Scribd
Upload
414 views1 page

Royong vs. Oblena, G.R. No. 376, April 30, 1963 - ROYALES

Royong vs. Oblena was a case where the complainant accused the respondent, a lawyer, of raping her. The respondent denied the allegation and claimed they had a consensual relationship after she turned 18. The court found the respondent was also living in an adulterous relationship with another married woman. The issue was whether these illicit relationships were grounds for disbarment. The court held yes, that a lawyer must maintain good moral character, and the respondent's conduct, though not directly related to his profession, rendered him unfit to practice law. His adulterous relationship and scandalous sexual conduct with minors showed he lacked good moral character required to remain a member of the bar.

Uploaded by

Evander Arcenal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
414 views1 page

Royong vs. Oblena, G.R. No. 376, April 30, 1963 - ROYALES

Royong vs. Oblena was a case where the complainant accused the respondent, a lawyer, of raping her. The respondent denied the allegation and claimed they had a consensual relationship after she turned 18. The court found the respondent was also living in an adulterous relationship with another married woman. The issue was whether these illicit relationships were grounds for disbarment. The court held yes, that a lawyer must maintain good moral character, and the respondent's conduct, though not directly related to his profession, rendered him unfit to practice law. His adulterous relationship and scandalous sexual conduct with minors showed he lacked good moral character required to remain a member of the bar.

Uploaded by

Evander Arcenal
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Royong vs.

Oblena
A.C. No. 376
April 30, 1963

Facts:

Complainant is the niece of Respondent’s common law wife. Royong charged Oblena, a
member of the Philippine Bar, with rape allegedly committed on her on August 5, 1958. The
former contended that as she was ironing clothes, the latter suddenly covered her mouth,
dragged her to one of the bedrooms of the house and raped her. According to Royong, she did
not shout for help because he threatened her and her family with death.

However, Respondent denied such allegation. He said that he had illicit relationship with the
complainant and that he cannot be criminally liable for seduction because he limited himself to
kissing and embracing her and sucking her tongue before the complainant turned eighteen.
Their first sexual intercourse happened after she had already turned eighteen.

The court also found that the Respondent’s common law wife, is already married to another
man from 1942 up to the present.

Issue:

WON limited illicit relations with the complainant Josefina Royong and the open cohabitation
with Briccia Angeles, a married woman, are sufficient grounds to cause the respondent's
disbarment.

Held:

YES. The continued possession of a fair private and professional character or a good moral
character is a requisite condition for the rightful continuance in the practice of law for one who
has been admitted, and its loss requires suspension or disbarment even though the statutes do
not specify that as ground for disbarment.

Respondent's conduct though unrelated to his office and in no way directly bearing on his
profession, has nevertheless rendered him unfit and unworthy of the privileges of a lawyer.

Fornication, if committed under such scandalous or revolting circumstances as have proven in


this case, as to shock common sense of decency, certainly may justify positive action by the
Court in protecting the prestige of the noble profession of the law.

Respondent, therefore, did not possess a good moral character at the time he applied for
admission to the bar. He lived an adulterous life with Briccia Angeles, and the fact that people
who knew him seemed to have acquiesced to his status, did not render him a person of good
moral character. It is of no moment that his immoral state was discovered then or now as he is
clearly not fit to remain a member of the bar.

You might also like