Case Digest (A.C. No. 11396) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
On June 20, 2018, the Second Division of the Supreme Court of the Philippines rendered a decision in the administrative case A.C. No. 11396, wherein Franco B. Gonzales filed a complaint against Atty. Danilo B. BaAares. The complaint arose from allegations that Atty. BaAares notarized a Deed of Absolute Sale concerning three parcels of land, which was executed on September 23, 2010, between Gonzales’ mother, Lilia Gonzales, as the seller, and Flordeliza Soriano, as the buyer. Gonzales contended that the signature of his father, Rodolfo Gonzales, was present in the document, although Rodolfo was in Irosin, Sorsogon, at the time of signing. Additionally, Gonzales stated that his own name appeared as a witness on the document, even though he was also not present during its execution. He averred that Atty. BaAares was aware of these discrepancies but went ahead with notarization anyway. Atty. BaAares denied Gonzales' accusations and claimed that Gonzales was present as an instrumenta Case Digest (A.C. No. 11396) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background and Nature of the Complaint
- Franco B. Gonzales filed an administrative complaint against Atty. Danilo B. BaAares.
- The complaint arose from allegations that BaAares notarized a Deed of Absolute Sale in violation of legal requirements.
- Transaction Details and Anomalies
- On September 23, 2010, a Deed of Absolute Sale was executed covering three (3) parcels of land.
- The deed involved:
- Lilia Gonzales as the seller.
- Flordeliza Soriano as the buyer.
- Irregularities in the document:
- The signature and name of Rodolfo Gonzales appeared even though he was reportedly in Irosin, Sorsogon at the time.
- Franco B. Gonzales’s name and signature appeared as a witness although he was not present during the execution of the deed.
- Notary Public’s Role and Allegations of Misconduct
- It was alleged that Atty. Danilo B. BaAares notarized the deed despite knowing that key parties were absent.
- BaAares contended that:
- Rodolfo Gonzales had “pre-signed” the document to manifest his conformity as the seller’s husband.
- He was under the impression that all parties were in agreement even without personal appearance at the time of notarization.
- Evidence contradicted Gonzales’s claims:
- Affidavits, including one from his own mother, confirmed his presence as an instrumental witness during the signing.
- No documentary or testimonial evidence confirmed Rodolfo’s personal appearance at the execution of the deed.
- Administrative Proceedings and Disciplinary Actions
- Commission on Bar Discipline of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) initially recommended a one (1) year suspension of BaAares’ commission as Notary Public.
- The IBP Board of Governors modified the initial recommendation on November 28, 2015:
- Suspended BaAares from the practice of law for six (6) months.
- Immediately revoked his commission as Notary Public.
- Disqualified him from being commissioned as a notary public for two (2) years.
- Supporting Evidence and Notarial Practice Issues
- Multiple affidavits and testimonies corroborated that:
- The parties, including Franco, were present during the signing, contrary to initial claims.
- Rodolfo’s absence was evident from the lack of any supporting testimony or documentary evidence.
- The necessity for personal appearance in notarization was severely compromised, undermining the authenticity and legality of the document.
Issues:
- Whether Atty. Danilo B. BaAares notarized the Deed of Absolute Sale in contravention of the legal requirements governing notarial acts, particularly regarding the necessity of the personal appearance of signatories.
- Whether the notarization process violated established notarial rules and practices, given that key signatories, notably Rodolfo Gonzales, did not personally appear before the notary.
- Whether the absence of proper verification and physical presence during notarization undermines the integrity, authenticity, and reliability of notarized documents.
- To what extent do the affidavits and evidentiary record support the claim that the notarization was executed contrary to established legal protocols.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)