Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 58 views

    Reasons For This Rule

    Uploaded by

    Angel Pagaran Amar
    Rule 9.02 prohibits lawyers from sharing legal fees with non-lawyers, except in certain circumstances such as completing unfinished work of a deceased lawyer or including non-lawyer employees in retirement plans. The rule aims to ensure only licensed lawyers can recover compensation for legal services and to avoid confusing the public about who they can consult for legal matters. The rule was established to maintain order within the legal profession and allow for disciplinary action against lawyers.

    Copyright:

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

    Reasons For This Rule

    Uploaded by

    Angel Pagaran Amar
    58 views1 page
    Rule 9.02 prohibits lawyers from sharing legal fees with non-lawyers, except in certain circumstances such as completing unfinished work of a deceased lawyer or including non-lawyer employees in retirement plans. The rule aims to ensure only licensed lawyers can recover compensation for legal services and to avoid confusing the public about who they can consult for legal matters. The rule was established to maintain order within the legal profession and allow for disciplinary action against lawyers.

    Original Description:

    asdfghjkl

    Original Title

    Rule 9.02

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Rule 9.02 prohibits lawyers from sharing legal fees with non-lawyers, except in certain circumstances such as completing unfinished work of a deceased lawyer or including non-lawyer employees in retirement plans. The rule aims to ensure only licensed lawyers can recover compensation for legal services and to avoid confusing the public about who they can consult for legal matters. The rule was established to maintain order within the legal profession and allow for disciplinary action against lawyers.

    Copyright:

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

    Reasons For This Rule

    Uploaded by

    Angel Pagaran Amar
    Rule 9.02 prohibits lawyers from sharing legal fees with non-lawyers, except in certain circumstances such as completing unfinished work of a deceased lawyer or including non-lawyer employees in retirement plans. The rule aims to ensure only licensed lawyers can recover compensation for legal services and to avoid confusing the public about who they can consult for legal matters. The rule was established to maintain order within the legal profession and allow for disciplinary action against lawyers.

    Copyright:

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

    Rule 9.

    02 - A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legal services with persons not licensed
    to practice law, except:

    (a) Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a partner or associate that, upon the latter's death,
    money shall be paid over a reasonable period of time to his estate or to persons specified in the
    agreement; or
    (b) Where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished legal business of a deceased lawyer; or
    (c) Where a lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer employees in a retirement plan even if the plan
    is based in whole or in part, on a profit-sharing agreement.

    Reasons for this rule:

     “No one is entitled to recover compensation for services as an attorney at law unless he has been
    duly admitted to practice and is an attorney in good standing at the time” (PAFLU Vs. Binalbagan
    Isabela Sugar Company, G.R. No. L-23959)
     Allowing non-lawyers to get attorney’s fees would confuse the public as to whom they should
    consult. It would leave the bar in a chaotic condition because non-lawyers are also not subject to
    disciplinary action.

    Cases:

    Lijauco Vs. Terrado, A.C. No. 6317, August 31, 2006

    Tumbokon Vs. Pefianco, A.C. No. 6116, August 1, 2012

    You might also like