Case Summary (A.C. No. 2505)
Key Dates
• 3 October 1976: Marriage solemnized under Article 76, Civil Code.
• 1977–1981: Respondent’s law studies and Bar examination.
• 6 January 1982: First complaint filed (Bar Matter No. 78).
• 14 February 1983: Petition for disbarment filed (Adm. Case No. 2505).
• 5 March 1990: Solicitor General’s report submitted.
• 21 February 1992: En banc decision rendered.
Applicable Law
• 1987 Philippine Constitution – Supreme Court’s inherent power to discipline members of the Bar.
• Code of Professional Responsibility:
– Rule 7.01, Canon 7: Lawyer answerable for false statements in Bar admission.
– Canon 10 and Rule 1001: Duty of candor, fairness, and truthfulness toward the court.
• Civil Code, Article 76: Requirements for a special-character marriage (five years cohabitation, affidavits by parties and solemnizing officer, majority age).
Background of the Secret Marriage
Respondent and complainant contracted an “exceptional character” marriage under Article 76, agreeing to keep it secret until respondent completed law studies and took the Bar to secure their future. They never cohabited thereafter.
Bar Admission and Fraudulent Declaration
When applying for the 1981 Bar Examinations, respondent declared himself single despite being legally married. This misrepresentation triggered Bar Matter No. 78, where the Court deferred his Oath and required him to answer charges of lacking good moral character.
Proceedings in Bar Matter No. 78
Respondent filed an Explanation admitting the marriage and justification for non-disclosure. Complainant filed an affidavit of desistance, and the Court dismissed the complaint on 20 August 1982, allowing respondent to take his Oath.
Filing of the Disbarment Petition
Complainant subsequently filed Adm. Case No. 2505 (14 February 1983), seeking disbarment on grounds that respondent:
a. Used legal knowledge to contract an invalid marriage;
b. Misrepresented marital status in Bar application;
c. Lacked good moral character;
d. Deceived complainant into withdrawing earlier complaint for ulterior motives.
Respondent’s Denials and Defense
In his Comment, respondent:
– Argued the marriage was void ab initio due to non-compliance with Article 76 requisites (five years cohabitation, affidavits, majority age).
– Maintained honest belief in being single under law.
– Denied authorship of an unsigned letter to complainant purportedly expressing disdain for the marriage.
Investigation and Reports
The Court referred the case to the Solicitor General (May 1984) and later to the Bar Confidant (March 1990). The Solicitor General recommended exoneration on unsubstantiated charges but a reprimand for inconsistent statements. The Bar Confidant recommended indefinite suspension until the marriage status is resolved.
Supreme Court’s Findings on Moral Character
- Misrepresentation: Declaring single in Bar application was a “gross misrepresentation of a material fact” in bad faith, violating Rule 7.01, Canon 7.
- Duplicity in Pleadings: Respondent adopted inconsistent posit
Case Syllabus (A.C. No. 2505)
Facts
- On 3 October 1976, Evangeline Leda and Trebonian Tabang contracted marriage at Tigbauan, Iloilo, under Article 76 of the Civil Code as an exceptional marriage.
- The parties agreed to keep the marriage secret until respondent completed law studies (begun 1977) and bar examinations (1981).
- They never lived together as husband and wife.
- Upon finishing law school in 1981, respondent declared himself “single” in his bar‐examination application.
- Complainant filed Bar Matter No. 78 on 6 January 1982 to block respondent’s oaths, alleging fraud in the application and abandonment.
- The Supreme Court deferred respondent’s oath‐taking and required him to answer.
- On 26 May 1982, respondent filed an Explanation admitting the marriage but justifying secrecy to protect their future; complainant gave her conformity.
- On 2 June 1982, respondent moved to dismiss with complainant’s affidavit of desistance, prompting the Court on 20 August 1982 to dismiss Bar Matter No. 78 and allow oath‐taking.
Petition for Disbarment
- Complainant filed Administrative Case No. 2505 (Petition for Disbarment) on 14 February 1983.
- Alleged grounds:
- Use of legal knowledge to contract an invalid marriage and mock the institution.
- Misrepresentation of marital status as single in bar application.
- Lack of good moral character contrary to certification.
- Deception in obtaining complainant’s conformity and desistance affidavit for ulterior motives.
- Annex F: An unsigned, undated letter purpor