Title
Supreme Court
Baysac vs. Aceron-Papa
Case
A.C. No. 10231
Decision Date
Aug 10, 2016
Complainant lost property due to fraudulent sale notarized by respondent, who failed to verify identity, leading to revocation of notarial commission and suspension.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 10231)

Factual Background

Complainant's property was initially mortgaged and later appeared to have been improperly transferred to the Spouses Cruz through a Deed of Absolute Sale notarized by the respondent. The complainant denied executing this document, asserting he was elsewhere on the day of its purported execution. Investigations revealed discrepancies regarding his signature and the acknowledgment process surrounding the notarization.

Complaint Filed and Investigation

On April 14, 2009, complainant filed a complaint for disbarment against the respondent, citing violations related to the notarization process. The records indicated that the respondent did not respond to the complaint or appear for a scheduled mandatory conference. The IBP Commission on Bar Discipline concluded its investigation, finding the respondent liable for notarizing a spurious document without the requisite personal appearance of the complainant.

Findings of the Investigating Commissioner

Atty. Salvador B. Hababag of the IBP Commission submitted a report highlighting the respondent's failure to adhere to notarial regulations. Despite being notified, the respondent did not submit a defense, leading to a recommendation for her suspension as a notary public for two years.

IBP Board of Governors' Resolution

On February 13, 2013, the IBP Board of Governors adopted the findings but modified the penalty, recommending a three-year disqualification from being a notary public, accompanied by a warning regarding future conduct.

Court's Ruling on Administrative Liability

The court affirmed the IBP's findings of administrative liability, reiterating the requirements under the Notarial Law, specifically that notaries must ensure the personal appearance of the individual acknowledging the documents. The respondent’s failure to obtain proper verification of the complainant's identity constituted a violation of the procedures intended to prevent fraud.

Analysis of Notarial Procedures

The court emphasized that notarization is a critical public function that safeguards against fraudulent activities. The respondent's act of accepting an outdated Community Tax Certificate (CTC) instead of verifying the complainant’s identity was deemed negligent, undermining the integrity of the notarization process.

Legal and Ethical Responsibilities of Notaries

The ruling asserted the notion that as a lawyer and a commissioned notary public, the respondent was held to a higher standard of professional conduct. Her failure to comply with the stricter obligations placed upon notaries resulted in significant legal implications, leading to her liability not only for the effects on the complainant but also for the trust associated with the notarial profession.

Penalty Modification and Rationale

In

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.