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
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. (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.
RULING Yes, because 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.
Under the law, 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.
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.”
No as to the second issue because there is an absence of constitutional or statutory authority.
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.
