Scribd
Upload
36 views2 pages

Aguirre Vs Rana

Uploaded by

Noreen Manalaysay
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
36 views2 pages

Aguirre Vs Rana

Uploaded by

Noreen Manalaysay
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

DONNA MARIE S. AGUIRRE vs. EDWIN L.

RANA
B.M. No. 1036
June 10, 2003
Carpio, J:
Doctrine

Respondent called himself "counsel" knowing fully well that he was not a member of the Bar. Having
held himself out as "counsel" knowing that he had no authority to practice law, respondent has shown
moral unfitness to be a member of the Philippine Bar.

A bar candidate does not acquire the right to practice law simply by passing the bar examinations. The
practice of law is a privilege that can be withheld even from one who has passed the bar examinations,
if the person seeking admission had practiced law without a license.

Facts
Respondent Edwin Rana passed the 2000 bar exam. On May 21, 2001 one day before the scheduled
mass oath-taking of successful bar examinees as members of the Philippine Bar, complainant Donna
Marie Aguirre ("complainant") filed against respondent a Petition for Denial of Admission to the Bar .
Complainant charged respondent with unauthorized practice of law, grave misconduct, violation of law,
and grave misrepresentation.

Court allowed respondent to take his oath as a member of the Bar during the scheduled oath-taking.
However, the Court ruled that respondent could not sign the Roll of Attorneys pending the resolution of
the charge against him.

Complainant charges respondent for unauthorized practice of law and grave misconduct. Complainant
alleges that respondent, while not yet a lawyer, appeared as counsel for a candidate in the May 2001
elections. It allegedly filed a pleading, where respondent represented himself as "counsel for and in
behalf of running Vice Mayor and Mayor, signed the pleading as counsel.

Respondent claims that "he decided to assist and give advice, not as a lawyer but as a person who
knows the law." Respondent admits signing the pleadings filed to the Municipal Board of Election
Canvassers. He explains, however, that he did not sign the pleading as a lawyer or represented himself
as an "attorney" in the pleading and that the complaint was obviously for political reasons.

Office of the Bar Confidant found that respondent really appeared as counsel in the MBEC and actively
participated therein. OBC believes that respondent's misconduct casts a serious doubt on his moral
fitness to be a member of the Bar. The OBC also believes that respondent's unauthorized practice of
law is a ground to deny his admission to the practice of law. The OBC therefore recommends that
respondent be denied admission to the Philippine Bar.

Issue/s
Whether Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law

Ruling: YES

Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law and thus does not deserve admission to the
Philippine Bar.

Respondent took his oath as lawyer on 22 May 2001. However, the records show that respondent
appeared as counsel for Vice Mayor candidate Bunan prior to 22 May 2001, before respondent took the
lawyer's oath. Mayoralty candidate Emily Estipona-Hao also "retained"respondent as her counsel and
counsel of the party. Respondent signed as counsel for Estipona-Hao in the petition filed before the
MBEC praying for the proclamation of Estipona-Hao as the winning candidate for mayor.
All of these happened even before respondent took the lawyer's oath. Clearly, respondent engaged in
the practice of law without being a member of the Philippine Bar.

In Cayetano v. Monsod, 2 the Court held that "practice of law" means any activity, in or out of court,
which requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience. To engage
in the practice of law is to perform acts which are usually performed by members of the legal
profession. Generally, to practice law is to render any kind of service which requires the use of
legal knowledge or skill.

Evidence clearly supports the charge of unauthorized practice of law. Respondent called himself
"counsel" knowing fully well that he was not a member of the Bar. Having held himself out as "counsel"
knowing that he had no authority to practice law, respondent has shown moral unfitness to be a
member of the Philippine Bar.

A bar candidate does not acquire the right to practice law simply by passing the bar examinations. The
practice of law is a privilege that can be withheld even from one who has passed the bar examinations,
if the person seeking admission had practiced law without a license.

Under Section 3 (e) of Rule 71 of the Rules of Court, a person who engages in the unauthorized practice
of law is liable for indirect contempt of court.

The fact that respondent passed the bar examinations is immaterial. Passing the bar is not the only
qualification to become an attorney-at-law. Respondent should know that two essential requisites for
becoming a lawyer still had to be performed, namely: his lawyer's oath to be administered by this Court
and his signature in the Roll of Attorneys.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy