A.C. No. 12467. April 10, 2019. SPOUSES PEPITO AND PRESCILA FRIAS, Complainants, vs. ATTY. NELLY E. ABAO, Respondent.
FACTS

Complainants, the Spouses Frias, owned a parcel of land in Capiz. In 1995, needing funds for their daughter’s medical treatment, they allegedly entered into a 20-year lease agreement with the Spouses Arbiz, receiving PHP 340,000. They left for Mindanao thereafter. After the lease term expired in 2015, they returned to claim the property but were refused possession by the Arbizes’ heirs, the Spouses Escutin. In an ejectment case, the Escutins presented a Deed of Absolute Sale dated July 11, 1995, purportedly executed by the Frias spouses in favor of the Arbizes, which was notarized by respondent Atty. Nelly E. Abao. The Spouses Frias denied executing any deed of sale, asserting they were already in Mindanao on that date. A certification from the Clerk of Court confirmed that the notarized document did not exist in the notarial records and, crucially, that Atty. Abao had no notarial commission for Roxas City, Capiz, in 1995.

ISSUE

Whether Atty. Nelly E. Abao is administratively liable for notarizing a document without a valid notarial commission and for making false statements in a judicial affidavit regarding the notarization.

RULING

Yes, Atty. Abao is administratively liable. The Court found her guilty of malpractice as a notary public and of violating Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which prohibits lawyers from engaging in unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct. Notarization is not a mere ministerial act; it invests a document with public faith and requires the notary public to act with utmost care and fidelity. A notarial commission is a prerequisite to lawfully perform such duties. By her own admission in her Answer, Atty. Abao notarized the Deed of Absolute Sale without the requisite commission. This unauthorized act is a clear violation of the Notarial Law and the lawyer’s oath. Furthermore, her contradictory judicial affidavit, wherein she insisted the complainants personally appeared before her, compounded her misconduct, especially in light of the official certification proving the non-existence of her commission and the notarial record.
The legal logic is grounded in the protection of public interest and the integrity of notarized documents. The Court emphasized that a lawyer who acts as a notary public without a commission usurps an official function and undermines the confidence of the public and the judiciary in notarial documents. Considering the gravity of the offense, which is akin to falsification of a public document, and following precedents for such unauthorized notarization, the penalty recommended by the IBP was deemed insufficient. The Court imposed a suspension from the practice of law for two years and permanently barred Atty. Abao from being commissioned as a Notary Public. Her advanced age and alleged sickness were not considered mitigating, as she was only 54 years old at the time of the offense.