Legal Counseling
Legal Counseling
Legal Counseling
Ramil F. De Jesus
Introduction
lawyer who used his knowledge in substantive and procedural laws in order to
the bar. The importance of legal counseling was not given its due emphasis
Objective
Discussion
particular activity comes within the meaning of the term depends upon the
doctrines laid down by the courts explaining the meaning and scope of the term.
Generally, to engage in the practice of law is to do any of those acts which are
which requires the application of law, legal principle, practice or procedure and
calls for legal knowledge, training and experience. It involves the carrying on of
rendering service to another. It includes legal advice and counseling, and the
preparation of legal instruments and contracts by which legal rights are secured,
layman; and appearance for clients before public tribunals which possess power
and authority to determine rights of life , liberty and property according to law, in
One who confers with clients and advices them of their legal rights is also
practicing law. Giving advice for compensation regarding the legal status and
extensive field of business and trust relations and other affairs. These require in
many aspects a high degree of legal skills, a wide experience with men and
that part of the work of a lawyer which involves the appearance in court and that
part which involves advice and drafting of instruments in his office. The work of
office lawyer has profound effect on the whole scheme of the administration of
2
justice. It is performed with the possibility of litigation in mind, otherwise it would
hardly be needed.
In Cayetano v. Monsod, the majority of the court through Mr. Justice Paras
engaged in active practice of law for at least ten years and that practice of law
Gutierrez, in his dissenting opinion, noted that engaging in the practice of law is
also a qualification for appointment of Justices of the Supreme Court and Judges
of the Lower Courts and then asked: What kind of judges and justices will we
Government or private practice, except that in one joyful moment in the distant
past, they happened to pass the bar examinations? Mr. Justice Cruz, in his
dissent, stated that from the term “practice of law” as defined by the majority of
the Court, “one does not even have to be a lawyer to be engage in the practice of
law as long as his activities involve the application of some law, however,
peripherally.” Mr. Justice Padilla, in his dissent, said that the respondent did not
determinative of engaging in the practice of law, said criteria being the following:
persons learned in law have not been dissipated. The law profession has
survived and continually become relevant in this modern world. The need for
3
persons and problems of future litigants abound and those seeking advice has
legal advice, as providing legal advice also constitute practice of law. Not all
persons may appear in courts and represent clients or provide legal counseling
The term Legal Ethics is the embodiment of all the principles of morality
and refinement that should govern the conduct of every member of the bar. It has
also been broadly defined as the living spirit of the profession, which limits yet
which treats of the duties which an attorney owes to the court, to his client, to his
colleagues in the profession and to the public. ( Agpalo, Legal and Judicial
Ethics, 2009).
and has become more complex, human problems have also multiplied and have
become complicated. Hence, the demand for more lawyers has turned acute,
practitioners.
that lawyers possess the integrity, probity and excellence that a member of the
law profession should have. Without legal ethics, the quality of legal service and
from one generation of lawyers to the other. With legal ethics, the tradition of
Professional Responsibility
4
There is more to law practice however than just opening and developing a
law office and winning office cases. In the conduct of lawyering an officer of the
table, an actor if you may, and above all a man of integrity whose words
command respect and authority not only from his clients but also from his clients’
On accepting cases
One cardinal advice to a lawyer is: Don’t take a case unless you believe in
it”. This advice seem at first blush impractical when a new lawyer needs cases
and is faced with increasing expenses; but in the long run, this advice produces
this does not involve one’s belief as to whether or not a client is guilty, since you
still have the duty to see to it that he is given the full benefits of the law and all
the legal defenses he is entitled to. But if the client has really no cause of action
or defense at all, but merely seeks your legal services to delay and buy time, to
obstruct justice and harass the court or the adverse party and you ought to know
this as a counselor-at-law, then you should not accept the case. Likewise, do not
accept a case on the ground solely that it has “nuisance value” for purpose of
On the other hand, if you believe that a case is a worthy cause, though
unpopular or difficult it may be, then, do the best you can, for the lawyer is bound
5
But whether or not a lawyer should advise his client to submit to arbitration
judgment subject to the client’s final word. The better judgment is towards
advising your client to submit amicable settlement, when, in your honest opinion
in the light of the evidence on hand, the prospect of winning court battle is
remote. Much of this judgment will depend on the lawyer’s knowledge of our
provisions of the law, if he takes the wrong step in their application or formulates
a wrong theory, his case is already doomed even he drafts the first pleading.
But it is also remembered that a lawyer has control only with respect to the
procedural aspects of the case. The final decision on whether to litigate or not, or
take an appeal or not, should come from the client. But even in the matter of
enter a plea of not guilty or not in a criminal case, or to prosecute malicious suit
or to pursue an illegal course of action, the lawyer should not allow himself to be
dictated by the client simply because the latter can afford to pay him the highest
fees. He must be frank with his client in explaining that his case will not prosper
in court and be ready to substantiate his opinion on this matter based on his legal
institute and the witnesses he will present in court. He can make admissions of
6
evidence against him and cannot be heard to deny that they were authorized.
non-suit, which does not bar the bringing of another suit on the same cause of
action.
relevant or not, or whether the defense he had chosen is proper or not, in the
pleading to file in court or what theory should be adopted, are all mistakes of
procedures and they bind the client, except for honest mistakes.
First and foremost, of course, there is no substitute for winning a case. But
being human beings as they are, not all lawyers can guarantee a sure victory for
his client’s cause. Apart from the human factor and this does not discount the
unpredictable disposition of the trial judge and his apparent bias and prejudices,
and many more are some of the setbacks that a trial lawyer usually suffers from
the practice of his profession no matter how strong his case appear at the start.
Good human relation, a lot of psychology and tact and diplomacy are
client. Even in the sad news of losing a case, the client would not feel
disappointed and would still come back to the same lawyer who is loaded with
7
these fire-power of encouragement and endeavors to soothe his client’s ruffled
feelings with reasonable and logical explanations why the case collapsed.
The key to a satisfied client therefore, is to treat him with cordiality and
compassion, with sincerity and honest intentions, and with a spirit of not giving up
even when all the odds seem to shatter the brightest hopes. These plus a strong
determination to succeed and sustain a good fight, believing that not all days are
cloudy and that in a court battle only one party is going to win and the other party
will lose. All of these human factors must be practiced not only by the lawyer, but
Advise
whatever else they do for clients is almost invariably accompanied with advice.
usually based in the large part on the lawyer’s conception and learning of
relevant substantive law and doctrine applicable on the particular facts and
subject involved.
The lawyer who does his advisory job well makes the law and legal
endeavor to explain the applicability and probable impact of the substantive law
with ideas and language, at simplifying concepts often mystifying and strange to
laymen. But the more the lawyer knows about the surrounding circumstances of
the matter at hand, the better position he is in to give accurate and sound advice.
enough. The better he understands his client and his client’s affair, the more
8
helpful the lawyer can be. Some lawyers, however, when asked for advice which
they know they are equipped to give, will gamble or luck on their client’s gullibility
and give the advice without sufficient preparation. This practice is fraught with
Not infrequently lawyers are asked to give advice having little or nothing to
difficulties are among those likely to seek non-legal advice from their lawyers. As
long as the performance of these acts do not prejudice the interest of the public
or are done outside of office hours, there is nothing wrong in the acts of
government lawyers who earn extra income outside their official functions. This
quite true with full time judges and government prosecutors who teaches in law
In advising clients, the lawyer can often run into role conflict giving rise to
different questions. The lawyer is not faced with problems in identifying and
determining what the client wants. The man who hires a lawyer may not be clear
in his own mind whether or not he wants the lawyer to challenge him or how he
wants the lawyer go in this respect. The problems become trickier when the
client is a large organization. The lawyer’s role then may be shaped by a number
of persons, each with different perceptions of what he wants the lawyer do and
represent a client or establish relationship with him for a long time before feeling
The best approach in dealing with this particular type of client is define
right upon the acceptance of the employment or before giving advice, the extent
9
of client’s role. He should be made to feel that as a lawyer his wishes can be
followed insofar as they appear to be legally feasible and do not collide with the
lawyer’s oath. Frankness is the name of the game. The lawyer’s role is to stand
foursquare with his client’s interest, but only to such limit that will not allow him
Conclusion
relationship and the lawyer merely gives advice it will not be considered practice
of law.
References:
Legal Counseling with Notes on: Practicum and Practice Court by Recaredo P. Barte
Legal and Judicial Ethics by Ruben E. Agpalo
Internet
10