Negligence in Notarization Leads to Revocation and Disqualification for Notary Public

The Supreme Court's ruling in Soriano v. Basco (A.C. No. 6648, September 21, 2005) serves as a stern reminder that notarization is far more than a routine ministerial act. When a lawyer commissioned as a notary public neglects the mandatory duties imposed by the Notarial Law, the consequences extend beyond a simple reprimand — the notarial commission may be revoked, and the lawyer disqualified from being commissioned again.

The Case: A Deed of Sale That Was Never Properly Recorded

The case arose from a complaint filed by Josefina P. Soriano against Atty. Humberto B. Basco, a Notary Public of Manila. Soriano alleged that Basco testified in court that he had notarized a Deed of Sale purportedly executed by her. However, Soriano claimed she never appeared before Basco and had never seen or received a copy of the alleged contract.

When Soriano requested copies of the document from the Office of the Clerk of Court of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, a certification dated February 11, 2003 revealed that the alleged Deed of Sale was not among the documents submitted to that office. Moreover, a certified true copy of Basco's notarial register disclosed his failure to indicate the names of witnesses, the fees charged, and the respective residence certificates of the parties to the documents he notarized.

The Issue: Dereliction of Duty as a Notary Public

The central issue was whether Basco was guilty of dereliction of duty as a notary public. The IBP Investigating Commissioner found that the allegations remained uncontroverted, and the evidence clearly showed Basco's failure to exercise diligence in performing his notarial responsibilities.

The Ruling: Revocation and Disqualification

The Supreme Court adopted the IBP Board of Governors' recommendation, revoking Basco's notarial commission and disqualifying him from being commissioned as a notary public for one year, with a warning that repetition of the same negligent act would be dealt with more severely.

The Court cited Sections 245 and 246 of the Revised Administrative Code, which require every notary public to keep a notarial register recording all official acts. Specifically, the notary must enter the nature of each instrument, the persons executing or acknowledging it, the witnesses, the date, the fees collected, and — for contracts — keep a correct copy as part of the records. The notary must also forward certified copies of monthly entries to the Clerk of Court of the Regional Trial Court within the first ten days of the following month.

The Legal Standard: Notarization Is Not a Mere Formality

The Court emphasized that notarization is not an empty, meaningless, routinary act. It is invested with substantive public interest. Notarization converts a private document into a public instrument, making it admissible in court without further proof of authenticity. A notarial document is entitled to full faith and credit upon its face.

The Court explained that when a document does not appear in the notarial records and there is no copy of it therein, doubt is engendered that the document was not really notarized. The failure to record a document is tantamount to falsely making it appear that the document was notarized when in fact it was not.

The Court also noted that Basco delegated the clerical entry of notarial particulars to his staff secretary and failed to check the sufficiency of the entries. This delegation did not excuse his negligence — the notary bears personal responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of the notarial register.

Practical Takeaways

• Notarial duties are personal and non-delegable. A notary public cannot shift responsibility for record-keeping to staff members. The notary must personally ensure that all entries in the notarial register are complete and accurate.

• Every detail matters. The Notarial Law requires specific entries: the nature of the instrument, the parties, witnesses, date, fees, and residence certificate details. Omitting any of these is a ground for disciplinary action.

• Records must be submitted promptly. Notaries must forward certified copies of monthly entries to the Clerk of Court of the Regional Trial Court within the first ten days of the following month. Failure to do so is a dereliction of duty.

• Notarization carries evidentiary weight. A notarized document is presumed authentic and admissible without further proof. Sloppy notarial practices undermine public confidence in the integrity of public documents.

• Negligence has professional consequences. Even without a finding of fraud or bad faith, mere negligence in performing notarial duties can result in revocation of the commission and disqualification from future commissions.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.