A.C. No. 13548 - Mendoza vs. Santiago, Jr.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 13548)

Factual Background

Complainant alleged that she was one of the heirs of Adela Espiritu-Barlaan, who died intestate on September 4, 2010, leaving brothers and sisters and a parcel of land registered under OCT No. 2133 located in Pembo, Makati City (the subject property). On October 25, 2013, Gemma S. Barlaan and certain children executed an Extrajudicial Settlement with Waiver and Transfer of Rights, which was acknowledged before and notarized by Respondent, resulting in cancellation of OCT No. 2133 and issuance of TCT No. 006-2014001250 in the name of John Alexander Barlaan.

Subsequent Transfers and Competing Deeds

On November 26, 2014, Respondent acknowledged and notarized a Deed of Absolute Sale (the First Deed of Sale) whereby John Alexander Barlaan sold 147 square meters of the subject property to Monette Abac Ramos for P3,130,000.00. On March 12, 2015, Respondent acknowledged and notarized a second Deed of Absolute Sale (the Second Deed of Sale) covering the same 147 square meters and the same vendee for P1,500,000.00. The Registry of Deeds entries reflected separate titles, with TCT No. 006-2015000699 issued in favor of Monette Abac Ramos for 147 square meters.

Civil Proceedings Arising from the Sales

After discovering occupation by other relatives, Monette Abac Ramos filed a Complaint for Ejectment dated May 12, 2015 and submitted a Judicial Affidavit recounting that she purchased the property for P3,130,000.00 as shown by the First Deed of Sale. The Metropolitan Trial Court of Makati City rendered a Decision on July 27, 2016, ruling in favor of Monette Abac Ramos and directing the defendants to vacate and surrender possession of the 147-square meter property.

Administrative Complaint Before the IBP

On June 23, 2017, Complainant filed an administrative complaint with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines—Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) against Respondent, seeking his disbarment for alleged violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice arising from his notarization of the two deeds reflecting different consideration for the same property. Respondent answered on July 4, 2018, contending that Complainant lacked legal personality to file the complaint, that the ownership issue had been finally resolved, and that his notarial duties had been discharged when the documents were submitted to the Bureau of Internal Revenue and the Register of Deeds.

Findings and Recommendation of the IBP-CBD

The IBP-CBD found that Complainant possessed legal personality to bring the administrative complaint because she demonstrated personal knowledge of the relevant facts. The IBP-CBD concluded that Respondent notarized two deeds covering the same property with different stated consideration in order to minimize his client’s tax liability, thereby violating the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice and Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. On June 17, 2021, the IBP-CBD recommended suspension from the practice of law for one year and revocation of Respondent’s notarial commission for two years.

Resolution of the IBP Board of Governors

The IBP Board of Governors affirmed the CBD’s findings but modified the penalty. The Board’s Resolution, dated August 28, 2001 in the record, recommended imposition of: (1) suspension from the practice of law for two years; (2) immediate revocation of Respondent’s notarial commission, if subsisting; and (3) disqualification for two years from being commissioned as a notary public.

Issues Presented

The principal issues were whether Respondent’s notarization of two deeds for the same property with different stated consideration constituted a violation of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice and the ethical canons governing lawyers; whether Complainant had legal personality to file the administrative complaint; and what disciplinary sanctions were appropriate upon a finding of misconduct.

Parties’ Contentions

Complainant alleged that Respondent aided in the preparation and notarization of documents intended to misrepresent the true consideration and thereby to evade proper tax liability. Respondent admitted notarizing the deeds but argued that Complainant lacked standing to file the complaint, that title disputes had been finally adjudicated, and that he had performed his official duties by submitting the documents to the revenue and registry authorities.

Ruling of the Court (Disposition)

The Court affirmed the findings of the IBP Board of Governors. It found Respondent guilty of violating the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice and Canon VI of the CPRA. The Court imposed the following sanctions: (1) suspension from the practice of law for two years; (2) immediate revocation of his notarial commission, if subsisting; and (3) disqualification from being commissioned as a notary public for two years. The Court issued a stern warning against repetition and directed Respondent to report the date of receipt of the Decision for administrative effectivity, and ordered transmission of copies to the Office of the Bar Confidant, the Office of the Court Administrator, and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.

Legal Basis and Reasoning

The Court emphasized that Respondent did not dispute notarizing both deeds and that the First Deed of Sale admitted in the ejectment case reflected a consideration of P3,130,000.00 while the deed submitted to the Registry of Deeds stated P1,500,000.00. The Court agreed with the IBP-CBD that the notarization of two deeds for the same property with different considerations was done to minimize tax liability and thereby constituted misconduct. The Court relied on its precedents, notably Lopez v. Ramos (A.C. No. 12081, November 24, 2020), which held that notarizing dual deeds intended to reduce tax liability violated the notarial rules and the ethical canons; Caalim-Verzonilla v. Pascua, where similar conduct warranted a two-year suspension, revocation and disqualification; and Gonzales v. Atty. Ramos for the proposition that notarization converts a private instrument into a public document entitled to full fai

Case Syllabus (A.C. No. 13548)

Parties and Procedural Posture

Celia D. Mendoza filed a Complaint dated June 23, 2017 before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines - Commission on Bar Discipline against Atty. Cesar R. Santiago, Jr. for alleged violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice.
The IBP-CBD investigated and on June 17, 2021 issued a Report and Recommendation finding respondent guilty and recommending suspension and revocation of his notarial commission.
The IBP Board of Governors issued a Resolution dated August 28, 2021 modifying the penalty recommendations and imposing a two-year suspension, immediate revocation of notarial commission, and two-year disqualification from reappointment as notary public.
The Supreme Court reviewed the IBP records and rendered judgment affirming the Board of Governors' resolution and imposing the penalties recited in its Decision.

Key Factual Allegations

The subject property was a 247-square meter parcel registered under OCT No. 2133 and originally owned by Adela Espiritu-Barlaan who died intestate.
On October 25, 2013, Gemma S. Barlaan and her children executed an Extrajudicial Settlement with Waiver and Transfer of Rights acknowledged and notarized by respondent that resulted in cancellation of OCT No. 2133 and issuance of TCT No. 006-2014001250 to John Alexander Barlaan.
On November 26, 2014, respondent acknowledged and notarized a Deed of Absolute Sale (First Deed of Sale) wherein John Alexander Barlaan sold 147 square meters to Monette Abac Ramos for P3,130,000.00.
On March 12, 2015, respondent acknowledged and notarized a second Deed of Absolute Sale (Second Deed of Sale) by which the same 147 square meters was conveyed to the same purchaser for P1,500,000.00.
The records showed submission to the Registry of Deeds of the Second Deed of Sale that reflected the lower consideration and that separate titles covering portions of the property were later issued to the parties.

Evidence and Documents

The administrative record included the Extrajudicial Settlement with Waiver and Transfer of Rights, the First and Second Deeds of Sale, and the corresponding TCTs and OCT.
The ejectment litigation file included Monette Abac Ramos' judicial affidavit and the Metropolitan Trial Court decision dated July 27, 2016 awarding possession to Ramos.
The respondent filed an Answer dated July 4, 2018 contesting legal personality of the complainant and asserting that the notarial acts were discharged when documents were submitted to the Bureau of Internal Revenue and the Register of Deeds.

Issues Presented

Whether complainant had legal personality to file the administrative complaint.
Whether respondent violated the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice and the ethical rules by notarizing two deeds covering the same property reflecting different consideration for the purpose of minimizing tax liability.
What sanction was ap