Submitted by:

Apordo, Mark Christian

B.
Enalpe, Rodolfo Jr.
Guasque, Jacqueline
Lagman, Ivy Xenia
Mabbun, Ma.
Submitted
to:
Antonette
Atty. Victor Eleazar

18 February
2011

[PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS]

TV OR RADIO PROGRAMS GIVING LEGAL ADVICE
FACTS:
There has been a spate of TV and radio programs where lawyers would give legal
advice from phone-in callers or texters.
Author Agpalo wrote, The giving of advice on legal matters through the medium of a
newspaper column or radio or television broadcast is improper citing A.B.A. Op. 270 dated
November 30, 1945. He said, It cannot be undertaken by a layman because that service
constitutes practice of law. Nor can it be undertaken by a lawyer because that work involves
indirect advertising, violation of the confidential relation of attorney and client, and a breach of
the traditional standards of the profession, citing the case of Rosenthal v. Shepard
Broadcasting Service, 12 NE2d 819, 114 ALR 1502 (1938).
In Drinkers work on Legal Ethics, he said that writing a column in a newspaper will,
sooner or later, violate those ethical principles because what the readers want is not a general
discussion such as they can find in law books or articles in law journals, but something practical
which they can apply to their own experience, which is what the publishers will see that they get,
and a lawyer answering such is apt to follow what he thinks his readers want to hear about and
to answer the personal problem which he sees behind the questions.
ISSUES:
The following issues are to be taken into consideration based on the abovementioned
facts:
1.
2.
3.

Is there a client-lawyer relationship when the client either calls in his legal query or sends his
query by SMS message?
What if the lawyers advice is found to be wrong, can he be held administratively liable for it?
Can the producer of the TV or Radio program be held liable for damages for the wrong advice
given by the lawyer?
COMMENTS:
1. Is there a client-lawyer relationship when the client either calls in his legal query
or sends his query by SMS message?
Yes, it is our position that a client-lawyer relationship is created when the client either calls in his
legal query or sends his query by SMS message.
It is a settled rule that to establish the professional relation, it is sufficient that the advice and
assistance of an attorney are sought and received in any manner pertinent to his profession
(George c. Solatan vs. Attys. Oscar a. Inocentes A.C. No. 6504. August 9, 2005).
The Supreme Court reiterated their pronouncement in Solatan in ruling the case of Virginia
Villaflores vs. Atty. Sinamar E. Limos( A.C. No. 7504. November 23, 2007), to wit: The relation
of attorney and client begins from the time an attorney is retained. To establish the professional
relation, it is sufficient that the advice and assistance of an attorney are sought and received in
any manner pertinent to his profession.
Thus, it is as to what kind of query will determine whether client-lawyer relationship is created. It
is not how and in what form or presence of formal requisites constitutes client-lawyer
relationship. Obviously if the query pertains to legal matters, the inevitable conclusion is that, as
the Supreme Court interprets it, client-lawyer relationship will exists no matter how conscious or
unconscious, and regardless of its medium, a lawyer when they give their advice.
Before, the client-lawyer relationship is premised on the Roman Law Concept of Contract of
lease of service, at the same time agency. But in the modern day understanding of the
Arellano School of Law | 18 February | Group 1

[PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS]

relationship, lawyer is more than a mere agent or servant because he possesses special power
of trust and confidence reposed by his client.
An attorney is employed - that is, he is engaged in his professional capacity as a lawyer or
counsellor - when he is listening to his client's preliminary statement of his case, or when he is
giving advice thereon, just as truly as when he is drawing his client's pleadings, or advocating
his client's cause in open court (Denver Tramway Co. vs. Owens, 20 Colo., 107; 36 P., 848.).
It may be asked whether text/SMS message is recognized in our jurisdiction. By virtue of RA
8792 and its Implementing Rules, said question will be answered in a positive. Chapter II of the
said law recognizes the Electronic Data Message 1 and Electronic Documents2 as to its validity
and enforceability and to have its corresponding legal effects.
Moreover, even not recognizing the involvement of text/SMS message in the given facts, the
same question can answered in the clarification made by the Supreme Court in the case
Rolando B. Pacana, Jr. vs. Atty. Maricel Pascual-Lopez wherein they categorically pronounced
that The absence of a written contract will not preclude the finding that there was a
professional relationship between the parties. Documentary formalism is not an essential
element in the employment of an attorney; the contract may be express or implied. To establish
the relation, it is sufficient that the advice and assistance of an attorney is sought and received
in any matter pertinent to his profession.
Finally, it is nice to revisit the case of Junio v. Grupo (Administrative Case No 5020, Dec 18,
2001) Respondent (Grupo) claims that complainant is a close personal friend and that in
helping redeem the property of complainant's parents, he did not act as a lawyer but as a friend,
hence there is no client-attorney relationship between them. The Supreme Court ruled that the
contention of Respondent has no merit and explained their conclusion by citing Hilado v. David3:
To constitute professional employment it is not essential that the client should
have employed the attorney professionally on any previous occasion . . . It is not
necessary that any retainer should have been paid. promised, or charged for ;
neither is it material that the attorney consulted did not afterward undertake the
case about which the consultation was had. If a person, in respect to his
business affairs or troubles of any kind, consults with his attorney in his
professional capacity with the view to obtaining professional advice or
assistance, and the attorney voluntarily permits or acquiesces in such
consultation, then the professional employment must be regarded as
established.
2. What if the lawyers advice is found to be wrong, can he be held administratively
liable for it?
Yes, we believe that if the lawyers advice is found to be wrong, he can be held
administratively liable for such wrong advice.
The usual scenario in providing legal advice on radio or television is that the lawyer answers
questions that undertake to advise a particular member of the audience as regards a
particular legal problem.
1 "Electronic data message" refers to information generated, sent, received or stored by electronic, optical or similar
means (Letter (b), Section 5 of RA 8792).

2 "Electronic signature" refers to any distinctive mark, characteristic and/or sound in electronic from, representing the
identity of a person and attached to or logically associated with the electronic data message or electronic document
or any methodology or procedures employed or adopted by a person and executed or adopted by such person with
the intention of authenticating or approving an electronic data message or electronic document (Letter (d), Section 5
of RA 8792).

3 G.R. No. L-961, September 21, 1949 (84 Phil 569)

Arellano School of Law | 18 February | Group 1

[PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS]

It is important to highlight that the giving of advice on legal matters through the medium of
radio or television may create an attorney-client relationship which gives rise to a legal duty
on the part of the lawyer vis-a-vis his putative client (i.e., the person who sought the advice).
The creation of the attorney-client relationship can be inferred in our previously reported
case of Burbe vs. Atty. Magulta4 wherein the Court ruled that if a person, in respect to
business affairs or troubles of any kind, consults a lawyer with a view to obtaining
professional advice or assistance, and the attorney voluntarily permits or acquiesces with
the consultation, then the professional employment is established.
Generally, an attorney-client relationship is understood as an assurance to employ a
reasonable degree of care, skill and diligence. Although, this undertaking does not grant that
the lawyer profess to know all the law or is incapable of error or mistake in applying it to the
facts of each case, we believe that the lawyer is nonetheless required to exert that degree of
vigilance and attention in the performance of his legal duties.
Applying this to the situation of persons who seek legal advice through the medium of radio
or television, it is critical to note that these persons are usually those who are highly
unfamiliar about the law (even the very basics thereof), readily assumes that the answers
they receive from the lawyer are correct and spontaneously decides to take an action (or not
to take an action) based on the legal advice they have received. This reliance should be
foreseeable by the lawyer and taking this into consideration, he must employ caution or
prudence.
Thus, the lawyers failure to apply a reasonable degree of caution in giving a legal advice
which may lead to the provision of a wrong legal advice can provide a justification for
administrative liability. This liability is more compelling if said wrong advice resulted damage
to the person who sought and relied with the advice.
Further, in consideration of the established attorney-client relationship, the administrative
liability of the lawyer in providing a wrong advice may be justified based on Rule 18.03 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility which provides that a lawyer shall not neglect a legal
matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable.
Nonetheless, we would like to reiterate that the existence or non-existence of attorney-client
relationship may not always be relevant for a lawyer to be liable. In the case of Mendoza vs.
Atty. Deciembre5, the Court ruled that the fact that there is no attorney-client relationship
xxx cannot shield respondent, as a lawyer, from liability. A lawyer may be disciplined xxx for
acts which tend to bring reproach on the legal profession or to injure it in the favorable
opinion of the public. Thus, if the lawyer will give an advice which would likely bring
reproach to the legal profession liability will still attach notwithstanding that there is no
attorney-client relationship.

The provision of legal advice through the medium of radio or television provides the general
public a cheaper and convenient means of soliciting reliable legal advice. We believe that if
the courts will not attach liability when a wrong advice is given by the lawyer would
eventually create a downside on the integrity of the legal profession.

4 AC No. 99-634, June 10, 2002, 383 SCRA 276

5 A.C. No. 5338, February 23, 2009
Arellano School of Law | 18 February | Group 1

[PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS]

Accordingly, the issue of lawyers participation in radio and television advice programs must
be guarded because there is a concern that a lawyer giving legal advice through these
mediums will have insufficient facts to give a full response and thus, a broadcast exchange
between a lawyer and questioner may raise concerns of misunderstanding or
misapprehension of facts and/or advice. At worst, other listeners might erroneously rely on
the legal advice given.

3. Can the producer of the TV or Radio program be held liable for damages for the
wrong advice given by the lawyer?
Yes, we believe that producers may be held liable jointly and severally with the person granted
the airtime (lawyer giving advice) and the station, provided that:
(1)

Four instances:
a. An undertaking has been executed, that they shall be liable jointly and severally;
b. the person giving legal advice is NOT duly qualified or NOT duly authorized;
c. the source of the advice given is NOT authoritative;
d. sources are NOT identified when the information is aired.

(2) No mention of liability attaching due to WRONG advice.

BASIS:
PART I: 2007 Broadcast Code of the Philippines
Article 14. MEDICAL, LEGAL AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVICE
Sec.1. Only duly qualified and authorized persons shall be allowed to give medical, legal or
other professional advice. (S)
Sec.2. Information about medical, legal and other professional matters, especially those
affecting the well-being of others, must come only from authoritative sources. These sources
must be identified when the information is aired. (G)
NOTE: The letter at the end of each provision indicates the class of penalties to be imposed for
violations.
PART II. IMPLEMENTING RULES AND REGULATIONS
Article 2. Persons, natural and juridical, who are granted airtime, whether by sale or donation
(including blocktimers and independent producers) shall be required to execute an undertaking
that they shall be liable, jointly and severally with the station, for all applicable penalties that
may be imposed for violations of this Code in their programs. Individuals who go on the air
during such airtime shall also be required to execute the same undertaking.
PART III. PENALTIES
Article 3. Serious (S) offenses shall be subject to the following penalties:
1. When the violation is on radio:
On the
Individua

On
the

Arellano School of Law | 18 February | Group 1

[PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS]

l
1st
Offens
e

P10,000.
00
and
repriman
d

2nd
Offens
e

P15,000.
00
and 30day onair
suspensi
on
P20,000.
00
and 60day onair
suspensi
on
P25,000.
00
and
revocati
on of
accredit
ation

3rd
Offens
e

4th
Offens
e

Stati
on
P20,
000.
00
and
cens
ure
P30,
000.
00

P40,
000.
00

P50,
000.
00
and
90day
susp
ensi
on of
mem
bers
hip
privil
eges

2. When the violation is on television:

1st
Offens
e

2nd
Offens
e

On the
Individ
ual
P15,00
0.00
and
reprim
and
P20,00
0.00
and
30-day

On the
Station
P30,00
0.00
and
censur
e
P40,00
0.00

Arellano School of Law | 18 February | Group 1

[PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS]

on-air
suspe
nsion
P25,00
0.00
and
60-day
on-air
suspe
nsion
P30,00
0.00
and
revoca
tion of
accred
itation

3rd
Offens
e

4th
Offens
e

P50,00
0.00

P60,00
0.00
and
120day
suspe
nsion
of
memb
ership
privileg
es

Article 4. Grave (G) offenses shall be subject to the following penalties:

1. When the violation is on radio:

1st
Offens
e

2nd
Offens
e

3rd
Offens
e

4th
Offens
e

On the
Individ
ual
P15,00
0.00
and
reprim
and
P20,00
0.00
and
60-day
on-air
suspe
nsion
P25,00
0.00
and
90-day
on-air
suspe
nsion
P30,00
0.00
and
revoca
tion of
accred

On the
Station
P30,00
0.00
and
censur
e
P40,00
0.00

P50,00
0.00

P60,00
0.00
and
120day
suspe

Arellano School of Law | 18 February | Group 1

[PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS]

itation

nsion
of
memb
ership
privileg
es

2. When the violation is on television:

On the
Individu
al
P20,000
.00
and
reprima
nd
P25,000
.00
and 60day onair
suspens
ion
P30,000
.00
and 90day onair
suspens
ion
P35,000
.00
and
revocati
on of
accredit
ation

1st
Offe
nse

2nd
Offe
nse

3rd
Offe
nse

4th
Offe
nse

On the
Station
P40,000
.00
and
censure
P50,000
.00

P60,000
.00

P70,000
.00
and
150-day
suspens
ion of
member
ship
privilege
s

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
Liability of producers (in case of existence of employer-employee relationship)
QUASI-DELICT

Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence
is obliged to pay for the damage done. (Article 2176 Civil Code)

Culpa Criminal (criminal negligence)

Arellano School of Law | 18 February | Group 1

[PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS]

-

Crime

Affect the public interest

The Revised Penal Code punishes or corrects criminal act
Punished only if there is a penal law clearly covering them
Liability of the employer of the actor-employee is subsidiary in crimes

Governed by Art. 365 of the Revised Penal Code.

Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence. Any person who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit
any act which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of
arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its medium period; if it would
have constituted a less grave felony, the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and medium
periods shall be imposed; if it would have constituted a light felony, the penalty of arresto menor
in its maximum period shall be imposed.
Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall commit an act which would
otherwise constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and
maximum periods; if it would have constituted a less serious felony, the penalty of arresto mayor
in its minimum period shall be imposed.
When the execution of the act covered by this article shall have only resulted in damage to the
property of another, the offender shall be punished by a fine ranging from an amount equal to
the value of said damages to three times such value, but which shall in no case be less than
twenty-five pesos.
A fine not exceeding two hundred pesos and censure shall be imposed upon any person who,
by simple imprudence or negligence, shall cause some wrong which, if done maliciously, would
have constituted a light felony.
In the imposition of these penalties, the court shall exercise their sound discretion, without
regard to the rules prescribed in Article sixty-four.
The provisions contained in this article shall not be applicable:
1. When the penalty provided for the offense is equal to or lower than those provided in the first
two paragraphs of this article, in which case the court shall impose the penalty next lower in
degree than that which should be imposed in the period which they may deem proper to apply.
2. When, by imprudence or negligence and with violation of the Automobile Law, to death of a
person shall be caused, in which case the defendant shall be punished by prision correccional
in its medium and maximum periods.
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntary, but without malice, doing or falling to do an act from
which material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the
person performing of failing to perform such act, taking into consideration his employment or
occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition and other circumstances regarding
persons, time and place.
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution displayed in those cases in which the
damage impending to be caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly manifest.

Arellano School of Law | 18 February | Group 1

[PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS]

The penalty next higher in degree to those provided for in this article shall be imposed upon the
offender who fails to lend on the spot to the injured parties such help as may be in this hand to
give. (As amended by R.A. 1790, approved June 21, 1957).(Sole Chapter on CRIMINAL
NEGLIGENCE, QUASI-OFFENSES-TITLE XIV)

Doctrine of Respondeat Superior the liability is strictly imputed, the employer is liable not
because of his act or omission but because of the act or omission of the employee; employer
cannot escape liability by claiming that he exercised due diligence in the selection or
supervision of the employee.
Employers are made liable not only because of the negligent or wrongful act of the person for
whom they are responsible but also because of their own negligence; Liability is imposed on the
employer because he failed to exercise due diligence in the selection or supervision of the
employee

Governed by Art. 103 of the Revised Penal Code.

Art. 103. Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. The subsidiary liability established in the
next preceding article shall also apply to employers, teachers, persons, and corporations
engaged in any kind of industry for felonies committed by their servants, pupils, workmen,
apprentices, or employees in the discharge of their duties.

AFFIRMATIVE DUTIES AND MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES:

Employers and Employees
Employers

In quasi-delictual actions against the employer, the employee may use the provisions of the
Labor Code which imposes upon the employer certain duties with respect to the proper
maintenance of the work place or the provisions of adequate facilities to ensure the safety of the
employees.
Employees

Employees are bound to exercise due care in the performance of their functions for the
employers; absence such due care, the employee may be held liable
Exceptions

Articles 1711 and 1712 of the Civil Code impose liability without fault on the part of the
employers
Art. 1711. Owners of enterprises and other employers are obliged to pay compensation for the
death of or injuries to their laborers, workmen, mechanics or other employees, even though the
event may have been purely accidental or entirely due to a fortuitous cause, if the death or
personal injury arose out of and in the course of the employment. The employer is also liable for
compensation if the employee contracts any illness or disease caused by such employment or
as the result of the nature of the employment. If the mishap was due to the employee's own
notorious negligence, or voluntary act, or drunkenness, the employer shall not be liable for
compensation. When the employee's lack of due care contributed to his death or injury, the
compensation shall be equitably reduced.
Art. 1712. If the death or injury is due to the negligence of a fellow worker, the latter and the
employer shall be solidarily liable for compensation. If a fellow worker's intentional malicious act
Arellano School of Law | 18 February | Group 1

10

[PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS]

is the only cause of the death or injury, the employer shall not be answerable, unless it should
be shown that the latter did not exercise due diligence in the selection or supervision of the
plaintiff's fellow worker.
Circumstances affecting Civil Liability

Justifying circumstances
defendant is free from civil liability if justifying circumstances are properly establishes

Exempting Circumstances
They do not erase the civil liability

Mitigating and Aggravating circums-tances

Damages to be adjudicated may either be decreased or increased depending on the presence
of mitigating or aggravating circumstances

persons relying on advice given by an expert (civil code);

Art. 1341. A mere expression of an opinion does not signify fraud,
unless made by an expert and the other party has relied on the former's special knowledge.
(n)

Arellano School of Law | 18 February | Group 1

11