Feb 12, 2014notarial practicenotary publiclegal ethicsadministrative casecivil law

Notarial Duty Verifying Identity in Document Acknowledgment

Supreme Court ruling on notaries' duty to verify identity in acknowledgments, revoking a notary's commission for lapses.


The Supreme Court has long held that notarization is not a mere routine act. In Talisic v. Atty. Rinen (A.C. No. 8761, February 12, 2014), the Court reiterated that a notary public must personally verify the identity of every person signing a document. The case serves as a reminder that failing to do so carries serious consequences, including revocation of one's notarial commission.

The Case

Complainant Wilberto Talisic charged Atty. Primo Rinen with falsification of an Extra Judicial Partition with Sale. The deed allowed the transfer of a parcel of land formerly owned by Wilberto's mother to third parties. Wilberto claimed that while his father's signature appeared authentic, his and his siblings' signatures were forged. He also noted that his name was misspelled as "Wilfredo" in the document.

Atty. Rinen denied the charge. He explained that parties approached him in 1994 to prepare and notarize the deed. His clerk prepared the document, and he administered the oath. The deed contained his certification that no notary public was available at the time, and notarial fees were covered by official receipts.

The Issue

The central issue was whether Atty. Rinen failed to exercise the diligence required of a notary public when he acknowledged the deed without properly verifying the identities of the parties who signed it.

The Ruling

The Court agreed with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines' recommendation and revoked Atty. Rinen's notarial commission, disqualifying him from being commissioned as a notary public for one year.

The Court emphasized that "[f]aithful observance and utmost respect of the legal solemnity of the oath in an acknowledgment or jurat is sacrosanct." Notarization converts a private document into a public one, making it admissible in court without further proof of authenticity. Thus, it "engages public interest in a substantial degree."

Citing Bautista v. Atty. Bernabe, the Court stressed that a notary should not notarize a document unless the persons who signed it are the very same persons who executed and personally appeared before him. The presence of the parties enables the notary to verify the genuineness of signatures.

Key Findings

Atty. Rinen admitted he failed to personally verify the identity of all parties who purportedly signed the document. This failure was evident from the fact that the community tax certificate details of Wilberto and his sister remained unspecified in the acknowledgment portion of the deed.

The Court also noted inconsistencies in the dates appearing on the deed: 1994 as to execution, 1995 when notarized, and entered as Series of 1992 in the notarial book. These discrepancies further demonstrated Atty. Rinen's negligence.

Notably, the fact that Atty. Rinen was a trial court judge at the time did not relieve him of compliance with the same standards imposed upon other commissioned notaries. He also could not simply rely on his clerk of court to perform the responsibilities attached to his function, particularly ensuring that parties were present and acting of their own free will.

Practical Takeaways

  • A notary public must personally verify the identity of every person appearing before them, requiring presentation of competent evidence of identity such as a community tax certificate or government-issued ID.
  • Notarization is not an empty routine. It carries substantial legal effects, converting private documents into public ones admissible in court without further proof of authenticity.
  • Notaries cannot delegate their duties to clerks or other staff. The notary bears personal responsibility for compliance with all legal requirements.
  • A notary's position as a judge or other public official does not exempt them from the standards governing notarial practice.
  • Failure to comply with notarial duties can result in revocation of commission, disqualification from future commission, and administrative sanctions.

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

Have a question about this topic?

This article is general information, not legal advice. Ask ASG Legal AI for a cited, plain-language answer on your own situation — free, no sign-up.