paralegal” for profit, without such term being clearly
defined by rule or regulation, and without any adequate and effective means of
regulating his activities
Here,
the court held that the services offered by respondent, which involves the
practice of law, cannot be performed by paralegals here in the absence of
constitutional or statutory authority. 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.
MISCELLANEOUS
MATERIALS
1. Section 3(e) Rule 71 of the
Rules of Civil Procedure provides to wit:
Section 3. Indirect contempt
to be punished after charge and hearing. — After a charge in writing has been
filed, and an opportunity given to the respondent to comment thereon within
such period as may be fixed by the court and to be heard by himself or counsel,
a person guilty of any of the following acts may be punished for indirect
contempt;
xxxx
(e) Assuming to be an
attorney or an officer of a court, and acting as such without authority;
2.
American
Bar Association, Current
ABA Definition of Paralegal (americanbar.org), Accessed 2021
3. Franco
et., al, (2018) Community-Based
Paralegalism in the Philippines (Chapter 3) - Community Paralegals and the
Pursuit of Justice (cambridge.org). Accessed 2021
