A lawyer who abandoned his legal wife and a child, cohabited and engaged in extramarital affairs with another woman, and flaunted his illicit relationship to the public was disbarred by the Supreme Court (SC).

The SC stressed: “It bears accentuating that every lawyer is expected to be honorable and reliable at all times. This must be so, because any lawyer who cannot abide by the laws in his private life cannot be expected to do so in his professional dealings.”

“By his scandalous and highly immoral conduct, therefore, the respondent (lawyer) committed grossly immoral conduct, and violated the fundamental canons of ethics expected to be obeyed by the members of the legal profession,” the SC said.

“Ineluctably, the Court imposes the penalty of disbarment upon respondent, consistent with the provisions of Section 33, in relation to Section 37, Canon VI of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability (CPRA),” the SC ruled.

(The SC’s decision in A.C. No. 13674 was made public last Feb. 19 in its website: sc.judiciary.gov.ph. While the names of the parties were not redacted by the SC, Manila Bulletin decided not to publish their real names and to use nicknames instead to protect the wife and her child, and the third party named in the complaint.)

Case records show that Atty. Vince and Nette were married in 2002. Their union bore a child.

In December 2016, Nette filed a complaint for disbarment against her husband before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines-Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD).

Nette alleged that her husband abandoned them and cohabited with Dey, the third party involved, despite the subsistence of their marriage.

Before the filing of her complaint, Nette said she went to the office of her husband to talk to him regarding their personal issues.  She said her husband got mad, went home, packed his things, and left their house without explanation.

In reply to Nette’s text message, Vince said he could no longer tolerate her attitude.  Nette’s parents attempted to intervene.  But efforts were in vain.

After several months, Nette sought the help of the police to determine the whereabouts of her husband.  The police found him in Bulacan cohabiting with Dey.

Nette searched the social media accounts and posts of Dey and found that the latter uses the surname of her husband.  Nette also found that Dey and Vince were married on Feb. 20, 2015.

In her complaint, Nette said she went to the wedding venue whose owner confirmed the marriage of Dey and Vince on Feb. 20, 2015.

Acting on her complaint, the IBP-CBD in May 2017 directed Vince to file a verified answer.  Vince did not comply. Both parties, Vince and Nette, were order to appear personally for mandatory conference.

Nette appeared before the IBP-CBD and submitted her evidence -- certificate of marriage between her and her husband, certificate of live birth of their son, print-out of pictures from the Facebook account of Dey, reservation slip for Vincent and Dey’s wedding ceremony on Feb. 20, 2015, and Customer Inquiry Form stating the details of Vince and Dey’s wedding.

Vince did not attend the mandatory conference.  Neither did he submit a mandatory conference brief.

In August 2020, the IBP-CBD submitted its report and recommended the disbarment of Vince for gross immorality “for abandoning his legitimate family, contracting a bigamous marriage with another woman, and flagrantly displaying such illicit relationship.”

The IBP-CBD noted Vince’s previous suspension for three months as a lawyer in 2019.

The IBP Board of Governors, however, modified the recommendation by lowering the penalty to an indefinite suspension as a lawyer and imposing a fine of P20,000 for disobeying a lawful order of IBP-CBD.

The case was forwarded to the SC which has supervision over all lawyers, as officers of the court.

In resolving the issue and ordering Atty. Vince’s disbarment, the SC said:

“The Code of Professional Responsibility, now CPRA, mandates all lawyers to possess good moral character at the time of their application for admission to the Bar, and requires them to maintain such character until their retirement from the practice of law.

“In the case at bench, the evidence adduced by complainant (Nette) indeed establish a pattern of conduct that is grossly immoral -- one which is not only corrupt or unprincipled, but reprehensible to a high degree. Complainant and respondent (Vince) contracted marriage on June 6, 2002, and their union eventually bore a child.

“As it happened, respondent subsequently abandoned his family, cohabited with another woman, and even flaunted his illicit relationship to the public.

“True it is that the photos and Reservation Slip of the alleged wedding ceremony presented by complainant fall short of the required evidence to prove that respondent indeed entered into a bigamous marriage with (Dey). However, it is equally true that respondent exhibited a highly reproachable conduct by engaging in an extramarital affair with a woman and therewithal, flaunting their illicit relationship to the public.

“The foregoing circumstances seriously taint respondent's sense of social propriety and moral values and constitutes a blatant and purposeful disregard of our laws on marriage.  
“Jurisprudence abounds with iterations that a married lawyer's abandonment of his spouse in order to live and cohabit with another constitutes gross immorality. The offense may even be criminal, amounting to concubinage or adultery.

“Here, respondent's transgression is even worse as he flaunted his illicit relationship with his mistress on social media, thereby manifesting his insouciance towards the harsh effects of his immorality on his wife and their child.

“Plain as day, respondent did not live up to the stringent standards required of him by the law profession.”