Notarization is Not a Mere Formality: Upholding Public Trust and Document Integrity

Ledesma D. Sanchez v. Atty. Carlito R. Inton, 866 Phil. 1 (2019)

Imagine a world where the authenticity of legal documents could not be trusted, where a simple signature could be falsified without consequence. This scenario is not just a hypothetical; it’s a real concern that the Supreme Court of the Philippines addressed in the case of Ledesma D. Sanchez against Atty. Carlito R. Inton. The central issue revolved around the integrity of notarized documents and the responsibilities of notaries public. At the heart of this case was the question of whether a notary public can be held accountable for failing to adhere to the strict standards of notarization.

In this case, Sanchez accused Atty. Inton of notarizing documents without verifying the identity of the signatories and allowing his secretaries to perform notarial acts on his behalf. The Supreme Court’s ruling emphasized the critical role of notaries in ensuring the authenticity and reliability of legal documents, highlighting the potential consequences of negligence in this area.

Legal Context: The Role and Responsibilities of a Notary Public

A notary public is an officer commissioned by the government to serve the public in non-contentious matters, typically involving the authentication of documents. In the Philippines, the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice (Notarial Rules) govern the conduct of notaries public. These rules are designed to ensure that notarization is not treated as a mere formality but as a vital legal act that carries significant weight.

One of the key principles under the Notarial Rules is the requirement for the notary public to personally know the signatory or verify their identity through competent evidence. According to Section 2 (b), Rule IV of the Notarial Rules, a notary public should not notarize a document unless the signatory is personally present and identified through competent evidence of identity. This is crucial because notarization transforms a private document into a public one, making it admissible in evidence without further proof of its authenticity.

Moreover, the Notarial Rules prohibit the notarization of documents with incomplete notarial certificates. A notarial certificate must include a statement of the facts attested to by the notary public, such as the jurat, which confirms the personal appearance and identification of the signatory. These requirements are in place to maintain the integrity of notarized documents and protect the public from fraud.

For example, consider a scenario where a property deed is notarized without proper verification of the seller’s identity. If the document is later contested in court, the lack of proper notarization could lead to significant legal disputes and financial losses for the parties involved.

Case Breakdown: The Journey from Complaint to Supreme Court Ruling

Ledesma D. Sanchez filed a complaint against Atty. Carlito R. Inton, alleging that he notarized a document called “Kontrata ng Kasunduan” without her presence. Sanchez claimed she was at her store in Quezon City on the date of notarization, not at Atty. Inton’s office in Cabanatuan City. To support her claim, she presented a sworn statement from her employee.

Additionally, Sanchez accused Atty. Inton of allowing his secretaries to notarize another document, “Acknowledgment of Legal Obligation With Promissory Note,” on his behalf. Atty. Inton admitted to notarizing the “Kontrata ng Kasunduan” but denied any involvement with the “Acknowledgment,” claiming it was not in his notarial book.

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) investigated the case and found Atty. Inton liable for failing to comply with the Notarial Rules. The IBP recommended the revocation of his notarial commission and a two-year ban from being commissioned as a notary public. The Supreme Court reviewed the case and affirmed the IBP’s findings, with modifications.

The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of notarization, stating, “Notarization is not an empty, meaningless or routinary act, but one invested with substantive public interest.” The Court found that Atty. Inton failed to verify the identity of the signatory in the “Kontrata ng Kasunduan” and allowed his secretaries to perform notarial acts, both of which violated the Notarial Rules.

Key points from the Supreme Court’s ruling include:

• Atty. Inton did not confirm the identity of the person claiming to be Sanchez through competent evidence of identity.
• The notarized document lacked a complete notarial certificate, including the jurat.
• Atty. Inton allowed his secretaries to perform notarial acts and forge his signature, which is a serious breach of his notarial duties.

The Supreme Court imposed a two-year suspension from the practice of law, a two-year disqualification from being commissioned as a notary public, and the revocation of Atty. Inton’s existing notarial commission, if any.

Practical Implications: Safeguarding Document Integrity

This ruling underscores the importance of notaries public in maintaining the integrity of legal documents. For individuals and businesses, it serves as a reminder to ensure that notarization is conducted properly, with the notary public verifying the identity of the signatories and adhering to the Notarial Rules.

The case also highlights the potential consequences of negligence by notaries public, which can lead to legal disputes and undermine public trust in notarized documents. Businesses and property owners should be vigilant in ensuring that their documents are notarized correctly to avoid future complications.

Key Lessons:

• Always ensure that the notary public verifies your identity through competent evidence before notarizing any document.
• Be cautious of notaries who allow others to perform notarial acts on their behalf, as this is a violation of the Notarial Rules.
• Understand that notarization is a critical legal act that should not be taken lightly, as it impacts the admissibility and reliability of documents in legal proceedings.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the role of a notary public in the Philippines?

A notary public in the Philippines is responsible for authenticating documents by verifying the identity of signatories and ensuring the proper execution of notarial acts.

What are the consequences of improper notarization?

Improper notarization can lead to the document being inadmissible in court, potential legal disputes, and disciplinary action against the notary public, including suspension from practice and revocation of their notarial commission.

How can I ensure that my documents are properly notarized?

To ensure proper notarization, always appear in person before the notary public, provide competent evidence of identity, and ensure that the notarial certificate is complete and accurate.

Can a notary public delegate their duties to others?

No, a notary public cannot delegate their duties to others. Notarial acts must be performed personally by the commissioned notary public.

What should I do if I suspect a notary public of misconduct?

If you suspect a notary public of misconduct, you should file a complaint with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) or the Supreme Court, providing evidence of the alleged violations.

ASG Law specializes in legal ethics and notarial practice. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.