Ethics
The prestige of
Atty Marcos
Nov. 14
Canon 1
Independence
Judicial independence is a pre-requisite to
the rule of law and a fundamental guarantee
of a fair trial. A judge shall therefore uphold
and exemplify judicial independence in both
its individual and institutional aspects.
Section 1
Judges shall exercise the judicial function
independently on the basis of their
assessment of the facts and in accordance
with a conscientious understanding of the
law, free of any extraneous influence,
inducement, pressure, threat or interference,
direct or indirect, from any quarter or for
any reason.
Section 2
In performing judicial duties, Judges shall
be independent from judicial colleagues in
respect of decisions which the judge is
obliged to make independently.
Section 3
Judges shall refrain from influencing in any
manner the outcome of litigation or dispute
pending before another court or
administrative agency.
Section 4
Judges shall not allow family, social, or
other relationships to influence judicial
conduct or judgment.
judicial office shall not be used or lent to
advance the private interests of others, nor
convey or permit others to convey the
impression that they are in a special position
to influence the judge.
Section 5
Judges shall not only be free from
inappropriate connections with, and
influence by, the executive and legislative
branches of government, but must also
appear to be free therefrom to a reasonable
observer.
Section 6
Judges shall be independent in relation to
society in general and in relation to the
particular parties to a dispute which he or
she has to adjudicate.
Section 7
Judges shall encourage and uphold
safeguards for the discharge of judicial
duties in order to maintain and enhance the
institutional and operational independence
of the judiciary.
Section 8
Judges shall exhibit and promote high
standards of judicial conduct in order to
reinforce public confidence in the judiciary
which is fundamental to the maintenance of
judicial independence.
Canon 2, NCJC
INTEGRITY IS ESSENTIAL NOT ONLY TO THE
PROPER DISCHARGE OF THE JUDICIAL OFFICE
BUT ALSO TO THE PERSONAL DEMEANOR OF
JUDGES.
The integrity of the judiciary rest not only upon
the fact that it is able to administer justice but
also upon the perception and confidence of the
community that the people who run the system
have done justice.
Judges are presumed to be honest and men of
integrity.
Section 1. Canon 2.
Judges shall ensure that not only is their
conduct above reproach but it is perceived to
be so in the view of a reasonable observer. The
maintenance of the court’s integrity is not only
the sole duty of the judge but it is also the duty
of the court’s personnel to see to it that
integrity is unblemished.
The code of judicial conduct requires a judge to
be the embodiment of integrity and to avoid
the appearance of impropriety in all activities.
Section 2.
The behavior and conduct of judges must
reaffirm the people’s faith in the integrity of the
judiciary. Justice must not merely be done but
must also be seen to be done.
A judge has a duty to not only render a just and
impartial decision but also to render it in such a
manner as to be free from any suspicion as to
its fairness and impartiality and also as to the
judge’s integrity.
Sec. 3
Judges should think or initiate appropriate
disciplinary measures against lawyers or court
personnel for unprofessional conduct of which
the judge may have become aware. The judge
may summarily punish anyone inside the court
for contempt. (direct or indirect contempt).
Can the judge dismiss his employee for violation
of the court? NO. It is only the Supreme Court
has the power to dismiss employees of the
court.
Canon 3.
IMPARTIALITY IS ESSENTIAL TO THE PROPER
DISCHARGE OF THE JUDICIAL OFFICE. IT APPLIES
NOT ONLY TO THE DECISION ITSELF BUT ALSO
TO THE PROCESS BY WHICH THE DECISION IS
MADE.
When a judge possesses proficiency in law in
order that he can competently construe and
enforce the law, it is more important that he
should act and behave in such a manner that
the parties before him shall have confidence in
his impartiality. Thus, it is not enough that he
decides cases without bias and favoritism nor it
is sufficient that he in fact rips himself off
prepositions.
Canon 4
Propriety
Propriety and the appearance of propriety
are essential to the performance of all the
activities of a judge.
Section 1
Judges shall avoid impropriety and the
appearance of impropriety in all of their
activities.
Section 2
As a subject of constant public scrutiny,
judges must accept personal restrictions that
might be viewed as burdensome by ordinary
citizen and should do so freely and
willingly. In particular, judges conduct
themselves in a way that is consistent with
the dignity of the judicial office.
Section 3
Judges shall, in their personal relations with
individual members of the legal profession
who practice regularly in their court, avoid
situations that might reasonably give rise to
the suspicion or appearance of favoritism or
partiality.
Section 4
Judges shall not participate in the
determination of a case in which any
member of their family represents a litigant
or is associated in any manner with the case.
Section 5
Judges shall not allow the use of their
residence by a member of the legal
profession to receive clients of the latter or
of other members of the legal profession.
Section 6
Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled to
freedom of expression, belief, association,
and assembly, but in exercising such rights,
they shall always conduct themselves in
such a manner as to preserve the dignity of
the judicial office and the impartiality and
independence of the judiciary.
Section 7
Judges shall inform themselves about their
personal fiduciary financial interests and
shall make reasonable efforts to be informed
about the financial interests of members of
their families.
Section 8
Judges shall not use or lend the prestige of
the judicial office to advance their private
interests or those of a member of their
family or of anyone else, nor shall they
convey or permit others to convey the
impression that anyone is in a special
position improperly to influence them in the
performance of judicial duties.
Section 9 as last updated by OCA Cir. 103-
06 (2006)
Confidential information acquired by judges
in their judicial capacity shall not be used or
disclosed for any other purpose NOT related
to their judicial duties.
Section 10
Subject to the proper performance of judicial
duties, judges may:
1. Write, lecture, teach and participate
in activities concerning the law, the
legal system, the administration of
justice, or related matters;
2. Appear at a public hearing before an
official body concerned with matters
relating to the law, the legal system,
the administration of justice, or
related matters;
3. Engage in other activities if such
activities do not detract from the
dignity of the judicial office or
otherwise interfere with the
performance of judicial duties.
Section 11
Judges shall not practice law whilst the
holder of judicial office.
Section 12
Judges may form or join associations of
judges or participate in other organizations
representing the interests of judges.
Section 13
Judges and members of their families shall
neither ask for nor accept, any gift, bequest,
loan, or favor in relation to anything done or
to be done or omitted to be done by him or
her in connection with the performance of
judicial duties.
Section 14
Judges shall not knowingly permit court
staff or others subject to their influence,
direction, or authority, to ask for, or accept,
any gift, bequest, loan, or favor in relation to
anything that is done or to be done or
omitted to be done in connection with their
duties or functions.
Section 15
Subject to law and to any legal requirements
of public disclosure, judges may receive a
token gift, award or benefit as appropriate to
the occasion on which it is made provided
that such gift, award or benefit might not
reasonably be perceived as intended to
influence the judge in the performance of
judicial duties or otherwise give rise to an
appearance of partiality.
Canon 5 :Equality
Ensuring equality of treatment to all before
the courts is essential to the due
performance of the judicial office.
So a judge must be able to render substantial
justice and maintain public confidence in the
judicial system by being aware of the diversity
in society. With that awareness, a judge should
not yield to first impression, reach hasty
conclusions or prejudge matters.
Section 1
Judges shall be aware of, and understand,
diversity in society and differences arising
from various sources, including but not
limited to race, color, sex, religion, national
origin, caste, disability, age, marital status,
sexual orientation, social and economic
status and other like causes.
So Judges should be mindful of the various
international instruments and treaties ratified
by the Philippines, which affirm the equality of
all human beings and establish a norm of
nondiscrimination without distinction as to
race, sex, language, or religion. Judges should
not yield to the first impression or reach hasty
conclusions or prejudge matters. They have a
duty to ensure that the minority status of a
party plays no part in their decisions because of
equality.
Section 2
Judges shall not, in the performance of
judicial duties, by words or conduct,
manifest bias or prejudice towards any
person or group on irrelevant grounds.
Under the rules of court, states that no judge
shall sit in any case which he has been counsel
for a party without the recent consent of all
parties signed by them and entered upon the
record. The prohibition is not limited to cases in
which a judge hears the evidence, but includes
as well cases where he acts by resolving
motions issues or issuing orders and the like.
Judges must also avoid private remarks, and
distasteful jokes that may give even erroneous
impressions of prejudice and lead the public to
believe that cases before them are being
prejudged.
Section 3
Judges shall carry out judicial duties with
appropriate consideration for all persons,
such as the parties, witnesses, lawyers, court
staff and judicial colleagues, without
differentiation on any irrelevant ground,
immaterial to the proper performance of
such duties.
(There was one judge who was filed with an
administrative case by a lawyer because he
asked lawyers appeared before his branch of
the school they graduated, if that lawyer was
not a graduate in a specific school which that
judge has favored/bias, he would discriminate
those lawyers. Thus, that judge was
administratively charged and disciplined by
court.)
Section 4
Judges shall not knowingly permit court
staff or others subject to his or her
influence, direction, or control to
differentiate between persons concerned, in
a matter before the judge on any irrelevant
ground.
What are the duties of the judges under this
section?
1. To ensure that court personnel under
their supervision do not discriminate.
By dispensing special favors or
disclosing confidential information to
any unauthorized person.
2. To organize their courts to ensure the
prompt and convenient dispatch of
business and should not tolerate
misconduct by their staff under their
control. Because they are sometimes
prone to expect favors or special
treatment due to their professional
relationship with the judge.
So all personnel involved or all the staff in court
involved in the dispensation of justice, should
conduct themselves with a high degree of
responsibility.
Section 5
Judges shall require lawyers in proceedings
before the court to refrain from manifesting,
by words or conduct, bias or prejudice based
on irrelevant grounds, except such as are
legally relevant to an issue in proceedings
and may be the subject of legitimate
advocacy.
So under this section of judges should conduct
proceedings in court with, of course, dignity and
in a manner that reflects the importance and
seriousness of proceedings. They should
maintain order and, of course, proper decorum
in the court.
As courts are expected to ensure equality, any
lawyer who makes an insensitive or demeaning
comment in court, of course, should be
admonished.
Canon 6:
Competence and
Diligence
Competence and diligence are prerequisites
to the due performance of judicial office.
A judge upon assumption to office, they
become the visible representation of law and
justice. Hence the Constitution prescribes that
he must be a person of proven competence as a
requisite of his membership in the judiciary.
And a judge, of course, should be the epitome
of competence, integrity and independence to
be able to render justice and uphold public
confidence in the legal system. He must be
conversant with basic legal principles and well
settled doctrines. He should also strive for
excellence and seek the truth with passion.
Section 1
The judicial duties of a judge take
precedence over all other activities.
What are the duties of the judge under this
section?
A judge must perform his judicial duties with
regard to a case where he is not disqualified to
do so and may not divest himself of such case if
he is not so disqualified. A judge shall not inhibit
himself simply to avoid sitting on difficult or
controversial cases.
Section 2
Judges shall devote their professional
activity to judicial duties, which include not
only the performance of judicial functions
and responsibilities in court and the making
of decisions, but also other tasks relevant to
the judicial office or the court's operations.
The judge would supervise everything inside his
court, otherwise, he may be held
administratively liable if there’s neglect on
behalf of the judge (i.e. records, case files). The
judge should take care of this matters.
(Instances during audit of SC in which there are
case files & records which are missing, so the
judges are disciplined by the court. So, what’s
the effect on this if records are gone? it will
effect speedy disposition of the cases. There are
also instances where judge who will retire
forgot to turn over the records properly)
Section 3
Judges shall take reasonable steps to
maintain and enhance their knowledge,
skills and personal qualities necessary for
the proper performance of judicial duties,
taking advantage for this purpose of the
training and other facilities which should be
made available, under judicial control, to
judges.
(The judge even lawyers should be updated
with the recent jurisprudence, amendments of
laws, etc. and there are trainings conducted by
the court)
Judges should be diligently acquainted with the
law & jurisprudence as an advocate of justice
and a visible representation of the law, a judge
is expected to keep abreast and be proficient in
the application & interpretation of the law.
Section 4
Judges shall keep themselves informed
about relevant developments of
international law, including international
conventions and other instruments
establishing human rights norms.
The Philippine as a signatory in a certain
convention or in international laws, then it
forms part of the laws of the land because of
doctrine of incorporation, so judges must be
mindful and knowledgeable on this updates on
new international laws or conventions or
norms.
Section 5
Judges shall perform all judicial duties,
including the delivery of reserved decisions,
efficiently, fairly and with reasonable
promptness.
The honor & integrity of the judicial system is
measured not only by the fairness or
correctness of decisions rendered but also by
the efficiency which disputes are resolved. The
mandate to proper dispose of cases or matters
also applies to motions or interlocutory matters
or incidents pending before the magistrate.
Unreasonable delay of a judge in resolving a
pending incident is a violation of the norms of
judicial conduct and constitutes gross
inefficiency that warrants the imposition
administrative sanction against the defaulting
magistrate. (Office of Court Administrator v.
Judge Ternes A.M. No. MTJ-12-1817, March 12,
2013)
Section 6
Judges shall maintain order and decorum in
all proceedings before the court and be
patient, dignified and courteous in relation
to litigants, witnesses, lawyers and others
with whom the judge deals in an official
capacity. Judges shall require similar
conduct of legal representatives, court staff
and others subject to their influence,
direction or control.
A magistrate must exceed that hallmark judicial
temperament of utmost sobriety and self-
restraint which are indispensable qualities of
every judge (Rodriguez vs Bonifacio). A
magistrate should not descend to the level of
sharp-tongued, ill-mannered, petty tyrant by
uttering harsh words, ---- remarks, or sarcastic
comments (Dela Cruz v Judge Caretas).
Section 7
A Judge shall not accept duties that will
interfere with his devotion to the
expeditious and proper administration of
his official functions.
When a judge along with two other people
acted as real estate agents for the sale of a
parcel of land for which he agreed to give a
commission of P100,000 to each of his
companions and after the transaction was
completed only gave the complainants P25,000
each. The court held that the judge violated this
section of the code of judicial conduct
(Catbagan v. Barte).
SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT & DISCIPLINE OF
LAWYERS
There are different kinds or forms of disciplinary
measures that may be imposed by the court
against judges or lawyers:
1.Warning- an act or fact of putting one on his
guard against an impending danger, evil
consequences or penalty.
2. Admonish – admonition is a gentle or friendly
reproof, rebuke, warning, or reminder.
Counseling on a fault, error, or oversight, and it
is an expression of authoritative advice.
3. Reprimanded – reprimand is a public and
formal censure or severe reproof administered
to a person in fault by superior officer or a body
to which he belongs.
4. Suspended – temporarily withholding the
lawyer’s right to practice his profession as a
lawyer for a certain period or for an indefinite
period of time (more on qualified disbarment).
5. Censure – the official reprimand or
6. Disbarment – the act of the Philippine
Supreme Court in withdrawing from an attorney
the right to practice law. The lawyer is stricken
out from the roll of attorneys.
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF DISBARMENT
PROCEEDINGS?
- NEITHER civil nor criminal proceeding, it
is sui generis (a class of its own). It is
 also confidential in nature and the
defense of double jeopardy is not
available in disbarment proceedings.
And the Supreme Court may motu
Proprio initiate disbarment proceedings
and even without a complaint, it can be
initiated. It can also proceed regardless
of the interest of the complainants. It is
imprescriptible & it is in itself due
process of law.
- In in Re: Almacen, held that disciplinary
proceedings against lawyers are sui
generis, neither civil nor purely criminal,
it is not & does not involved a trial of an
action or a suit but rather an
investigation by the court in the
conduct of its officers, not being
intended to inflict punishment, it is no
sense a criminal prosecution.
Accordingly, there is neither plaintiff
nor a prosecutor, the public interest is
its primary objective and the real
question for determination is whether
or not the attorney or lawyer is still a fit
person to be allowed thus with such
privileges.
WHAT COULD BE THE GROUNDS FOR
DISBARMENT?
1. Deceit
2. Malpractice or other gross misconduct in
office.
3. Any malfeasance or dereliction of duty
committed by a lawyer
4. Grossly immoral conduct
5. Conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude such as estafa, bribery, murder,
bigamy, seduction, abduction,
concubinage, smuggling, falsification of
public documents, violation of BP 22,
violation of oath of office, willful
disobedience of any lawful order of a
superior court, willfully appearing as an
attorney for a party to a case without
authority to do so.
Disbarment & suspension of a lawyer being the
most severe form of disciplinary action should
be imposed with great caution & only in those
cases where the misconduct of the lawyer as an
officer of the court & a member of the bar is
established by clear, convincing, and
satisfactory proof (the quantum of evidence).
There is no prescriptive period for the filing of a
complaint against an erring lawyer.
A lawyer may not be suspended or disbarred
for misconduct on his professional or private
capacity. Exception: where such is so gross as
to show him to be morally unfit for office or
unworthy of privilege, the court may be
justified in suspending or removing him the roll
of attorneys.
6. Gross immorality- conviction of a crime
involving moral turpitude.
7. Promoting to violate or violating penal laws
8. Misconduct in his charge of official duties.
A lawyer who holds a government office may
not be disciplined as a member of a bar for
misconduct in the discharged of his duty as
government official, however, if the
misconduct is also a violation of code of
professional responsibility or his oath as a
lawyer or of such a character as to affect his
qualification as a lawyer, he may be subject to
disciplinary action such as disbarment.
9. Commission of fraud or falsehood
10. Misconduct as notary public
Any interested person or the court motu
proprio may initiate disciplinary proceedings
against lawyers. There can be no doubt as to
the right to fascism to bring attention to the
proper authority acts & doings of public officers
which citizens feel are incompatible with the
duties of the office and from which conduct the
citizen or the public might or does suffer
undesirable consequences.
Disbarment proceedings may proceed
regardless of lack of interest of complainant or
even there’s a reconciliation already with the
complainant & the lawyer, however if the
complainant refuses to testify and the charges
cannot be substantiated, the court will have no
alternative but to dismiss the case. Evidence is
also important in filing disciplinary actions
against lawyer.
WHY THERE’S A NEED THAT A DISBARMENT
PROCEEDING SHOULD BE CONFIDENTIAL?
1. This is to enable the court to make its
investigation free from extraneous
influence or interference
2. It is also to protect the personal &
professional reputation of lawyers or
attorneys from baseless charges of
disgruntle, distinct vindictive & responsible
persons or clients.
3. To deter the press from publishing charges
or proceedings base their own or even the
verbatim reproduction of the complaint
against an attorney in the newspaper may
be actionable.
WHO ARE THE OFFICERS IN CHARGE TO
INVESTIGATE DISBARMENT PROCEEDINGS?
1. The Supreme Court
2. IBP
3. Through an authorized investigator or
the Commission on Bar Discipline
4. Solicitor General
WHAT HAPPENS IF THE LAWYER DIES WITH
PENDING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST HIM?
1. It renders the action moot & academic
but the court may opt to resolved the
case on its merit in order to clear public
name of the lawyer.
Case: VELEZ v DE VERA A.C. No. 6697, July 25,
2006
Held: The judgment of suspension against a
Filipino lawyer in a foreign jurisdiction does not
automatically resolve any suspension or
disbarment in the Philippines. As the acts giving
rise to his suspension are not grounds for
disbarment & suspension in this jurisdiction.
Judgment of suspension against a Filipino
lawyer may transmute into a similar judgment
of suspension in the Philippines only if the basis
of the foreign court’s action includes any of the
grounds for disbarment or suspension in our
jurisdiction. Such judgment merely constitutes
prima facie evidence of unethical acts of the
lawyer.
There is also modifying circumstances when it
comes to the disciplinary proceedings against
the lawyers.
1. Good faith in the acquisition a property of the
client subject of the litigation can be a
modifying circumstance as discussed in the case
of IN RE: Ruste.
2.Inexperience of a lawyer may also be a
modifying circumstance.
3. Age can also be a modifying circumstance
4. If the lawyer asked for an apology
5. Lack of intention to slight or offend the court.
WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE IS A PENDING CASE
AGAINST A LAWYER (CASE INVOLVING MORAL
TURPITUDE) AND ALSO PENDING
ADMINISTRATIVE CASE FOR THE DISBARMENT
OF A LAWYER AND EVENTUALLY IS PARDONED
by the President?
During the pendency of the disbarment
proceeding, the respondent was granted
executive pardon the dismissal of the case on
that sole basis will depend on whether the
executive pardon is absolute or conditional. If A lawyer was been suspended or disbarred may
the pardon is absolute, then the disbarment be reinstated when the SC is convinced that he
case will be dismissed. However, if the has already possess the requisites of probity &
executive pardon is conditional, the disbarment integrity necessary to guarantee his worth to
case will not be dismissed on the basis thereof practice his profession.
because absolute pardon by the President may
wipe out conviction as when as offense is in
itself and the grant thereof in favor of a lawyer
is a bar to a proceeding for disbarment against
him base solely on commission of such offense.
(Because if there is an absolute pardon, it is as if
na wala jud ka sala).

WHAT IS REINSTATEMENT?
WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF REINSTATEMENT?
Reinstatement is the restoration in disbarment
proceedings to a disbarred lawyer on the 1. Recognition of moral rehabilitation &
privilege to practice law. The power of the SC to mental fitness to practice law
2. Lawyers shall be subject to same law,
reinstate is based on its constitutional
rules & regulations as those applicable
prerogative to promulgate rules on the
to any other lawyer and
admission to the practice of law. So, in order
3. lawyer must comply with the conditions
that there is a reinstatement the ff. must be imposed on his readmission
taken into consideration:

1.) The applicant’s character & standing

prior to disbarment
2.) The nature & character of the
misconduct for which he is disbarred
3.) His conduct subsequent to the
disbarment including his efficient
government service
4.) The time that has elapsed between the
disbarment and the application for
reinstatement
5.) Circumstances that he has been
sufficiently punished & disciplined
6.) The applicant’s appreciation of
significance of his dereliction & his
assurance that he now possesses the
requisite, probity & integrity.
7.) There should be favorable indorsement
from the IBP.
NOTE: A previously disbarred lawyer who is
given absolute pardon by the president is not
automatically reinstated. He must still file a
petition for reinstatement with the SC.
2004 RULES ON A TRIAL PRACTICE
What is the purpose of notarial rule of law?
1. To promote, serve, and protect public
interest
2. To simplify, clarify, and modernize the
rules governing notaries’ public
3. To foster ethical conduct among
notaries’ public
A document acknowledged before a notary
republic is a public document and may be
presented in evidence without further proof,
the certificate of acknowledgment being a
prima facie evidence of the execution of the
instrument or document involved.
WHO IS A NOTARY PUBLIC?
-A notary public is a person appointed by the
court whose duty is to attest to the genuineness
of any deed or writing in order to render them
available as evidence of facts stated therein and
who is authorized by the statute to administer
various oaths.
WHAT ARE THE QUALIFICATIONS OF A NOTARY
PUBLIC?
1. He should be a citizen of the Philippines
2. Over 21 years of age
3. A resident of the Philippines for at least
1 year
4. Maintains a regular place of work or
business in the city or province where
the commission is to be issued.
5. Member of the Philippine bar in good
standing with clearances from the office
of bar confidant of the SC & IBP
6. Not convicted in the first instance of
any crime involving moral turpitude
Usually, the lawyers are notary public. It
doesn’t mean that lawyers automatically
are notary public since there’s a need for
the compliance of the requirements.
Acts of notarization are within the ambit of
the term practice of law.
WHAT ARE THE STEPS OF GOVERNMENT
LAWYERS TO BECOME NOTARY PUBLIC?
That lawyer working for the government should
seek first the written authority of the head of
the department where he is working because
acts of notarization are within the ambit of the
term ‘practice of law’. (The law allowed
government lawyers to serve as notaries or
notary public, provided, that there is a written
consent form head of the Dep’t)
HOW ABOUT CLERK OF COURTS, ARE THEY
AUTHORIZED TO NOTARIZED?
Clerks of courts of the RTC are authorized to
notarized not only documents relating to the
exercise of official functions but also private
documents subject to conditions. Not all
notarial fees charged had been for the account
of the judiciary and they certify in the notarized
documents that there are no notaries’ public
within the territorial jurisdiction of the RTC.
WHAT IS COMMISSION?
Commission refers to the grant of authority to
perform notarial acts and to the written
evidence of the authority. Once you petition as
notary public, you will be issued with
commission. A notarial commission may be
issued by an executive judge to any qualified
person whose submits a petition in accordance
with the rules on notarial practice. The
summary hearing to be conducted by the
executive judge and the requirements are the
following:
1. Petition that is sufficient, in form, and
substance. The petitioner proves the
allegation containing the petition and
establishes the satisfaction of the
executive judge that he has read & fully
understood the rules on notarial
practice.
2. The executive judge shall issue a
commission & certificate of
authorization to purchase a notarial
seal in favor to the petitioner-lawyer.
DISTORTED AUDIO @ 39:20 – 39:29
2.Verification of the capacity and identity of the
parties as well as the legality of the acts
executed.
WHAT ARE THE DUTIES OF NOTARY PUBLIC?
1. Keep a notarial register (like record
book with numbers)
2. Must transmit??? the proper
entry/entries in the notarial register
3. To affix the acknowledgments, the date
of expiration of his commission
 4. When filled the notarial register should
be forwarded to the proper clerk of
court
5. performing a notarial act, a notary
public may charge the maximum fee as
prescribed by the SC UNLESS he waives
the fee in good & in heart???
6. A notary public may charge travel fees
& expenses separate from the notarial
fees when traveling to perform a
notarial act if the notary public & the
same person requesting to the notarial
act agree prior to the travel.
HOW ABOUT IF YOUR NOTARIAL
COMMISSION EXPIRED (EVERY 2 YRS.)?
1. A notary public must first file a written
application with the executive judge for
the renewal of fees, commission within
45 days before the expiration.
2. Failure to file said application will result
in the deletion of the name of the
notary public in the register of notaries’
public & may only reinstated therein
after re-issued a new commission.
Upon the payment of the application fee,
executive judge shall act on the application
for renewal of a commission within 30 days
from receipt.
THE FOLLOWING ARE THE NOTARIAL ACTS
PERFORMED BY THE NOTARY PUBLIC:
1. Acknowledgements
2. Oaths & affirmations
3. Jurats
4. Signature witnessing
5. Copies certifications
6. And any other act authorized by the
rules
A notary public should not notarize a document
unless the persons who signed his name are the
very same person who executed & personally
appeared before the notary public to attest to
the contents & truth of what are stated therein.
The presence of the parties to the deed will
enable the notary public to verify the
genuineness of the signature of the affiant.
HOW ABOUT IF THE DEED OF SALE IS NOT
NOTARIZED, WILL THAT RENDER THE DEED OF
SALE VOID OR VALID?
-The absence of notarization of the deed of sale
will not necessarily invalidate the transaction
evidence therein. The Civil Code requires that
the form of a contract that transmits or
extinguishes real rights over immovable
property should be in a public document, yet, it
is also an accepted rule that the failure to
observe the proper form does not render the
transaction invalid.
WHAT IS AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT?
It refers to an act in which an individual appears
in person before the notary public and presents
integrally complete instrument or document is
attested to be personally known to the notary
public or identified by the notary public through
competent evidence of identity and represents
the notary public that the signature in the
instrument or document was voluntarily affixed
by him for the purpose of stated therein
declares that he had executed the instrument
or document as his free and voluntary act &
deed, and if he acts in a particular
representative capacity that he has the
authority to sign that capacity.
AFFIRMATION OR OATH
Refers to act which an individual on a single
occasion appears in person before the notary
public personally known to the public or
identified by the notary public through
competent evidence of identity & avows under
penalty of law, the whole truth of the contents
of the instrument or document. Officers
authorized to administer oaths with the
exception of notaries’ public, municipal judges,
& clerks of court are not obliged to administer
oaths or execute certificates save in matters of
official business or in relation to their functions
as such. And with the exceptions of notaries’
public, the officer performing the service in
those matters shall charge no fee unless
specifically authorized. All lawyers are
authorized to administer oaths provided this is
in connection in the performance of their duties
and of course the fiscal or the prosecutor.
JURAT
The affiant signs the instrument or document in
the presence of the notary & takes an oath or
affirmation before the notary public as to such
instrument or document. ( i.e. katong
nakaindicate na subscribe & sworn to)
SIGNATURE WITNESSING
The affiant signs the instrument or document in
the presence of the notary public.
THUMBMARK
Allowed. The notary public is allowed to certify
the affixing of a signature by thumbmark or
other mark on instrument or document
presented for notarization provided:
1. The thumb or other mark is affixed in
the presence of the notary public & of
two disinterested & unaffected
witnesses
2. There must be 2 disinterested
witnesses to the instrument or
document
3. And both witnesses sign their own
names in addition to that thumb or
other marks
4. And the notary public writes below the
thumb or other mark affixed by (i.e. the
signatory –mark--- in the presence of ---
witnesses & undersigned notary public.)
NOTARIAL PRACTICE (A.M. NO. 02-8- 13-SC,
AS AMENDED)
The importance and effects of notarization
Notarization is not an empty, meaningless, routinary
act. It is invested with substantive public interest,
such that only those who are qualified or authorized
may act as notaries public. Notarization converts a
private document into a public document; thus,
making that document admissible in evidence
without further proof of its authenticity. A notarial
document is by law entitled to full faith and credit
upon its face. Courts, administrative agencies and the
public at large must be able to rely upon the
acknowledgment executed by a notary public and
appended to a private instrument. (Linco v. Lacebal,
A.C. No. 7241, 2011)
II. TERM OF OFFICE OF NOTARY PUBLIC
Term of office: A notary public may perform
notarial acts for a period of 2 years commencing the
first day of January of the year in which the
commissioning is made, unless earlier revoked or the
notary public has resigned under these Rules and the
Rules of Court. (Rule III, Sec. 11, 2004 Notarial
Rules)
Q: Mr. X was commissioned as a notary
public on December 15, 2018. When will Mr.
X’s term of office as a notary public expire?
A: Mr. X’s term of office will expire on December
31, 2019. This is because the effectivity of the
notarial commission issued on December 31, 2018
retroacted to January 1, 2018. Therefore, the first
year of the notary public’s commission expired on
December 31, 2018 (first year: January 1, 2018 to
December 31, 2018) and the second year of the
notary public’s commission will expire on December
31, 2019 (second year: January 1, 2019 to
December 31, 2019).
Notarizing documents with an expired notarial
commission is a violation of the rules on notarial
practice. (Re: Violation of Rules of Notarial
Practice, A.M. No. 09-6-1-SC, January 21, 2015;
In re: Order of Judge Madamba, A.C. No.
10119, November 11, 2014)
III. POWERS AND LIMITATIONS
The phrase “any other act authorized by the 2004
Notarial Rules” refers to the authority of notaries
public to perform the following acts:
1. To certify the affixing of a thumb or other
mark on an instrument or document
presented for notarization; and
2. To sign on behalf of a person who is
physically unable to sign or make a mark on
an instrument or document. (Rule IV, Secs.
1(b) and (c), 2004 Notarial Rules)
A signature witnessing refers to a notarial act in
which an individual on a single occasion:
1. Appears in person before the notary public and
presents an instrument or document;
2. Is personally known to the notary public or
identified by the notary public through competent
evidence of identity as defined by (the 2004 Notarial
Rules); and,
3. Signs the instrument or document in the presence
of the notary public. (Rule II, Sec. 14, 2004
Notarial Rules)
A copy certification refers to a notarial act in
which a notary public:
1. Is presented with an instrument or document
that is neither a vital record, a public record, nor
publicly recordable;
2. Copies or supervises the copying of the instrument
or document;
3. Compares the instrument or document with the
copy; and
4. Determines that the copy is accurate and complete.
(Rule II, Sec. 4, 2004 Notarial Rules)
A notary public may certify the affixing of a
thumb or other mark on an instrument or
document presented for notarization, provided:
1. The thumb or other mark is affixed in the presence
of the notary public and of two disinterested and
unaffected witnesses to the instrument or document;
2. Both witnesses sign their own names in addition to
the thumb or other mark;
3. The notary public writes below the thumb or other
mark: "Thumb or Other Mark affixed by (name of
signatory by mark) in the presence of (names and
addresses of witnesses) and undersigned notary
public"; and
4. The notary public notarizes the signature by thumb
or other mark through an acknowledgment, jurat, or
signature witnessing. (Rule IV, Sec. 1(b), 2004
Notarial Rules)
Q: May a notary public notarize documents
by affixing his thumb or other mark on the
notarial certificate?
A: It appears that he may not. This is because Rule
VIII, Sec. 1 of the 2004 Notarial Rules provides that
in notarizing a paper instrument or document, a
notary public shall:
1. Sign by hand on the notarial certificate only
the name indicated and as appearing on the
notary's commission;
2. Not sign using a facsimile stamp or printing
device; and,
3. Affix his official signature only at the time
the notarial act is performed.
A notary public may sign on behalf of a person who
is physically unable to sign or make a mark on an
instrument or document provided:
1. The notary public is directed by the person
unable to sign or make a mark to sign on his
behalf;
2. The signature of the notary public is affixed
in the presence of two disinterested and
unaffected witnesses to the instrument or
document;
3. Both witnesses sign their own names;
4. The notary public writes below his
signature: "Signature affixed by notary in
presence of (names and addresses of person
and two (2) witnesses)"; and,
5. The notary public notarizes his signature by
acknowledgment or jurat. (Rule IV, Sec.
1(c), 2004 Notarial Rules)
Prohibitions
A notary public shall not perform a notarial act if the
person involved as signatory to the instrument or
document is:
1. Not in the notary’s presence personally at the time
of the notarization; and
2. Not personally known to the notary public or
otherwise identified by the notary public through
competent evidence of identity as defined by the
Rules. (Rule IV, Sec. 2(b), 2004 Notarial Rules)
Disqualifications
A notary public is disqualified from performing a
notarial act if he:
1. Is a party to the instrument or document that is to
be notarized;
2. Will receive, as a direct or indirect result, any
commission, fee, advantage, right, title, interest, cash,
property, or other consideration, except as provided
by the 2004 Notarial Rules and by law; or
3. Is a spouse, common-law partner, ancestor,
descendant, or relative by affinity or consanguinity of
the principal within the fourth civil degree. (Rule IV,
Sec. 3, 2004 Notarial Rules)
The Supreme Court has held that it was improper for
a notary public to notarize a complaint-affidavit
executed by his two sisters-in-law based on Rule IV,
Sec. 3 of the 2004 Notarial Rules. (Jandoquile v.
Revilla, A.C. No. 9514, April 10, 2013)
Refusal to notarize
A notary public shall not perform a notarial act when:
1. The notary knows or has good reason to
believe that the notarial act or transaction is
unlawful or immoral;
2. The signatory shows a demeanor which
engenders in the mind of the notary public
reasonable doubt as to the former's
knowledge of the consequences of the
transaction requiring a notarial act; and
3. In the notary's judgment, the signatory is not
acting of his or her own free will. (Rule IV,
Sec 4, 2004 Notarial Rules)
False or incomplete certificates
A notary public shall not:
1. Execute a certificate containing information
known or believed by the notary to be false.
2. Affix an official signature or seal on a
notarial certificate that is incomplete (Rule
IV, Sec. 5, 2004 Notarial Rules)
A notarial certificate refers to the part of, or
attachment to, a notarized instrument or document
that is completed by the notary public, bears the
notary's signature and seal, and states the facts
attested to by the notary public in a particular
notarization as provided for by these Rules. (Rule II
Sec. 8, 2004 Notarial Rules)
The notarial certificate must contain the
following:
1. Name of the notary public as exactly
indicated in the commission;
2. Serial number of the commission of the
notary public;
3. Words "Notary Public" and the province or
city where the notary public is
commissioned, the expiration date of the
commission, the office address of the notary
public; and
4. Roll of attorney’s number, the professional
tax receipt number and the place and date of
issuance thereof, and the IBP membership
number. (Rule VIII, Sec. 2, 2004 Notarial
Rules)
1. (a)  The “Roll of Attorney’s
number” is a permanently-assigned
number to each lawyer.
2. (b)  The “Professional Tax Receipt
(“PTR”) Number” is subject to
renewal every year. A PTR
Number issued in a year is valid
until January 31 of the succeeding
year. (Local Government Code
of 1991, Sec. 139(d))
3. (c)  If the notary public is an IBP
Lifetime Member, simply indicate
his or her IBP Lifetime
Membership number. If the notary
public is not an IBP Lifetime
Member, he/she must indicate the
“number and date of the official
receipt indicating payment of
his/her annual membership dues to
the IBP.” An IBP official receipt
issued in one year may be availed
of and indicated in all pleadings,
 motions, and papers “until the end
of February of the succeeding
year.” (OCA Circular No. 10- 85,
July 24, 1985)
Improper instruments or documents
A notary public shall not notarize:
1. A blank or incomplete instrument or
document; or,
2. An instrument or document without
appropriate notarial certification. (Rule IV,
Sec. 6, 2004 Notarial Rules)
Required entries in a Notarial Register:
1. Entry number and page number;
2. Date and time of day of the notarial act;
3. Type of notarial act;
4. Title or description of the instrument,
document or proceeding;
5. Name and address of each principal;
6. Competent evidence of identity as defined
by these Rules if the signatory is not
personally known to the notary;
7. Name and address of each credible witness
swearing to or affirming the person's
identity;
8. Fee charged for the notarial act;
9. Address where the notarization was
performed if not in the notary's regular place
of work or business; and
10. Any other circumstance the notary public
may deem of significance or of relevance.
(Rule VI, Sec. 2(a), 2004 Notarial Rules)
A notarial register is prima facie evidence of the facts
there stated. It has the presumption of regularity and
to contradict the veracity of the entry, evidence must
be clear, convincing, and more than merely
preponderant. (Bote vs. Judge Eduardo, MTJ-04-
1524, February 11, 2005)
A notary public shall, within the first ten (10) days of
the month following, be forwarded to the Clerk of
Court and shall be under the responsibility of such
officer. If there is no entry to certify for the month,
the notary shall forward a statement to this effect in
lieu of certified copies herein required. (Rule VI,
Sec. 2 (g), 2004 Notarial Rules
At the time of notarization, the notary's notarial
register shall be signed or a thumb or other mark
affixed by each:
1. Principal;
2. Credible witness swearing or affirming to
the identity of a principal; and,
3. Witness to a signature by thumb or other
mark, or to a signing by the notary public on
behalf of a person physically unable to sign.
(Rule VI, Sec. 3, 2004 Notarial Rules)
JURISDICTION OF NOTARY PUBLIC AND
PLACE OF NOTARIZATION
A person commissioned as notary public may
perform notarial acts in any place within the
territorial jurisdiction of the commissioning court.
(Rule III, Sec. 11, 2004 Notarial Rules)
Generally, a notary public may perform notarial acts
in his regular place of work or business, which must
be within the territorial jurisdiction of the
commissioning court. However, a notary public may
perform a notarial act outside his place of work or
business in any of the following sites located within
his territorial jurisdiction:
1. Public offices, convention halls and similar
places where oaths of office may be
administered;
2. Public function areas in hotels and similar
places for the signing of instruments or
documents requiring notarization;
3. Hospitals and other medical institutions
where a party to an instrument or document
is confined for treatment; and,
4. Any place where a party to an instrument or
document requiring notarization is under
detention. (Nasayao v. Unay, A.C. No.
9504, June 5, 2013)
The act of notarizing documents outside one's area of
commission is not to be taken lightly. Aside from
being a violation of Sec. 11 of the 2004 Rules on
Notarial Practice, it also partakes of malpractice of
law and falsification. (Laquindanum v. Quintana,
A.C. No. 7036, June 29, 2009; Almazan, Sr. v.
Suerte-Felipe, A.C. No. 7184, September 17,
2014)
Under the rule, only persons who are commissioned
as notary public may perform notarial acts within the
territorial jurisdiction of the court which granted the
commission. Clearly, Atty. Siapno could not perform
notarial functions in Lingayen, Natividad and
Dagupan City of the Province of Pangasinan since he
was not commissioned in the said places to perform
such act. By performing notarial acts without the
necessary commission from the court, Atty. Siapno
violated not only his oath to obey the laws
particularly the Rules on Notarial Practice but also
Canons 1 and 7 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility which proscribes all lawyers from
engaging in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
conduct and directs them to uphold the integrity and
dignity of the legal profession, at all times. (Re:
Violation of Rules on Notarial Practice, A.M. No.
09-6-1-SC, January 21, 2015)
REVOCATION OF COMMISSION
Grounds for revocation of commission or
administrative sanctions
1. Any ground on which an application for a
commission may be denied.
2. When the notary public:
1. (a)  Fails to keep a notarial register;
2. (b)  Fails to make the proper entry or entries
in his notarial register concerning his
notarial acts;
3. (c)  Fails to send the copy of the entries to
the Executive Judge within the first ten (10)
days of the month following;
4. (d)  Fails to affix to acknowledgments the
date of expiration of his commission;
5. (e)  Fails to submit his notarial register,
when filled, to the Executive Judge;
6. (f)  Fails to make his report, within a
reasonable time, to the Executive Judge
concerning the performance of his duties, as
may be required by the judge;
7. (g)  Fails to require the presence of a
principal at the time of the notarial act;
8. (h)  Fails to identify a principal on the basis
of personal knowledge or competent
evidence;
9. (i)  Executes a false or incomplete certificate
under Sec. 5, Rule IV;
10. (j)  Knowingly performs or fails to perform
any other act prohibited or mandated by
these Rules; and
11. (k)  Commits any other dereliction or act
which in the judgment of the Executive
Judge constitutes good cause for revocation
of commission or imposition of
administrative sanction. (Rule XI, Sec. 1,
2004 Notarial Rules)
Publication of revocations and
administrative sanctions
The Executive Judge shall immediately order the
Clerk of Court to post in a conspicuous place in the
offices of the Executive Judge and of the Clerk of
Court the names of notaries public who have been
administratively sanctioned or whose notarial
commissions have been revoked. (Rule XI, Sec. 3,
2004 Notarial Rules)
Examples of violations of the Notarial Rules:
• Notarizing a document 2 months after the party’s
death (Sicat v. Arriola, A.C. No. 5864, April 15,
2005)
• Notarizing a spurious last will and testament where
the signatures of witnesses were forged (Lee vs.
Tambago, A.C. No. 5281, February 12, 2008)
• Notarizing an antedated document to evade an Anti-
Dummy charge (Mondejar v. Rubia, July 21,
2006)
• Notarizing a deed of transfer of a free patent lot that
was still under the 5-year restriction (Relampagos.
vs. Lagunay, A.C. No. 10703, February 9, 2015)
• Notarizing absolute deeds of sale using false
cedulas (Heirs of Alilano vs. Examen, A.C. No.
10132, March 24, 2015)
• A lawyer notarizing a document where his brother
was the vendee (Heirs of Alilano vs. Examen,
supra)
• Maintaining different notarial registers in several
offices, which resulted in the notarized documents
being irregularly numbered and entered (Gimeno vs.
Zaide, A.C. No. 10303, April 22, 2015)
• Notarizing documents that were either unsigned or
lacked the necessary signatures (De Jesus vs.
Sanchez-Malit, A.C. No. 6470, July 8, 2014)
• Allowing one’s secretary to sign and/or notarize
documents on the lawyer’s behalf (Angeles vs.
Bagay, A.C. No. 8103, December 3, 2014)
• Assigning only 1 notarial document number for 6
complaints for rescission and ejectment (Crisostomo
vs. Nazareno, A.C. No. 6677, June 10, 2014)
Notarizing a document which contained false entries
in the certification against forum- shopping
(Crisostomo vs. Nazareno, supra)
COMPETENT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY
A Principal is the person appearing before a notary
public whose act is the subject of notarization. (Rule
II, Sec. 10, 2004 Notarial Rules)
If the Principal is “personally known to the notary
public,” there is no need to require the presentation of
competent evidence of identity.
If the Principal is “not personally known to the notary
public,” the notary must identify the Principal
through competent evidence of identity.
Competent evidence of identity refers to the
identification of an individual based on:
1. At least one current identification document
issued by an official agency bearing the
photograph and signature of the individual,
such as but not limited to, passport, driver's
license, Professional Regulations
Commission ID, National Bureau of
Investigation clearance, police clearance,
postal ID, voter's ID, Barangay certification,
Government Service and Insurance System
(GSIS) e-card, Social Security System (SSS)
card, Philhealth card, senior citizen card,
Overseas Workers Welfare Administration
(OWWA) ID, OFW ID, seaman's book,
alien certificate of registration/immigrant
certificate of registration, government office
ID, certification from the National Council
for the Welfare of Disable Persons
(NCWDP), Department of Social Welfare
and Development; or
2. The oath or affirmation of one credible
witness not privy to the instrument,
document or transaction who is personally
known to the notary public and who
personally knows the individual; or,
3. The oath or affirmation of two credible
witnesses neither of whom is privy to the
instrument, document or transaction who
each personally knows the individual and
shows to the notary public documentary
identification.
NOTE: For the requirement of personal knowledge
of the parties to be satisfied, the notary public must at
least be acquainted with them.
The Supreme Court has declared that a Community
Tax Certificate is not competent evidence of identity.
However, note that Sec. 163(a) of Republic Act No.
7160, otherwise known as the Local Government
Code of 1991 requires persons subject to the payment
of community tax to present their community tax
certificates whenever they acknowledge documents
before notaries public. (Baylon v. Almo, A.C. No.
6962, June 25, 2008)
SANCTIONS
Violations of the 2004 Notarial Rules may also
constitute violations of the Code of Professional
Responsibility and the Lawyer’s Oath.
Punishable acts
The Executive Judge shall cause the prosecution of
any person who:
1. Knowingly acts or otherwise impersonates a notary
public;
2. Knowingly obtains, conceals, defaces, or destroys
the seal, notarial register, or official records of a
notary public; and
3. Knowingly solicits, coerces, or in any way
influences a notary public to commit official
misconduct. (Rule XII, Sec. 1, 2004 Notarial
Rules)
The Executive Judge concerned shall submit
semestral reports to the Supreme Court on discipline
and prosecution of notaries public. (Rule XII, Sec.
2, 2004 Notarial Rules)
Liability of notary public
Even defectively notarized documents which are
improperly obtained from the notarial register of a
notary public are admissible as evidence against the
notary public in an administrative case against the
latter. The 2004 Notarial Rules contain no provision
declaring the inadmissibility of documents obtained
in violation thereof. (De Jesus v. Sanchez-Malit,
A.C. No. 6470, July 8, 2014)
If a Notary Public does not comply with the
requirements for signing a document on behalf of
another, he becomes a party to the instrument and
becomes disqualified from notarizing it. The act of
notarizing a deed to which a notary public is a party
is a violation of the Notarial Rules and is a ground for
the imposition of disciplinary sanctions. (Nevada v.
Casuga, supra)
A notary public is personally responsible for the
correctness and completeness of the entries in his/her
notarial register. A notary public cannot escape
liability for blaming the incorrectness or
incompleteness of the entries in his/her notarial
register on his/her secretary. (Agadan v. Kilaan,
A.C. No. 9385, November 11, 2013)
A notary public should not facilitate the
disintegration of a marriage and the family by
encouraging the separation of the spouses and extra-
judicially dissolving the conjugal partnership.
Further, a notary public is personally responsible for
the entries in his notarial register and he could not
relieve himself of this responsibility by passing the
blame on his secretaries or any member of his staff.
(Espinosa v. Omana, A.C. No. 9081, October
12, 2011)
CONSEQUENCES OF DEFECTIVE
NOTARIZATION
Defective notarization generally does not affect the
validity of a contract. However, from an evidentiary
perspective, the defective notarization of a document
prevents it from being considered and admitted in
evidence as a public document. It remains a private
document that must be authenticated as such in
accordance with the Rules of Evidence. (The Heirs
of Sarili v. Lagrosa, G.R. No. 193517, January
15, 2014)
Exception: In cases where the law requires
notarization as a requisite for validity, the defective
notarization will render the contract or transaction
void. (Azuela v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
122880, April 12, 2006)
i. Donation of immovable property
Article 749 of the Civil Code provides that the
donation of immovable property must be in a
public (i.e., notarized) document in order to be valid.
The Supreme Court has declared void a deed of
donation of land that had been defectively notarized.
(Unchuan v. Lozada, G.R. No. 172671, April 16,
2009)
ii. Notarial Wills
Article 806 of the Civil Code provides that wills must
be acknowledged before a notary public by the
testator and his witnesses.
In Guerrero v. Bihis (G.R. No. 174144, April 17,
2007), a notary public commissioned for and in
Caloocan City notarized a will in Quezon City. The
Supreme Court held that the notary public had no
authority to notarize documents in Quezon City, and
therefore the will in this case was void for being
defectively notarized.
Likewise, in Azuela v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No.
122880, April 12, 2006), the Supreme Court
declared a will void for, among other things, not
being “acknowledged” before a notary public, even if
it was “subscribed and sworn to” before a notary
public:
In lieu of an acknowledgment, the notary public,
wrote "Nilagdaan ko at ninotario ko ngayong 10 ng
Hunyo 10 (sic), 1981 dito sa Lungsod ng Maynila."
By no manner of contemplation can those words be
construed as an acknowledgment. “An
acknowledgment is the act of one who has executed a
deed in going before some competent officer or court
and declaring it to be his act or deed. It involves an
extra step undertaken whereby the signor actually
declares to the notary that the executor of a document
has attested to the notary that the same is his/her own
free act and deed.”
“It might be possible to construe the averment as a
jurat, even though it does not hew to the usual
language thereof. A jurat is that part of an affidavit
where the notary certifies that before him/her, the
document was subscribed and sworn to by the
executor.” Ordinarily, the language of

the jurat should avow that the document was

subscribed and sworn before the notary public, while
in this case, the notary public averred that he himself
"signed and notarized" the document. Possibly
though, the word "ninotario" or "notarized"
encompasses the signing of and swearing in of the
executors of the document, which in this case would
involve the decedent and the instrumental witnesses.

“Yet even if we consider what was affixed by the

notary public as a jurat, the will would nonetheless
remain invalid, as the express requirement of Article
806 is that the will be "acknowledged", and not
merely subscribed and sworn to.” The will does not
present any textual proof, much less one under oath,
that the decedent and the instrumental witnesses
executed or signed the will as their own free act or
deed. The acknowledgment made in a will provides
for another all-important legal safeguard against
spurious wills or those made beyond the free consent
of the testator.

“An acknowledgement is not an empty meaningless

act. The acknowledgment coerces the testator and the
instrumental witnesses to declare before an officer of
the law that they had executed and subscribed to the
will as their own free act or deed. Such declaration is
under oath and under pain of perjury, thus allowing
for the criminal prosecution of persons who
participate in the execution of spurious wills, or those
executed without the free consent of the testator. It
also provides a further degree of assurance that the
testator is of certain mindset in making the
testamentary dispositions to those persons he/she had
designated in the will.

“It may not have been said before, but we can assert
the rule, self-evident as it is under Article 806. A
notarial will that is not acknowledged before a notary
public by the testator and the witnesses is fatally
defective, even if it is subscribed and sworn to before
a notary public.

————- end of topic ————-