Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Lawyer deceives complainants into believing that he can expedite the titling of their properties

See - http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/june2012/6368.htm

"x x x.



It can not be overstressed that lawyers are instruments in the administration of justice.  As vanguards of our legal system, they are expected to maintain not only legal proficiency but also a high standard of morality, honesty, integrity and fair dealing.  In so doing, the people’s faith and confidence in the judicial system is ensured.  Lawyers may be disciplined – whether in their professional or in their private capacity – for any conduct that is wanting in morality, honesty, probity and good demeanor.[26]

          Rules 2.03 and 3.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility read:

Rule 2.03. – A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed primarily to solicit legal business.

Rule 3.01. – A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or unfair statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services.



          There is no question that the respondent committed the acts complained of.  He himself admitted in his answer that his legal services were hired by the complainants through Magat regarding the purported titling of land supposedly purchased.  While he begs for the Court’s indulgence, his contrition is shallow considering the fact that he used his position as a lawyer in order to deceive the complainants into believing that he can expedite the titling of the subject properties.  He never denied that he did not benefit from the money given by the complainants in the amount of P495,000.00.

          The practice of law is not a business.  It is a profession in which duty to public service, not money, is the primary consideration.  Lawyering is not primarily meant to be a money-making venture, and law advocacy is not a capital that necessarily yields profits.  The gaining of a livelihood should be a secondary consideration.  The duty to public service and to the administration of justice should be the primary consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate their personal interests or what they owe to themselves.[27]

x x x."