EN BANC

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

MAURICIO C. ULEP, Petitioner, v. 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 findings 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 offers legal support services can neither be seriously
considered nor sustained. Said proposition is belied by respondent’s own description
of the services it has been offering, to wit: . . . While some of the services being
offered by respondent corporation merely involve mechanical and technical know-
how, such as the installation of computer systems and programs for the efficient
management of law offices, or the computerization of research aids and materials,
these will not suffice 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 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 definition of "practice of law." Such a conclusion will not be
altered by the fact that respondent corporation does not represent clients in court
since law practice, as the weight of authority holds, is not limited merely to court
appearances but extends to legal research, giving legal advice, contract drafting,
and so forth. The aforesaid conclusion is further strengthened by an article published
in the January 13, 1991 issue of the Starweek/The Sunday Magazine of the
Philippine Star, entitled "Rx for Legal Problems," where an insight into the structure,
main purpose and operations of respondent corporation was given by its own
"proprietor," Atty. Rogelio P. Nogales: . . .

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 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.

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 definitely 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 first 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 offered by private respondent which constitute practice of law
cannot be performed by paralegals. Only a person duly admitted as a member of the
bar, or hereafter admitted as such in accordance with the provisions of the Rules of
Court, and who is in good and regular standing, is entitled to practice law. . . .

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, dignified
and objective information or statement of facts. He is not supposed to use or permit
the use of any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or
unfair statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services. 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 fidelity to trust,
which must be earned as the outcome of character and conduct. Good and efficient
service to a client as well as to the community has a way of publicizing itself and
catching public attention. That publicity is a normal by-product of effective service
which is right and proper. A good and reputable lawyer needs no artificial stimulus
to generate it and to magnify his success. He easily sees the difference between a
normal by-product of able service and the unwholesome result of propaganda.

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 first of such exceptions is the publication
in reputable law lists, in a manner consistent with the standards of conduct imposed
by the canons, of brief biographical and informative data. "Such data must not be
misleading and may include only a statement of the lawyer’s name and the names of
his professional associates; addresses, telephone numbers, cable addresses;
branches of law practiced; date and place of birth and admission to the bar; schools
attended with dates of graduation, degrees and other educational distinction; public
or quasi-public offices; posts of honor; legal authorships; legal teaching positions;
memberships and offices in bar associations and committees thereof, in legal and
scientific societies and legal fraternities; the fact of listings in other reputable law
lists; the names and addresses of references; and, with their written consent, the
names of clients regularly represented.." . . The use of an ordinary simple
professional card is also permitted. The card may contain only a statement of his
name, the name of the law firm which he is connected with, address, telephone
number and special branch of law practiced. The publication of a simple
announcement of the opening of a law firm or of changes in the partnership,
associates, firm name or office address, being for the convenience of the profession,
is not objectionable. He may likewise have his name listed in a telephone directory
but not under a designation of special branch of law.

11. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; REQUIREMENT FOR LAW LIST. — The law list must be a
reputable law list published primarily for that purpose; it cannot be a mere
supplemental feature of a paper, magazine, trade journal or periodical which is
published principally for other purposes. For that reason, a lawyer may not properly
publish his brief biographical and informative data in a daily paper, magazine, trade
journal or society program. Nor may a lawyer permit his name to be published in a
law list the conduct, management or contents of which are calculated or likely to
deceive or injure the public or the bar, or to lower the dignity or standing of the
profession.

12. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; CASE AT BAR. — Verily, taking into consideration the
nature and contents of the advertisements for which respondent is being taken to
task, which even includes a quotation of the fees charged by said respondent
corporation for services rendered, we find and so hold that the same definitely do
not and conclusively cannot fall under any of the above-mentioned exceptions.

13. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; EXCEPTION IN BATES, ET AL. v. STATE BAR OF
ARIZONA (433 U.S. 350, 53 L Ed 2d 810, 97 S Ct. 2691) AS TO PUBLICATION OF
LEGAL FEES, NOT APPLICABLE; REASONS. — The ruling in the case of Bates, Et. Al.
v. State Bar of Arizona, which is repeatedly invoked and constitutes the justification
relied upon by respondent, is obviously not applicable to the case at bar. Foremost
is the fact that the disciplinary rule involved in said case explicitly allows a lawyer,
as an exception to the prohibition against advertisements by lawyers, to publish a
statement of legal fees for an initial consultation or the availability upon request of a
written schedule of fees or an estimate of the fee to be charged for the specific
services. No such exception is provided for, expressly or impliedly, whether in our
former Canons of Professional Ethics or the present Code of Professional
Responsibility. Besides, even the disciplinary rule in the Bates case contains a
proviso that the exceptions stated therein are "not applicable in any state unless and
until it is implemented by such authority in that state." This goes to show that an
exception to the general rule, such as that being invoked by herein respondent, can
be made only if and when the canons expressly provide for such an exception.
Otherwise, the prohibition stands, as in the case at bar. It bears mention that in a
survey conducted by the American Bar Association after the decision in Bates, on the
attitude of the public about lawyers after viewing television commercials, it was
found that public opinion dropped significantly with respect to these characteristics
of lawyers: . . . Secondly, it is our firm belief that with the present situation of our
legal and judicial systems, to allow the publication of advertisements of the kind
used by respondent would only serve to aggravate what is already a deteriorating
public opinion of the legal profession whose integrity has consistently been under
attack lately by media and the community in general. At this point in time, it is of
utmost importance in the face of such negative, even if unfair, criticisms at times, to
adopt and maintain that level of professional conduct which is beyond reproach, and
to exert all efforts to regain the high esteem formerly accorded to the legal
profession.

RESOLUTION

REGALADO, J.:

Petitioner prays this Court "to order the respondent to cease and desist from issuing
advertisements similar to or of the same tenor as that of Annexes `A’ and `B’ (of
said petition) and to perpetually prohibit persons or entities from making
advertisements pertaining to the exercise of the law profession other than those
allowed by law." chanrobles virtual lawlibrary
The advertisements complained of by herein petitioner are as follows: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Annex A

SECRET MARRIAGE?

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 office 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
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 herein before quoted. chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

In its answer to the petition, respondent admits the fact of publication of said
advertisements at its instance, but claims that it is not engaged in the practice of
law but in the rendering of "legal support services" through paralegals with the use
of modern computers and electronic machines. Respondent further argues that
assuming that the services advertised are legal services, the act of advertising these
services should be allowed supposedly in the light of the case of John R. Bates and
Van O’Steen v. State Bar of Arizona, 2 reportedly decided by the United States
Supreme Court on June 7, 1977.

Considering the critical implications on the legal profession of the issues raised
herein, we required the (1) Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), (2) Philippine Bar
Association (PBA), (3) Philippine Lawyers’ Association (PLA), (4) U.P. Women
Lawyers’ Circle (WILOCI), (5) Women Lawyers Association of the Philippines (WLAP),
and (6) Federation International de Abogadas (FIDA) to submit their respective
position papers on the controversy and, thereafter, their memoranda. 3 The said bar
associations readily responded and extended their valuable services and cooperation
of which this Court takes note with appreciation and gratitude.

The main issues posed for resolution before the Court are whether or not the
services offered by respondent, The Legal Clinic, Inc., as advertised by it constitutes
practice of law and, in either case, whether the same can properly be the subject of
the advertisements herein complained of. chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

Before proceeding with an in-depth analysis of the merits of this case, we deem it
proper and enlightening to present hereunder excerpts from the respective position
papers adopted by the aforementioned bar associations and the memoranda
submitted by them on the issues involved in this bar matter.

1. Integrated Bar of the Philippines:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

x x x

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?

x x x

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) does not wish to make issue with
respondent’s foreign citations. Suffice it to state that the IBP has made its position
manifest, to wit, that it strongly opposes the view espoused by respondent (to the
effect that today it is alright to advertise one’s legal services).

The IBP 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 field of law practice as aforedescribed 4 .

x x x
A. The use of the name "The Legal Clinic, Inc." gives the impression that respondent
corporation is being operated by lawyers and that it renders legal services.

While the respondent repeatedly denies that it offers legal services to the public, the
advertisements in question give the impression that respondent is offering legal
services. The Petition in fact simply assumes this to be so, as earlier mentioned,
apparently because this (is) the effect that the advertisements have on the reading
public.

The impression created by the advertisements in question can be traced, first 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
offers 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 offered.

It thus becomes irrelevant whether respondent is merely offering "legal support

services" as claimed by it, or whether it offers 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 offered 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 offered 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:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

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 (defines) a marriage as follows:
virtual 1aw library
chanrob1es

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 fix 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 profit. At worst, this is
outright malpractice. chanrobles.com:cralaw:red

Rule 1.02. — A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the
law or at lessening confidence 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. chanrobles law library : red

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 confirms 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 offers
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 offers 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.

x x x

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 offering some of the services it presently offers, or, at the very least,
from offering 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 benefit the legal profession and
should not be stifled but instead encouraged. However, when the conduct of such
business by non-members of the Bar encroaches upon the practice of law, there can
be no choice but to prohibit such business.

Admittedly, many of the services involved in the case at bar can be better
performed by specialists in other fields, such as computer experts, who by reason of
their having devoted time and effort exclusively to such field cannot fulfill the
exacting requirements for admission to the Bar. To prohibit them from "encroaching"
upon the legal profession will deny the profession of the great benefits and
advantages of modern technology. Indeed, a lawyer using a computer will be doing
better than a lawyer using a typewriter, even if both are (equal) in skill.

Both the Bench and the Bar, however, should be careful not to allow or tolerate the
illegal practice of law in any form, not only for the protection of members of the Bar
but also, and more importantly, for the protection of the public. Technological
development in the profession may be encouraged without tolerating, but instead
ensuring prevention of, illegal practice.

There might be nothing objectionable if respondent is allowed to perform all of its

services, but only if such services are made available exclusively to members of the
Bench and Bar. Respondent would then be offering technical assistance, not legal
services. Alternatively, the more difficult task of carefully distinguishing between
which service may be offered to the public in general and which should be made
available exclusively to members of the Bar may be undertaken. This, however, may
require further proceedings because of the factual considerations involved.

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. chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

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. 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:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

x x x
Respondent asserts that it "is not engaged in the practice of law but engaged in
giving legal support services to lawyers and laymen, through experienced
paralegals, with the use of modern computers and electronic machines" (pars. 2 and
3, Comment). This is absurd. Unquestionably, respondent’s acts of holding out itself
to the public under the trade name "The Legal Clinic, Inc.," and soliciting
employment for its enumerated services fall within the realm of a practice which
thus yields itself to the regulatory powers of the Supreme Court. For respondent to
say that it is merely engaged in paralegal work is to stretch credulity. Respondent’s
own commercial advertisement which announces a certain Atty. Don Perkinson to be
handling the fields of law belies its pretense. From all indications, respondent "The
Legal Clinic, Inc." is offering and rendering legal services through its reserve of
lawyers. It has been held that the practice of law is not limited to the conduct of
cases in court, but includes drawing of deeds, incorporation, rendering opinions, and
advising clients as to their legal rights and then take them to an attorney and ask
the latter to look after their case in court (See Martin, Legal and Judicial Ethics,
1948 ed., p. 39).

It is apt to recall that only natural persons can engage in the practice of law, and
such limitation cannot be evaded by a corporation employing competent lawyers to
practice for it. Obviously, this is the scheme or device by which respondent "The
Legal Clinic, Inc." holds out itself to the public and solicits employment of its legal
services. It is an odious vehicle for deception, especially so when the public cannot
ventilate any grievance for malpractice against the business conduit. Precisely, the
limitation of practice of law to persons who have been duly admitted as members of
the Bar (Sec. 1, Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court) is to subject the members to the
discipline of the Supreme Court. Although respondent uses its business name, the
persons and the lawyers who act for it are subject to court discipline. The practice of
law is not a profession open to all who wish to engage in it nor can it be assigned to
another (See 5 Am. Jur. 270). It is a personal right limited to persons who have
qualified themselves under the law. It follows that not only respondent but also all
the persons who are acting for respondent are the persons engaged in unethical law
practice. 6

3. Philippine Lawyers’ Association: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

The Philippine Lawyers’ Association’s position, in answer to the issues stated herein,
are, to wit:
chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

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 officers for its unauthorized practice of law and for its
unethical, misleading and immoral advertising.

x x x
Respondent posits that it is not engaged in the practice of law. It claims that it
merely renders "legal support services" to lawyers, litigants and the general public
as enunciated in the Primary Purpose Clause of its Article(s) of Incorporation. (See
pages 2 to 5 of Respondent’s Comment). But its advertised services, as enumerated
above, clearly and convincingly show that it is indeed engaged in law practice, albeit
outside the court.

As advertised, it offers the general public its advisory services on Persons and
Family Relations Law, particularly regarding foreign divorces, annulment of
marriages, secret marriages, absence and adoption; Immigration Laws, particularly
on visa related problems, immigration problems; the Investment Law of the
Philippines and such other related laws.

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: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

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 unqualified 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 qualified 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 qualified 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 staffed by "paralegals." Clearly, measures should be
taken to protect the general public from falling prey to those who advertise legal
services without being qualified to offer such services." 8

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, staffed
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: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

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 officers 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 qualified practitioners legal services for their particular needs can justify the
use of advertisements such as are the subject matter of this petition, for one
(cannot) justify an illegal act even by whatever merit the illegal act may serve. The
law has yet to be amended so that such as act could become justifiable. chanrobles law library

We submit further that these advertisements that seem to project that secret
marriages and divorce are possible in this country for a fee, when in fact it is not so,
are highly reprehensible.

It would encourage people to consult this clinic about how they could go about
having a secret marriage here, when it cannot nor should ever be attempted, and
seek advice on divorce, where in this country there is none, except under the Code
of Muslim Personal Laws in the Philippines. It is also against good morals and is
deceitful because it falsely represents to the public to be able to do that which by
our laws cannot be done (and) by our Code of Morals should not be done. chanrobles virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph

In the case (of) In re Taguda, 53 Phil. 37, the Supreme Court held that solicitation
for clients by an attorney by circulars of advertisements, is unprofessional and
offenses of this character justify permanent elimination from the Bar. 10

6. Federacion International de Abogadas: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

x x x

1.7 That entities admittedly not engaged in the practice of law, such as
management consultancy firms or travel agencies, whether run by lawyers or not,
perform the services rendered by Respondent does not necessarily lead to the
conclusion that Respondent is not unlawfully practicing law. In the same vein,
however, the fact that the business of respondent (assuming it can be engaged in
independently of the practice of law) involves knowledge of the law does not
necessarily make respondent guilty of unlawful practice of law.

". . . Of necessity, no one . . . acting as a consultant can render effective 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 fire prevention codes, factory and tenement house
statutes, and who draws plans and specifications in harmony with the law. This is
not practicing law.

"But suppose the architect, asked by his client to omit a fire tower, replies that it is
required by the statute. Or the industrial relations expert cites, in support of some
measure that he recommends, a decision of the National Labor Relations Board. Are
they practicing law? In my opinion, they are not, provided no separate fee is
charged for the legal advice or information, and the legal question is subordinate
and incidental to a major non-legal problem.

"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 field had been pre-empted by lawyers, or custom placed a lawyer always at
the elbow of the lay personnel man. But this is not the case. The most important
body of industrial relations experts are the officers and business agents of the labor
unions and few of them are lawyers. Among the larger corporate employers, it has
been the practice for some years to delegate special responsibility in employee
matters to a management group chosen for their practical knowledge and skill in
such matters, and without regard to legal training or lack of it. More recently,
consultants like the defendant have tendered to the smaller employers the same
service that the larger employers get from their own specialized staff.

"The handling of industrial relations is growing into a recognized profession for which
appropriate courses are offered 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 defining his client’s obligations to his
employees, to guide his client along the path charted by law. This, of course, would
be the practice of the law. But such is not the fact in the case before me.
Defendant’s primary efforts are along economic and psychological lines. The law only
provides the frame within which he must work, just as the zoning code limits the
kind of building the architect may plan. The incidental legal advice or information
defendant may give, does not transform his activities into the practice of law. Let
me add that if, even as a minor feature of his work, he performed services which are
customarily reserved to members of the bar, he would be practicing law. For
instance, if as part of a welfare program, he drew employees’ wills.

"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 differing interpretations of a contract, or of a statute, it is quite likely
that defendant should not handle it. But I need not reach a definite conclusion here,
since the situation is not presented by the proofs.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

"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 `in person, or by counsel, or by other representative.’ Rules and
Regulations, September 11th, 1946, S. 203.31. `Counsel’ here means a licensed
attorney, and `other 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:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

(a) The legal question is subordinate and incidental to a major non-legal problem;

(b) The services performed are not customarily reserved to members of the bar;

(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: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
"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."cralaw virtua1aw library

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 affect this. . . . Apparently it is urged that the conjoining of these
two, that is, the text and the forms, with advice as to how the forms should be filled
out, constitutes the unlawful practice of law. But that is the situation with many
approved and accepted texts. Dacey’s book is sold to the public at large. There is no
personal contact or relationship with a particular individual. Nor does there exist that
relation of confidence and trust so necessary to the status of attorney and client.
THIS IS THE ESSENTIAL OF LEGAL PRACTICE — THE REPRESENTATION AND
ADVISING OF A PARTICULAR PERSON IN A PARTICULAR SITUATION. At most the
book assumes to offer general advice on common problems, and does not purport to
give personal advice on a specific problem peculiar to a designated or readily
identified person. Similarly the defendant’s publication does not purport `to give
personal advice on a specific problem peculiar to a designated or readily identified
person in a particular situation — in the publication and sale of the kits, such
publication and sale did not constitute the unlawful practice of law . . .. There being
no legal impediment under the statute to the sale of the kit, there was no proper
basis for the injunction against defendant maintaining an office for the purpose of
selling to persons seeking a divorce, separation, annulment or separation agreement
any printed material or writings relating to matrimonial law or the prohibition in the
memorandum of modification of the judgment against defendant having an interest
in any publishing house publishing his manuscript on divorce and against his having
any personal contact with any prospective purchaser. The record does fully support,
however, the finding that for the charge of $75 or $100 for the kit, the defendant
gave legal advice in the course of personal contacts concerning particular problems
which might arise in the preparation and presentation of the purchaser’s asserted
matrimonial cause of action or pursuit of other legal remedies and assistance in the
preparation of necessary documents (The injunction therefore sought to) enjoin
conduct constituting the practice of law, particularly with reference to the giving of
advice and counsel by the defendant relating to specific problems of particular
individuals in connection with a divorce, separation, annulment of separation
agreement sought and should be affirmed." (State v. Winder, 348, NYS 2d 270
[1973], cited in Statsky, supra at p. 101.)

1.12. Respondent, of course, states that its services are "strictly non-diagnostic,
non-advisory." It is not controverted, however, that if the services "involve giving
legal advice or counselling," such would constitute practice of law (Comment, par.
6.2). It is in this light that FIDA submits that a factual inquiry may be necessary for
the judicious disposition of this case.

2.10. Annex "A" may be ethically objectionable in that it can give the impression (or
perpetuate the wrong notion) that there is a secret marriage. With all the
solemnities, formalities and other requisites of marriages (See Articles 2, et seq.,
Family Code), no Philippine marriage can be secret.

2.11. Annex "B" may likewise be ethically objectionable. The second paragraph
thereof (which is not necessarily related to the first paragraph) fails to state the
limitation that only "paralegal services" or "legal support services", and not legal
services, are available." 11

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.chanrobles virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph

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 v. Monsod, 19 after citing the doctrines in several
cases, we laid down the test to determine whether certain acts constitute "practice
of law," thus:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Black defines "practice of law" as: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"The rendition of services requiring the knowledge and the application of legal
principles and technique to serve the interest of another with his consent. It is not
limited to appearing in court, or advising and assisting in the conduct of litigation,
but embraces the preparation of pleadings, and other papers incident to actions and
special proceedings, conveyancing, the preparation of legal instruments of all kinds,
and the giving of all legal advice to clients. It embraces all advice to clients and all
actions taken for them in matters connected with the law." cralaw virtua1aw library

The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases in court. (Land Title
Abstract and Trust Co. v. Dworken, 129 Ohio St. 23, 193 N.E. 650). A person is also
considered to be in the practice of law when he: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

". . . for valuable consideration engages in the business of advising persons, firms,
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)." cralaw virtua1aw library

This Court, in the case of Philippine Lawyers Association v. Agrava (105 Phil. 173,
176-177), stated: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court; it
embraces the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and
special proceedings, the management of, such actions and proceedings on behalf of
clients before judges and courts, and in addition, conveying. In general, all advice to
clients, and all action taken for them in matters connected with the law
incorporation services, assessment and condemnation services contemplating an
appearance before a judicial body, the foreclosure of a mortgage, enforcement of a
creditor’s claim in bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings, and conducting
proceedings in attachment, and in matters of estate and guardianship have been
held to constitute law practice, as do the preparation and drafting of legal
instruments, where the work done involves the determination by the trained legal
mind of the legal effect of facts and conditions. (5 Am. Jr. p. 262, 263).

"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 field of
business and trust relations and other affairs. 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 affairs, and great capacity for adaptation to difficult
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 office. 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)." cralaw virtua1aw library

The practice of law, therefore, covers a wide range of activities in and out of court.
Applying the aforementioned criteria to the case at bar, we agree with the
perceptive findings and observations of the aforestated bar associations that the
activities of respondent, as advertised, constitute "practice of law." cralaw virtua1aw library

The contention of respondent that it merely offers legal support services can neither
be seriously considered nor sustained. Said proposition is belied by respondent’s
own description of the services it has been offering, to wit:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"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 finding
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 certifications, obtaining
documentation like clearances, passports, local or foreign visas; giving information
about laws of other countries that they may find 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
efficient management of law offices, corporate legal departments, courts, and other
entities engaged in dispensing or administering legal services." 20

While some of the services being offered by respondent corporation merely involve
mechanical and technical know-how, such as the installation of computer systems
and programs for the efficient management of law offices, or the computerization of
research aids and materials, these will not suffice 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 definition of "practice of law." Such a conclusion
will not be altered by the fact that respondent corporation does not represent clients
in court since law practice, as the weight of authority holds, is not limited merely to
court appearances but extends to legal research, giving legal advice, contract
drafting, and so forth.

The aforesaid conclusion is further strengthened by an article published in the

January 13, 1991 issue of the Starweek/The Sunday Magazine of the Philippine Star,
entitled "Rx for Legal Problems," where an insight into the structure, main purpose
and operations of respondent corporation was given by its own "proprietor," Atty.
Rogelio P. Nogales: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

This is the kind of business that is transacted everyday at The Legal Clinic, with
offices on the seventh floor of the Victoria Building along U.N. Avenue in Manila. No
matter what the client’s problem, and even if it is as complicated as the Cuneta-
Concepcion domestic situation, Atty. Nogales and his staff of lawyers, who, like
doctors, are "specialists" in various fields, can take care of it. The Legal Clinic, Inc.
has specialists in taxation and criminal law, medico-legal problems, labor, litigation
and family law. These specialists are backed up by a battery of paralegals,
counsellors and attorneys.

Atty. Nogales set up The Legal Clinic in 1984. Inspired by the trend in the medical
field toward specialization, it caters to clients who cannot afford the services of the
big law firms.

The Legal Clinic has regular and walk-in clients. "When they come, we start by
analyzing the problem. That’s what doctors do also. They ask you how you
contracted what’s bothering you, they take your temperature, they observe you for
the symptoms, and so on. That’s how we operate, too. And once the problem has
been categorized, then it’s referred to one of our specialists." cralaw virtua1aw library

There are cases which do not, in medical terms, require surgery or follow-up
treatment. These The Legal Clinic disposes of in a matter of minutes. "Things like
preparing a simple deed of sale or an affidavit of loss can be taken care of by our
staff or, if this were a hospital, the residents or the interns. We can take care of
these matters on a while you wait basis. Again, kung baga sa ospital, out-patient,
hindi kailangang ma-confine. It’s just like a common cold or diarrhea," explains Atty.
Nogales.

Those cases which require more extensive "treatment" are dealt with accordingly. "If
you had a rich realtive who died and named you her sole heir, and you stand to
inherit millions of pesos of property, we would refer you to a specialist in taxation.
There would be real estate taxes and arrears which would need to be put in order,
and your relative is even taxed by the state for the right to transfer her property,
and only a specialist in taxation would be properly trained to deal with that problem.
Now, if there were other heirs contesting your rich relative’s will, then you would
need a litigator, who knows how to arrange the problem for presentation in court,
and gather evidence to support the case." 21

That fact that the corporation employs paralegals to carry out its services is not
controlling. What is important is that it is engaged in the practice of law by virtue of
the nature of the services it renders which thereby brings it within the ambit of the
statutory prohibitions against the advertisements which it has caused to be
published and are now assailed in this proceeding. chanrobles.com : virtual law library

Further, as correctly and appropriately pointed out by the U.P. WILOCI, said
reported facts sufficiently establish that the main purpose of respondent is to serve
as a one-stop-shop of sorts for various legal problems wherein a client may avail of
legal services from simple documentation to complex litigation and corporate
undertakings. Most of these services are undoubtedly beyond the domain of
paralegals, but rather, are exclusive functions of lawyers engaged in the practice of
law. 22

It should be noted that in our jurisdiction the services being offered by private
respondent which constitute practice of law cannot be performed by paralegals. Only
a person duly admitted as a member of the bar, or hereafter admitted as such in
accordance with the provisions of the Rules of Court, and who is in good and regular
standing, is entitled to practice law. 23

Public policy requires that the practice of law be limited to those individuals found
duly qualified in education and character. The permissive right conferred on the
lawyers is an individual and limited privilege subject to withdrawal if he fails to
maintain proper standards of moral and professional conduct. The purpose is to
protect the public, the court, the client and the bar from the incompetence or
dishonesty of those unlicensed to practice law and not subject to the disciplinary
control of the court. 24

The same rule is observed in the American jurisdiction where from respondent would
wish to draw support for his thesis. The doctrines there also stress that the practice
of law is limited to those who meet the requirements for, and have been admitted
to, the bar, and various statutes or rules specifically so provide. 25 The practice of
law is not a lawful business except for members of the bar who have complied with
all the conditions required by statute and the rules of court. Only those persons are
allowed to practice law who, by reason of attainments previously acquired through
education and study, have been recognized by the courts as possessing profound
knowledge of legal science entitling them to advise, counsel with, protect, or defend
the rights, claims, or liabilities of their clients, with respect to the construction,
interpretation, operation and effect of law. 26 The justification for excluding from
the practice of law those not admitted to the bar is found, not in the protection of
the bar from competition, but in the protection of the public from being advised and
represented in legal matters by incompetent and unreliable persons over whom the
judicial department can exercise little control. 27

We have to necessarily and definitely 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 first 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 offer 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, dignified and objective information or statement of
facts. 33 He is not supposed to use or permit the use of any false, fraudulent,
misleading, deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or unfair statement or claim
regarding his qualifications or legal services. 34 Nor shall he pay or give something
of value to representatives of the mass media in anticipation of, or in return for,
publicity to attract legal business. 35 Prior to the adoption of the Code of
Professional Responsibility, the Canons of Professional Ethics had also warned that
lawyers should not resort to indirect advertisements for professional employment,
such as furnishing or inspiring newspaper comments, or procuring his photograph to
be published in connection with causes in which the lawyer has been or is engaged
or concerning the manner of their conduct, the magnitude of the interest involved,
the importance of the lawyer’s position, and all other like self-laudation. 36

The standards of the legal profession condemn the lawyer’s advertisement of his
talents. A lawyer cannot, without violating the ethics of his profession, advertise his
talents or skills as in a manner similar to a merchant advertising his goods. 37 The
proscription against advertising of legal services or solicitation of legal business rests
on the fundamental postulate that the practice of law is a profession. Thus, in the
case of The Director of Religious Affairs v. Estanislao R. Bavot 38 an advertisement,
similar to those of respondent which are involved in the present proceeding, 39 was
held to constitute improper advertising or solicitation.

The pertinent part of the decision therein reads: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

It is undeniable that the advertisement in question was a flagrant 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
offering them to the public. As a member of the bar, he defiles the temple of justice
with mercenary activities as the money-changers of old defiled the temple of
Jehovah. The most worthy and effective advertisement possible, even for a young
lawyer, . . . is the establishment of a well-merited reputation for professional
capacity and fidelity 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 fidelity to trust,
which must be earned as the outcome of character and conduct. Good and efficient
service to a client as well as to the community has a way of publicizing itself and
catching public attention. That publicity is a normal by-product of effective service
which is right and proper. A good and reputable lawyer needs no artificial stimulus
to generate it and to magnify his success. He easily sees the difference between a
normal by-product of able service and the unwholesome result of propaganda. 40

Of course, not all types of advertising or solicitation are prohibited. The canons of
the profession enumerate exceptions to the rule against advertising or solicitation
and define the extent to which they may be undertaken. The exceptions are of two
broad categories, namely, those which are expressly allowed and those which are
necessarily implied from the restrictions. 41

The first of such exceptions is the publication in reputable law lists, in a manner
consistent with the standards of conduct imposed by the canons, of brief
biographical and informative data. "Such data must not be misleading and may
include only a statement of the lawyer’s name and the names of his professional
associates; addresses, telephone numbers, cable addresses; branches of law
practiced; date and place of birth and admission to the bar; schools attended with
dates of graduation, degrees and other educational distinction; public or quasi-public
offices; posts of honor; legal authorships; legal teaching positions; membership and
offices in bar associations and committees thereof, in legal and scientific societies
and legal fraternities; the fact of listings in other reputable law lists; the names and
addresses of references; and, with their written consent, the names of clients
regularly represented." 42

The law list must be a reputable law list published primarily for that purpose; it
cannot be a mere supplemental feature of a paper, magazine, trade journal or
periodical which is published principally for other purposes. For that reason, a lawyer
may not properly publish his brief biographical and informative data in a daily paper,
magazine, trade journal or society program. Nor may a lawyer permit his name to
be published in a law list the conduct, management or contents of which are
calculated or likely to deceive or injure the public or the bar, or to lower the dignity
or standing of the profession. 43

The use of an ordinary simple professional card is also permitted. The card may
contain only a statement of his name, the name of the law firm which he is
connected with, address, telephone number and special branch of law practiced. The
publication of a simple announcement of the opening of a law firm or of changes in
the partnership, associates, firm name or office address, being for the convenience
of the profession, is not objectionable. He may likewise have his name listed in a
telephone directory but not under a designation of special branch of law. 44

Verily, taking into consideration the nature and contents of the advertisements for
which respondent is being taken to task, which even includes a quotation of the fees
charged by said respondent corporation for services rendered, we find and so hold
that the time definitely do not and conclusively cannot fall under any of the above-
mentioned exceptions.

The ruling in the case of Bates, Et. Al. v. State Bar of Arizona, 45 which is
repeatedly invoked and constitutes the justification relied upon by respondent, is
obviously not applicable to the case at bar. Foremost is the fact that the disciplinary
rule involved in said case explicitly allows a lawyer, as an exception to the
prohibition against advertisements by lawyers, to publish a statement of legal fees
for an initial consultation or the availability upon request of a written schedule of
fees or an estimate of the fee to be charged for the specific services. No such
exception is provided for, expressly or impliedly, whether in our former Canons of
Professional Ethics or the present Code of Professional Responsibility. Besides, even
the disciplinary rule in the Bates case contains a proviso that the exceptions stated
therein are "not applicable in any state unless and until it is implemented by such
authority in that state." 46 This goes to show that an exception to the general rule,
such as that being invoked by herein respondent, can be made only if and when the
canons expressly provide for such an exception. Otherwise, the prohibition stands,
as in the case at bar.chanrobles law library : red

It bears mention that in a survey conducted by the American Bar Association after
the decision in Bates, on the attitude of the public about lawyers after viewing
television commercials, it was found that public opinion dropped significantly 47 with
respect to these characteristics of lawyers: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Trustworthy from 71% to 14%

Professional from 71% to 14%

Honest from 65% to 14%

Dignified from 45% to 14%

Secondly, it is our firm belief that with the present situation of our legal and judicial
systems, to allow the publication of advertisements of the kind used by respondent
would only serve to aggravate what is already a deteriorating public opinion of the
legal profession whose integrity has consistently been under attack lately by media
and the community in general. At this point in time, it is of utmost importance in the
face of such negative, even if unfair, criticisms at times, to adopt and maintain that
level of professional conduct which is beyond reproach, and to exert all efforts to
regain the high esteem formerly accorded to the legal profession.

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 different proceeding and 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. chanrobles lawlibrary : rednad

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-off 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 Office of the Bar Confidant and the Office of the Solicitor General
for appropriate action in accordance herewith.

Narvasa, C.J., Cruz, Feliciano, Padilla, Bidin, Griño-Aquino, Davide, Jr., Romero,
Nocon, Bellosillo, Melo and Quiason, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:

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 Affairs, 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, Officer-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 v. Morrow, 269 Hy. 1.

14. West Virginia State Bar v. Earley, 109 S.E. 2d 423, 144 W. Va. 504; Rhode Is.
Bar Assoc. v. Automobile Service Assoc. (R.I.) 179 A. 139, 144.

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

16. Depew, Et. Al. v. Witchita Assn. of Credit Men., Inc., 142 Kan. 403.

17. Fitchette v. Taylor, 94 ALR 356.

18. Mandelaum v. 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. v. Binalbagan-Isabela Sugar Co., Et Al.,
42 SCRA 312 (1971).

25. 7 C.J.S., Attorney & Client, 863, 864.

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

27. Lowell Bar Ass’n. v. 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 official or other person appointed or designated in
accordance with law to appear for the Government of the Philippines in a case in
which the government has an interest (Sec. 33, Rule 138, id.);(c) An agent or friend
who aids a party-litigant in a municipal court for the purpose of conducting the
litigation (Sec. 34, Rule 138; id.);(d) A person, resident of the province and of good
repute for probity and ability, who is appointed counsel de oficio to defend the
accused in localities where members of the bar are not available (Sec. 4, Rule 116,
id.);(e) Persons registered or specially recognized to practice in the Philippine Patent
Office (now known as the Bureau of Patents, Trademarks and Technology Transfer)
in trademark, service mark and trade name cases (Rule 23, Rules of Practice in
Trademark Cases);(f) A non-lawyer who may appear before the National Labor
Relations Commission or any Labor Arbiter only if (1) he represents himself as a
party to the case; (2) he represents an organization or its members, provided that
he shall be made to present written proof that he is properly authorized; or (3) he is
a duly-accredited member of any legal aid office duly recognized by the Department
of Justice or the Integrated Bar of the Philippines in cases referred thereto by the
latter (New Rules of Procedure of the National Labor Relations Commission);(g) An
agent, not an attorney, representing the lot owner or claimant in a case falling under
the Cadastral Act (Sec. 9, Act No. 2259); and(h) Notaries public for municipalities
where completion and passing the studies of law in a reputable university or school
of law is deemed sufficient qualification for appointment (Sec. 233, Administrative
Code of 1917). See Rollo, 144-145.

31. 7 C.J.S., Attorney & Client, 866; Johnstown Coal & Coke Co. of New York v.
U.S., 102 Ct. Cl. 285.

32. Florida Bar v. 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 v. 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 confidential.

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 Affairs v. Bayot,

supra, Fn 38.

49. U.S. v. Ney & Bosque, 8 Phil. 146 (1907); People v. Luna, 102 Phil. 968 (1958).

50. Secs. 2 and 3, Rule 66, Rules of Court, in relation to Sec. 6(1), P.D. No. 902-A
and Sec. 121, Corporation Code.