I recently read an advertisement on Facebook enticing people to contact a certain lawyer for legal services. Advertisements for legal services are frowned upon in our jurisdiction and in fact it can even be reprimanded or penalized. The idea is that the law profession is not the same as other professions where, in order to entice people, certain words or techniques can be employed that may tend to demean the profession. Advertisement is not allowed except for simple office signages or calling cards. But why are advertisements not allowed for lawyers but are permitted for other professionals? I could not answer for the Supreme Court since it is the body that regulates the law profession. On the practical side, I personally believe that this rule should perhaps be relaxed since the public also needs to be informed regarding legal services through advertisements so people can also protect their rights.
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 utilize 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 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 evidence 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 public’s 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 lawyer’s 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.”