Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 192 views

    Abeto V Garcesa

    Uploaded by

    Kenneth Peter Molave
    A complaint was filed against a court stenographer for allegedly misrepresenting himself as a lawyer and representing complainants in labor cases. The respondent admitted to assisting with the cases but denied claiming to be a lawyer. He stated he was helping a union representative. The court agreed with reprimanding the respondent for engaging in outside work without permission, which is prohibited for court employees whose full time is required. However, the court found no convincing evidence the respondent presented himself as a lawyer, as non-lawyers were allowed to represent parties in labor cases at that time. Therefore, the complaint was dismissed but the respondent was reprimanded.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Abeto V Garcesa

    Uploaded by

    Kenneth Peter Molave
    192 views1 page
    A complaint was filed against a court stenographer for allegedly misrepresenting himself as a lawyer and representing complainants in labor cases. The respondent admitted to assisting with the cases but denied claiming to be a lawyer. He stated he was helping a union representative. The court agreed with reprimanding the respondent for engaging in outside work without permission, which is prohibited for court employees whose full time is required. However, the court found no convincing evidence the respondent presented himself as a lawyer, as non-lawyers were allowed to represent parties in labor cases at that time. Therefore, the complaint was dismissed but the respondent was reprimanded.

    Original Description:

    Pub Off Reyes

    Original Title

    Abeto v Garcesa

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    A complaint was filed against a court stenographer for allegedly misrepresenting himself as a lawyer and representing complainants in labor cases. The respondent admitted to assisting with the cases but denied claiming to be a lawyer. He stated he was helping a union representative. The court agreed with reprimanding the respondent for engaging in outside work without permission, which is prohibited for court employees whose full time is required. However, the court found no convincing evidence the respondent presented himself as a lawyer, as non-lawyers were allowed to represent parties in labor cases at that time. Therefore, the complaint was dismissed but the respondent was reprimanded.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    192 views1 page

    Abeto V Garcesa

    Uploaded by

    Kenneth Peter Molave
    A complaint was filed against a court stenographer for allegedly misrepresenting himself as a lawyer and representing complainants in labor cases. The respondent admitted to assisting with the cases but denied claiming to be a lawyer. He stated he was helping a union representative. The court agreed with reprimanding the respondent for engaging in outside work without permission, which is prohibited for court employees whose full time is required. However, the court found no convincing evidence the respondent presented himself as a lawyer, as non-lawyers were allowed to represent parties in labor cases at that time. Therefore, the complaint was dismissed but the respondent was reprimanded.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Abeto v Garcesa

    1995 | Davide, Jr., J.


    A complaint was filed against respondent for
    allegedly misrepresenting himself as a full-fledged lawyer
    and having acted as one of the authorized representatives
    of the complainant and his co-complainants in labour
    cases despite him being a court employee(stenographer).
    Respondent admitted he assisted complainant in
    labour cases but denied he misrepresented himself as a
    lawyer. He explained he frankly informed petitioner that
    he is only a court employee and he was only helping one
    Ronquillo (BP of Workders Amalgamated Union of the PH
    (WAUP) whose assistance was sought by petitioner and
    others. Respondent further alleges that the case arose out
    of ill-feeling and is design to maligh his name and
    reputation as a court employee. He manifests that if his
    motives in helping poor and downtrodden
    workers/employees of BISCOM Central would not be in
    consonance with Memo Circ 17 (1986) issued by the Exec
    Dept and is prohitibed by Admin Circ 5 issued by the
    Supreme Court, he will readily submit to the discretion of
    the SC.

    Issue:
    W/N complaint be dismissed. Yes but Respondent is
    reprimanded.

    Court agreed with recommendation of Deputy Court
    Admin Elapano that respondent be reprimanded.
    - Section 12 Rule XVIII of RCSR cited and SC
    memo circ 5;
    - Under the section 12, government employees
    prohibited from engaging in any private business,
    vocation of profession without permission from
    the Court; a proviso was emphasized which
    provided that the prohibition is absolute in the
    case of officers and employees whose duties and
    responsibilities require that their entire time be at
    the disposal of the Government;
    - Admin Circ 5 was also cited which provides that
    the entire time of Judiciary officials and
    employees must be devoted to government
    service to insure efficient and speedy
    administration of justice; the nature of their work
    requires them to serve with the highest degree of
    efficiency and responsibility in order to maintain
    public confidence in the Judiciary;



    W/N respondent should be held liable for
    unauthorized practice of law. No.
    - There is no convincing evidence respondent
    represented himself as a lawyer; his appearance
    merely was in his capacity as one of the
    representatives of the complainants, not as a
    lawyer;
    - NLRC rules provided at that time that a non-
    lawyer may appear before NLRC or any Labor
    Arbiter if he represents himself or as a party to
    the case, represents an organization or its
    members or is a duly accredited member of a free
    legal aid staff of the DOLE or other accredited
    legal aid of office by the DoJ and IBP;

    You might also like