Summary
The court will likely apply the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) in Atty. Dagons case, as it was the law in effect at the time of the conduct. The new Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA) does not retroactively affect ongoing cases unless explicitly stated. Atty. Marce is administratively liable under the CPRA for using abusive language, as lawyers must maintain respect towards judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, reflecting the integrity and decorum expected in the legal profession.Full Conversation
A case was initiated by the Supreme Court against Atty. Dagon following a viral
video dated January *, *. In the video, Atty. Dagon was seen speaking in
front of a camera while inside a parked car, fuming and angrily cursing and using
profane language against journalist Raina.The Court found that Atty. Dagon's
language in the video violated Rule *.* of the Code of Professional
Responsibility (CPR):
On April *, *, while the case against Atty. Dagon was still pending, the Court
unanimously approved the Code of Professional Responsibility and
Accountability (CPRA) which took effect on May *, *. The CPR under
which Atty. Dagon was charged with disbarment has now been expressly
repealed by the new CPRA. In deciding the case, what will the Court apply, is
it the provisions of the CPR or the provisions of the new CPRA? Explain.
The Court will likely apply the provisions of the CPR under which Atty. Dagon was charged. Generally, legal proceedings apply the law that was in effect at the time the conduct occurred. The repeal of the CPR by the CPRA does not retroactively affect ongoing cases unless expressly stated.
Is there anything else you would like to know about this case?
Rule *.* – A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects
on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life,
behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession.
The court will likely apply the provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) under which Atty. Dagon was initially charged, as legal proceedings typically adhere to the law in effect at the time of the conduct.
Is there a specific outcome or next step you are concerned about regarding this case?
*. Atty. Marce, in his Motion for Reconsideration of the Decision rendered by the NLRC, alleged that there
was connivance of the NLRC Commissioners with Atty. Leon for monetary consideration in arriving at
the questioned decision. He insulted the Commissioners for their ineptness in appreciating the facts as
borne by the evidence presented. Atty. Leon files an administrative complaint against Atty. Marce for
using abusive language. Atty. Marce posits that as lawyer for the down-trodden laborers, he is entitled
to express his righteous anger against the commissioners for having cheated them; that his allegations
in the Motion for Reconsideration are absolutely privileged; and that proscription against the use of
abusive language does not cover pleadings filed with the NLRC, as it is not a court, nor are any of its
Commissioners Justices or Judges. Is Atty. Marce administratively liable under the Code of
Professional Responsibility and Accountability? Explain.
Yes, Atty. Marce is administratively liable under the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA). Lawyers must maintain respect towards judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, and the use of abusive language, even in pleadings, reflects poorly on the legal profession. The CPRA expects lawyers to uphold the integrity and decorum of their practice at all times.
Would you like information on how to proceed with this case or any specific legal advice?
TRY ME!
Start a new chat