see - sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2013/july2013/6942.pdf
"x x x.
Indeed, the practice of law is not a right but merely a privilege bestowed upon by the State upon those who show that they possess, and continue to possess, the qualifications required by law for the conferment of such privilege. One of those requirements is the observance of honesty and
candor. Candor in all their dealings is the very essence of a practitioner’s
honorable membership in the legal profession. Lawyers are required to act
with the highest standard of truthfulness, fair play and nobility in the
conduct of litigation and in their relations with their clients, the opposing
parties, the other counsels and the courts. They are bound by their oath to
speak the truth and to conduct themselves according to the best of their
knowledge and discretion, and with fidelity to the courts and their clients.6
From the foregoing, it is clear that respondent violated his duties as a lawyer to avoid dishonest and deceitful conduct, (Rule 1.01, Canon 1) and to act with candor, fairness and good faith (Rule 10.01, Canon 10). Also,
respondent desecrated the solemn oath he took before this Court when he
sought admission to the bar, i.e., not to do any falsehood nor consent to the doing of any in Court. Thus, even at the risk of jeopardizing the probability of prevailing on STEELCORP’s application for a search warrant, respondent should have informed the court of the patent’s expiration so as to allow the latter to make an informed decision given all available and pertinent facts.
x x x."
