< All Topics

Question 2

II.

A.

(Question II-A, Legal and Judicial Ethics, 2017 Bar Exam)

Pedro Tigas, a known toughie, asked Atty. Chloe to meet with him in the Jollibee Restaurant in Harrison Plaza because he wanted to seek her legal advice on an important matter. Atty. Chloe had once before been consulted by Pedro Tigas, who had then paid her well. When they met in Jollibee Restaurant, he confided his planned assassination of Pepeng Taga, his rival for control of the neighborhood in San Andres Bukid, Manila. He wanted her to represent him should he be apprehended for the assassination. Atty. Chloe did not agree, and left the restaurant in a hurry before Pedro Tigas could utter anything more.

A few days afterwards, Pepeng Taga was killed near his house in San Andres Bukid, Manila. The police follow-up team arrested Pedro Tigas on the basis of testimony by at least two residents that they had heard him saying two days before the killing that Pepeng Taga would not live beyond 48 hours. Should Atty. Chloe reveal to the police investigator what Pedro Tigas had stated to her at the Jollibee Restaurant without violating the confidence of the latter as a client? Explain your answer. (4%)

Suggested Answer:

Yes. Answer

Under jurisprudence, the attorney-client privilege cannot be invoked or used as a shield for an illegal act. It is not within the professional character of a lawyer to give advice on the commission of a crime. Rule

In the case at bar, Atty. Chloe is not bound by the attorney-client privilege. Mr. Tigas was consulting on a possible commission of a crime which is not covered by the privilege. Apply

Thus, Atty. Chloe may reveal to the police investigator what Mr. Tigas had stated to her. Conclusion

B.

(Question II-B, Legal and Judicial Ethics, 2017 Bar Exam)

Assuming that the meeting between Pedro Tigas and Atty. Chloe in Jollibee Restaurant occurred after the killing of Pepeng Taga, and in that meeting Pedro Tigas expressly admitted to Atty. Chloe in strict confidence as his lawyer that he had shot Pepeng Taga. Is Atty. Chloe ethically bound to reveal the admission of Pedro Tigas to the police investigator what Pedro Tigas had stated to her at the Jollibee Restaurant? Explain your answer. (4%)

Suggested Answer:

No. Answer

Under jurisprudence, consulting a lawyer for representation from a criminal charge is covered by the attorney-client privilege. Rule

In the case at bar, the killing had already happened prior to consulting Atty. Chloe. Accordingly, when Mr. Tigas consulted Atty. Chloe as his lawyer and admitted to the killing in confidence, she was bound by attorney-client privilege. Apply

Thus, Atty. Chloe is not ethically bound to reveal the admission of Mr. Tigas to the police investigator. Conclusion

..

(Notice: The suggested answers simulate those that a bar examinee may provide, and thus specific citations are not provided. Notwithstanding, in the reviewers, the bar exam question is answered under the appropriate topic which discusses the concepts and principles, as well as provide for specific citations. Accordingly, please refer to it on the reviewer or in the Library.)

Previous Question 1
Next Question 3
Table of Contents