Title
Supreme Court
Velasco vs. Causing
Case
A.C. No. 12883
Decision Date
Mar 2, 2021
Atty. Causing suspended for one year for breaching confidentiality, violating ethical rules, and making derogatory public posts about a client's case.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 12883)

Petitioner

Enrico R. Velasco, plaintiff in Civil Case No. 10536 before the Regional Trial Court of Balanga City, Bataan, seeking nullity of his marriage.

Respondent

Atty. Berteni C. Causing, legal counsel for Velasco’s spouse in the nullity proceeding and author of the contested Facebook post.

Key Dates

• March 19, 2016 – Respondent’s initial Facebook publication (“Wise Polygamous Husband?”) with attached petition documents
• April 7, 2016 – Respondent sent direct message to Velasco’s son linking the Facebook post
• January 23, 2017 – IBP investigating commissioner’s report recommending one-year suspension
• November 28, 2017 – IBP Board of Governors resolution imposing two-year suspension
• June 18, 2019 – Denial of respondent’s motion for reconsideration by IBP Board
• March 2, 2021 – Supreme Court resolution docketing administrative case
• October 2, 2023 – Final Supreme Court decision

Applicable Law

• 1987 Philippine Constitution – freedom of expression subject to ethical and legal limits
• Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR)
– Canon 1; Rule 8.01 (prohibition against abusive or offensive language)
– Canon 13; Rule 13.02 (prohibition on public statements about pending cases)
– Canon 19; Rule 19.01 (requirement to employ only fair and honest means)
• Republic Act No. 8369 (Family Courts Act of 1997), Section 12 (confidentiality of family court records)

Antecedents

Velasco’s petition for nullity of marriage was pending before Branch 3, RTC Balanga City. Respondent, representing Velasco’s spouse, published the entire petition on his Facebook account under the caption “Wise Polygamous Husband?” He labeled Velasco “polygamous,” “dishonest,” “arrogant,” and “cheater,” and sent the post link to Velasco’s son. The post was shared publicly, eliciting adverse reactions toward Velasco. Velasco filed a Complaint-Affidavit for disbarment before the IBP.

Issue

Whether Atty. Causing violated his ethical and statutory duties by publishing confidential family court documents and making derogatory public statements about the complainant.

Ruling

The Court finds Atty. Causing administratively liable for breaching the CPR and RA 8369. His defenses invoking freedom of expression and status as a “spokesman-lawyer” or “journalist-blogger” are untenable. The Court adopts the IBP findings but reduces the penalty.

Rationale

  1. Duty of Confidentiality and Professional Decorum
    – Section 12, RA 8369 prohibits disclosure of family court records.
    – CPR Canon 13, Rule 13.02 forbids public statements on pending cases.
    – CPR Rule 8.01 prohibits abusive or offensive language.
    – CPR Canon 19, Rule 19.01 mandates fair and honest means.
    – A lawyer may not shed professional obligations once off the record.

  2. Limits on Freedom of Expression
    – Under the 1987 Constitution, freedom of speech and the press is not absolute.
    – In Belo-Henares v. Atty. Guevarra, the Court held that defamatory or insulting statements in a lawy

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.