Lawyers in other countries are free to advertise their services through the media. Not in the Philippines. We only see signages bearing the name of the lawyer, his office address, and mobile number and nothing more. The signages are there only to inform people of the location of the lawyer’s office but not to entice them to avail of his services. For other firms or companies, they can use whatever is available to persuade clients to avail of their services over other firms or companies. Businesses compete for more clients, lawyers cannot. On many instances, the Supreme Court reprimanded, suspended, penalised, and even disbarred lawyers for soliciting clients or advertising their services in violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility. One lawyer was suspended from the practise of law for one year for soliciting and enticing clients to transfer legal representation.
Complaint Against the Lawyer (real name withheld)
A complaint was filed with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines against Atty. X for trying to entice a client to dismiss his lawyer and retain him instead. He sent several text messages and called said client several times to convince him to utilise his services and even promised that he will extend a 50,000 loan. Atty. X’s calling card was also submitted to the IBP as an evidence to support the complaint. The said card does not just contain the name, office, address, and mobile number of the lawyer but also contains the phrase “W/ FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE”. The IBP recommended that Atty. X be “reprimanded with a stern warning that any repetition would merit a heavier penalty.” (A.C. No. 6672, 04 September 2009)
The Court’s Ruling
The Supreme Court agreed with the IBP that the evidences presented against Atty. X proved that he indeed violated Canons of the Code of Professional Responsibility which contains the rules of conduct that must be followed by all lawyers. When Atty. X placed the phrase “w/ financial assistance” on his calling card which he distributed to the public, he was in violation of Canon 3- A lawyer in making known his legal services shall use only true, honest, fair, dignified and objective information or statement of facts. Said phrase was meant to entice clients to prefer him over other lawyers because aside from legal services his clients can get financial assistance if they hire Atty. X. This is also considered “solicitation” which Canon 2.03 prohibits: A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designated primarily to solicit legal business. The SC said: “Time and time again, lawyers are reminded that the practice of law is a profession and not a business; lawyers should not advertise their talents as merchants advertise their wares. To allow a lawyer to advertise his talent or skill is to commercialize the practice of law, degrade the profession in the publics estimation and impair its ability to efficiently render that high character of service to which every member of the bar is called.”
Atty. X also violated Canon 8.02 when he encroached “upon the professional employment of another lawyer” when he enticed the client to drop his present lawyer and retain his services instead. The promise of lending money to future clients was also in violation of Canon 16.04 prohibiting lawyers from borrowing or lending money to clients. The High Tribunal reminds lawyers that: “A lawyers best advertisement is a well-merited reputation for professional capacity and fidelity to trust based on his character and conduct. For this reason, lawyers are only allowed to announce their services by publication in reputable law lists or use of simple professional cards. Professional calling cards may only contain the following details: (a) lawyers name; (b) name of the law firm with which he is connected; (c) address; (d) telephone number and (e) special branch of law practiced.”
