G.R. No. 222166 - Gatmaytan vs. Misibis Land, Inc.

Complainant Nicanor D. Triol, along with his sister Grace D. Triol, are co-owners of a parcel of land in Quezon City covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 129010 with an area of 408.80 square meters.
In January 2011, Complainant Triol intended to sell the subject land to Leonardo P. Caparas but was unable to complete the sale because Grace, then residing in the United States, did not provide her signature.

On March 11, 2011, a Deed of Absolute Sale was executed and notarized by respondent Atty. Delfin R. Agcaoili, Jr. allegedly without the authority or consent of Complainant Triol and his sister.
It was contended that neither the complainant nor Grace personally appeared before the respondent at the time of notarization.
The document also purportedly contained falsified community tax certificates.

Respondent asserted that he disavowed knowledge regarding the execution and notarization of the subject deed.
He maintained that his signature on the document was forged, and that under his professional practice he would never notarize a document without the personal appearance of the signatories.
Additionally, respondent claimed that he was not commissioned as a notary public in Quezon City during the relevant period (2011), implying his inability to perform the notarial act lawfully.

Proceedings Before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) and the Commission on the Integrity of Notarial Practice

In a Report and Recommendation dated August 14, 2015, the IBP Investigating Commissioner recommended the dismissal of the complaint due to an apparent lack of substantial evidence against respondent.
The Investigating Commissioner noted that respondent’s specimen signature, submitted in his Answer, established that the signature affixed on the subject deed was not his.
Subsequently, on April 29, 2016, the IBP Board of Governors reversed the earlier recommendation and imposed disciplinary measures: a suspension from the practice of law for two (2) years and disqualification from being commissioned as a notary public for the same period, along with the directive to revoke any current notarial commission.
An extended resolution by Commission on Bar Discipline Director Ramon S. Esguerra further clarified that respondent’s specimen signature evidence was insufficient, given the absence of corroboration from official records.

Respondent filed a motion for reconsideration, which was ultimately denied in a Resolution dated May 27, 2017.
The issue before the Court was centered on whether respondent should be held administratively liable for performing a notarization in violation of the 2004 Notarial Rules and the applicable ethical standards under the Code of Professional Responsibility.

Whether respondent Atty. Delfin R. Agcaoili, Jr. is administratively liable for the alleged unauthorized notarization of the subject deed.

Determination of whether the notarization was performed without the requisite personal appearance of the signatories.
Verification of respondent’s status as a commissioned notary public during the time of the notarization.
Evaluation of the authenticity of the specimen signature provided by respondent and its adequacy as defense against the allegations.

The implications of respondent’s actions on the integrity of notarization and legal ethics under the 2004 Notarial Rules and the Code of Professional Responsibility.