LAW STUDENT PRACTICE RULE

A. RULE 138-A; RULES OF COURT

I. Conditions for Student Practice (Sec. 1)

A law student who has successfully completed his 3rd year of the regular four-year prescribed law
curriculum and is enrolled in a recognized law school's clinical legal education program approved by the
Supreme Court, may appear without compensation in any civil, criminal or administrative case before any
trial court, tribunal, board or officer, to represent indigent clients accepted by the legal clinic of the law
school.

II. Appearance (Sec. 2)

The appearance of the law student authorized by this rule, shall be under the direct supervision and
control of a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines duly accredited by the law school. Any and
all pleadings, motions, briefs, memoranda or other papers to be filed, must be signed by the supervising
attorney for and in behalf of the legal clinic.

o In Bar Matter No. 730 (13 June 1997), the Supreme Court held that a law student appearing
before the Regional Trial Court under Rule 138-A should at all times be accompanied by a
supervising lawyer.

The records show that the plaintiff in civil Case No. BCV-92-11 (Irene A. Caliwara
v. Roger T. Catbagan, RTC of Bacoor, Cavite) was represented by Mr. Cornelio
Carmona, Jr., an intern at the Office of Legal Aid, UP-College of Law (UP-OLA). Mr.
Carmona conducted hearings and completed the presentation of the plaintiff's
evidence-in-chief without the presence of a supervising lawyer. Justice Barredo
questioned the appearance of Mr. Carmona during the hearing because the latter
was not accompanied by a duly accredited lawyer. On December 15, 1994,
Presiding Judge Edelwina Pastoral issued an Order requiring Mr. Carmona to be
accompanied by a supervising lawyer on the next hearing. In compliance with said
Order, UP-OLA and the Secretary of Justice executed a Memorandum of
Agreement directing Atty. Catubao and Atty. Legayada of the Public Attorney's
Office to supervise Mr. Carmona during the subsequent hearings.

Justice Barredo asserts that a law student appearing before the trial court under
Rule 138-A should be accompanied by a supervising lawyer. On the other hand,
UP-OLA, through its Director, Atty. Alfredo F. Tadiar, submits that "the matter of
allowing a law intern to appear unaccompanied by a duly accredited supervising
lawyer should be . . . left to the sound discretion of the court after having made at
least one supervised appearance."

o The phrase direct supervision and control requires no less than the physical presence of the
supervising lawyer during the hearing. This is in accordance with the threefold rationale behind
the Law Student Practice Rule, to wit:
1. to ensure that there will be no miscarriage of justice as a result of incompetence or
inexperience of law students, who, not having as yet passed the test of professional
competence, are presumably not fully equipped to act as counsels on their own;
 2. to provide a mechanism by which the accredited law school clinic may be able to protect itself
from any potential vicarious liability arising from some culpable action by their law students;
and
3. to ensure consistency with the fundamental principle that no person is allowed to practice a
particular profession without possessing the qualifications, particularly a license, as required
by law. (Bar Matter No. 730)

o Can the matter of allowing a law student to appear before the court unaccompanied by a
supervising lawyer be left to the discretion of the presiding judge?
No. The matter of allowing a law student to appear before the court unaccompanied by a
supervising lawyer cannot be left to the discretion of the presiding judge. The rule clearly states
that the appearance of the law student shall be under the direct control and supervision of a
member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines duly accredited by law schools. The rule must be
strictly construed because public policy demands that legal work should be entrusted only to
those who possess tested qualifications, are sworn to observe the rules and ethics of the legal
profession and subject to judicial disciplinary control.

The Law Student Practice Rule is only an exception to the rule. Hence, the presiding judge should
see to it that the law student appearing before the court is properly guided and supervised by a
member of the bar. (Bar Matter No. 730)

o Exception to the exception

The rule, however, is different if the law student appears before an inferior court, where the issues
and procedure are relatively simple. In inferior courts, a law student may appear in his personal
capacity without the supervision of a lawyer.

Section 34 of Rule 138 provides that in the court of a justice of the peace a party may conduct his
litigation in person, with the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for the purpose, or with
the aid an attorney. In any other court, a party may conduct his litigation personally or by aid of
an attorney, and his appearance must be either personal or by a duly authorized member of the
bar.

Thus, a law student may appear before an inferior court as an agent or friend of a party without
the supervision of a member of the bar. (Bar Matter No. 730)

o Application of the Exception to the Appearance Rule

In respect to the constitutional right of an accused to be heard by himself and counsel, the
Supreme Court held that during the trial, the right to counsel cannot be waived. The rationale for
this ruling is that even the most intelligent or educated man may have no skill in the science of
law, particularly in the rules of procedure, and without counsel, he may be convicted not because
he is guilty but because he does not know how to establish his innocence. (People v. Holgado, 86
Phil. 752 (1950)).

However, the solicitous concern that the Constitution accords the accused in a criminal
prosecution obviously does not obtain in a civil case. In Cruz v. Mijares (G.R. no. 154464, 11
September 2008), petitioner Ferdinand A. Cruz, a fourth-year law student sought permission to
enter his appearance for and on his behalf under Section 34 of Rule 138 before the RTC of Pasay
City as the plaintiff in Civil Case No. 01-0410 for Abatement of Nuisance. Respondent Judge
 Priscilla Mijares required Cruz to secure a written permission from the Court Administrator before
he could be allowed to appear as counsel for himself. For having failed to submit the promised
document and jurisprudence, and for his failure to satisfy the requirements or conditions under
Rule 138-A of the Rules of Court, Judge Mijares denied his appearance.

Here, the Supreme Court held that the trial court’s conclusion that Rule 138-A superseded Rule
138 is misplaced. The Court never intended to repeal Rule 138 when it released the guidelines for
limited law student practice. In fact, it was intended as an addendum to the instances when a
non-lawyer may appear in courts and was incorporated to the Rules of Court through Rule 138-A.

The Supreme Court held that a party litigant in a civil case, who insists that he can, without a
lawyer's assistance, effectively undertake the successful pursuit of his claim, may be given the
chance to do so. In this case, petitioner alleges that he is a law student and impliedly asserts that
he has the competence to litigate the case himself. Evidently, he is aware of the perils incident to
this decision.

o Appearance of non-lawyers before the Municipal Trial Court in a criminal case

Section 7 of Rule 116 provides that in localities where such members of the bar are not available,
the court may appoint a non-lawyer who is:
a) a resident of the that province;
b) of good repute for probity; and
c) ability to defend the accused.

o Appearance of non-lawyers in Administrative Tribunals

Section 6 of Rule III of the 2011 National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) Rules of Procedure,
as amended, provides that a non-lawyer may appear before the Labor Arbiter or Commission only
under the following conditions:
a) He/she represents himself/herself as party to the case;
b) He/she represents a legitimate labor organization which is a party to the case;
c) He/she represents a member or members of a legitimate labor organization that is existing
within the employer’s establishment, who are parties to the case;
d) He/she is a duly-accredited member of any legal aid office recognized by the Department of
Justice or Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and
e) He/she is the owner or president of a corporation or establishment which is a party to the
case.

III. Privileged Communications (Sec. 3)

The Rules safeguarding privileged communications between attorney and client shall apply to similar
communications made to or received by the law student, acting for the legal clinic. (Sec. 3, Rule 138-A)

IV. Standards of Conduct and Supervision (Sec. 4)

The law student shall comply with the standards of professional conduct governing members of the Bar.
Failure of an attorney to provide adequate supervision of student practice may be a ground for disciplinary
action. (Sec. 4, Rule 138-A)
B. A.M. NO. 19-03-24-SC, 25 June 2019 – Amendment to the provisions of Rule 138-A
(This rule shall take effect at the start of Academic Year 2020-2021 following its publication in two (2)
newspapers of general circulation)

I. Coverage (Sec. 1)
The limited practice of law covers:
1. Appearances;
2. Drafting and submission of pleadings and documents before trial and appellate courts and quasi-
judicial and administrative bodies;
3. Assistance in mediation and other alternative modes of dispute resolution, legal counseling and
advice; and
4. Such other activities that may be covered by the Clinical Legal Education Program of the law school.

II. Eligibility Requirements of Law Student Practitioners and Practice Areas of Law Student
Practitioners (Secs. 3 and 4)
No law student shall be permitted to engage in any of the activities under the Clinical Legal Education
Program of a law school unless the law student has applied for and secured the following certifications:

Eligibility1 Practice Areas2

Level 1 Certification 1. Interview prospective clients;
- For law students who have 2. Give legal advice to the client;
successfully completed their first- 3. Negotiate for and on behalf of the client;
year law courses. 4. Draft legal documents such as affidavits, compromise
agreements, contracts, demand letter, position papers,
and the like;
5. Represent eligible parties before quasi-judicial or
administrative bodies;
6. Provide public legal orientation; and
7. Assist in public interest advocacies for policy formulation
and implementation.

Level 2 Certification 1. Perform all activities under Level 1 Certification;

- For law students currently 2. Assist in the taking of depositions and/or preparing judicial
enrolled for the second semester affidavits of witnesses;
of their third-year law courses: 3. Appear on behalf of the client at any stage of the
Provided however, where a proceedings or trial, before any court, quasi-judicial or
student fails to complete all their administrative body;
third-year law courses, the Level 2 4. In criminal cases, subject to the provisions of Section 5,
certification shall be deemed Rule 110 of the Rules of Court, to appear on behalf of a
automatically revoked. government agency in the prosecution of criminal actions;
- The Level 2 Certification shall be and
valid before all courts, quasi- 5. In appealed cases, to prepare the pleadings required in the
case.

1
The certification issued shall be valid until the student has completed the required number of courses in the
clinical legal education program to complete the law degree, unless sooner revoked. (Sec. 3)
2
Subject to the supervision and approval of a supervising lawyer. (Sec. 4)
 judicial and administrative bodies.
(Sec. 5)

III. Certification Application Requirements (Sec. 5)

Law Student Law School Exec. Judge of RTC

Level 1 - submit a duly- - through the dean or - shall evaluate, approve, and
Certification* accomplished the authorized issue the certification within
application representative, shall ten (10) days from receipt of
form under submit to the Office of the application
oath in three the Executive Judge of
(3) copies the Regional Trial
- payment of the Court (RTC) having
necessary legal jurisdiction over the
and filing fees territory where the
law school is located,
the duly-accomplished
application form
- endorsement under
oath
* The Level 1 Certification shall be valid before all courts, quasi-judicial and administrative bodies within
the judicial region where the law school is located.

Level 2 1. submit a duly- 1. through the dean or 1. Within ten (10) days from
Certification** accomplished the authorized receipt of the application, the
application representative, shall Executive Judge of the RTC
form under submit to the Office of shall:
oath in three the Executive Judge of a. evaluate the application
(3) copies the Regional Trial together with its
2. payment of the Court (RTC) having attachments, and
necessary legal jurisdiction over the b. recommend to the Office
and filing fees territory where the of the Court
law school is located, Administrator (OCA) the
the duly-accomplished approval and issuance of
application form the certification.
2. endorsement under
oath 2. If the Executive Judge finds
the application to be
incomplete, the law school
shall be notified and required
to comply with the
requirements within five (5)
days from receipt of notice.
** The Level 2 Certification shall be valid before all courts, quasi-judicial and administrative bodies.
IV. Qualification of Supervising Lawyers (Sec. 10)
A supervising lawyer under this Rule shall be a member of the bar in good standing.

V. Duties of Law Student Practitioners (Sec. 6)

Acting under a certification, the law student practitioner shall:
1. Observe the provisions of Section 24(b), Rule 130 of the Rules of Court;
2. Be prohibited from using information acquired in one's capacity as a law student practitioner for
personal or commercial gain;
3. Perform the duties and responsibilities to the best of one's abilities as a law student practitioner; and
4. Strictly observe the Canons of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

VI. Use of Law Student Practitioner's Name (Sec. 7)

A law student practitioner may sign briefs, pleadings, letters, and other similar documents which the
student has produced under the direction of the supervising lawyer, indicating the law student
practitioner's certificate number as required under this Rule.

VII. Duties of Law Schools (Sec. 9)

The law school, through its dean or authorized representative, must:
1. Develop and adopt a Clinical Legal Education Program;
2. Develop and establish at least one law clinic in its school;
3. Endorse qualified students for certification as law student practitioner under this Rule. Such
endorsement shall constitute as a certification that the dean or authorized representative knows that
the applicant is a student enrolled in the Clinical Legal Education course, possesses good moral
character, and has met the requirements of Section 3 of this Rule; and
4. Ensure compliance by law student practitioners and supervising lawyers with the Code of Professional
Responsibility.

VIII. Duties of Supervising Lawyers (Sec. 11)

The following are the duties of a supervising lawyer:
1. Supervise such number of certified law student practitioners as far as practicable;
2. Personally appear with the law student practitioner in all cases pending before the second-level courts
and in all other cases the supervising lawyer determines that his or her presence is required;
3. Assume personal professional responsibility for any work performed by the certified law student
practitioner while under his or her supervision;
4. Assist and advise the certified law student practitioner in the activities authorized by these rules and
review such activities with the certified law student practitioner, all to the extent required for the
proper practical training of the certified law student practitioner and the protection of the client;
5. Read, approve, and personally sign any pleadings, briefs or other similar documents prepared by the
certified law student practitioner prior to the filing thereof, and read and approve any documents
which shall be prepared by the certified law student practitioner for execution by the eligible party;
and
6. Provide the level of supervision to the certified law student practitioner required by these rules.
C. Sanction for practice or appearance without authority (non-lawyers)
I. Indirect Contempt to be Punished After Charge and Hearing (Sec. 3 (e), Rule 71)
The person appearing in court without authority shall be punished for indirect contempt after charge and
hearing. After a charge in writing has been filed, and an opportunity given to the respondent to comment
thereon within such period as may be fixed by the court and to be heard by himself or counsel, a person
guilty of any of the following acts may be punished for indirect contempt for assuming to be an attorney
or an officer of a court, and acting as such without authority.

II. Sanctions (Sec. 13, Rule 138-A)

o Without prejudice to existing laws, rules, regulations, and circulars, the following shall be
considered as unauthorized practice of law by a certified law student practitioner:
1. Engaging in any of the acts provided in Section 4 of this Rule without the necessary
certification or without the consent and supervision of the supervising lawyer;
2. Making false representations in the application for certification;
3. Using an expired certification to engage in the limited practice of law under this Rule;
4. Rendering legal services outside the scope of the practice areas allowed under Section 4 of
this Rule;
5. Asking for or receiving payment or compensation for services rendered under the Clinical
Legal Education Program as provided in this Rule; and
6. Such other analogous circumstances.

o Unauthorized practice of law shall be a ground for revocation of the law student practitioner's
certification and/or disqualification for a law student from taking the bar examination for a period
to be determined by the Supreme Court.

o The above provisions notwithstanding, any act constituting a violation of the Code of Professional
Responsibility shall subject the supervising lawyer, Clinical Legal Education Program Head, and/or
law school dean to disciplinary action, as the circumstances may warrant.