March 12, 2014
FACTS
A compromise agreement was executed by the parties in a civil case over a parcel of land, which agreement was notarized by respondent Atty. Marcelino Cabucana, Jr.
However, during the hearing, the parties in the compromise agreement testified that they signed the agreement in the courtroom, but not in the presence of Atty. Cabucana, Jr.
Complainant Licerio Dizon, one of the prospective buyers of the parcel of land subject in the compromise agreement, filed an administrative case against Atty. Cabucana, Jr. for notarizing the agreement without the presence of the parties.
He averred that the irregularity in the due execution of the compromise agreement caused undue delay of the resolution of the case, to his prejudice and damage.
Atty. Cabucana, Jr. contended that Dizon’s complaint was only to harass him because he was the private prosecutor in a criminal case filed against Dizon.
ISSUE
Whether or not Atty. Cabucana, Jr. is administratively liable for notarizing the compromise agreement without the presence of all the parties.
RULING
YES, Atty. Cabucana, Jr. is administratively liable for notarizing the compromise agreement without the presence of all the parties.
A person shall not perform a notarial act if the person involved as signatory to the instrument or document –
(Sec. 2(b), Rule IV of the Rules on Notarial Practice of 2004)
- is not in the notary’s presence personally at the time of the notarization; and
- is not personally known to the notary public or otherwise identified by the notary public through competent evidence of identity as defined by these Rules.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION
WHEREFORE, the Court finds respondent Atty. Marcelino Cabucana, Jr. GUILTY of violating Rule 1.01, Canon l of the Code of Professional Responsibility.1âwphi1 Accordingly, the Court SUSPENDS him from the practice of law for three (3) months, REVOKES his incumbent notarial commission, if any, and PROHIBITS him from being commissioned as a notary public for two (2) years, effective immediately, with a stern WARNING that a repetition of the same or similar offense shall be dealt with more severely.
Let copies of this resolution be furnished the Bar Confidant to be included in the records of the respondent; the Integrated Bar of the Philippines for distribution to all its chapters; and the Office of the Court Administrator for dissemination to all cou1is throughout the country.
SO ORDERED.
Full text of this decision.
