1.
TALISIC v RINEN
DOCTRINE:
Faithful observance and utmost respect of the legal solemnity of the oath in an
acknowledgment or jurat is sacrosanct.
The notarization of a document carries considerable legal effect. Notarization of a private
document converts such document into a public one, and renders it admissible in court
without further proof of its authenticity. Thus, notarization is not an empty routine; to the
contrary, it engages public interest in a substantial degree.
It must be stressed that "a notary public's function should not be trivialized and a notary
public must discharge his powers and duties which are impressed with public interest, with
accuracy and fidelity."
"Notaries public must observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the performance
of their duties." Otherwise, the confidence of the public in the integrity of public
instruments would be undermined.
FACTS:
Talisic filed an administrative complaint charging Atty. Rinen with falsification of an Extra
Judicial Partition with Sale transferring a parcel of land owned by Talisic’s mother to spouses
Durante. He further claimed that his mother died on May 1987, that it was only after his
father’s death that they knew of the transfer. Lastly, he believed that his father’s signature
was authentic, however, his signature and his siblings were forged, and that even his name
was erroneously indicated on the deed as Wilfredo instead of Wilberto.
In his defense, Atty. Rinen denied the allegations against him and explained that he only
knew about the transaction on April 1994 when the spouses approached him to prepare and
notarized the deed, and that the deed contained his certification that at the time of the
document’s execution, no notary public was available to expedite the transaction.
Investigating Commissioner’s:
o Report - although there was no evidence of forgery, he was negligent in not requiring a
presentation of document as proof of identity of the parties. His negligence was further
shown in the inconsistencies of the dates in the deed.
o Recommendation - the cancellation of Atty. Rinen’s notarial commission and his
suspension from notarial practice for 1year;
IBP Board of Governor Ruling- adopted the Investigating Commissioner’s Report and
Recommendation.
ISSUE: W/N Atty. Rinen was negligent in the performance of his notarial practice?
RATIO: The Court agrees with the findings and recommendations of the IBP.
"Faithful observance and utmost respect of the legal solemnity of the oath in an
acknowledgment or jurat is sacrosanct." "The notarization of a document carries considerable
legal effect. Notarization of a private document converts such document into a public one, and
renders it admissible in court without further proof of its authenticity. Thus, notarization is not
an empty routine; to the contrary, it engages public interest in a substantial degree. It must be
stressed that "a notary public's function should not be trivialized and a notary public must
discharge his powers and duties which are impressed with public interest, with accuracy and
fidelity."
In the present case, Atty. Rinen did not deny his failure to personally verify the identity of all
parties who purportedly signed the subject document and whom, as he claimed, appeared
before him. Such failure of Atty. Rinen justified the recommendation presented by the IBP.
The fact that Atty. Rinen was a trial court judge during the time that he administered the
oath for the subject deed did not relieve him of compliance with the same standards and
obligations imposed upon other commissioned notaries public. Thus, "notaries public must
JROliva
observe with utmost care the basic requirements in the performance of their duties."
Otherwise, the confidence of the public in the integrity of public instruments would be
undermined.
HELD: WHEREFORE, as recommended by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the Court
REVOKES the notarial commission which Atty. Primo R. Rinen may presently have, and
DISQUALIFIES him from being commissioned as a notary public for one year, effective
immediately. He is WARNED that a repetition of the same or similar act in the future shall merit
a more severe sanction. He is DIRECTED to report to this Court the date of his receipt of this
Resolution to enable it to determine when the revocation of his notarial commission and his
disqualification from being commissioned as notary public shall take effect.
JROliva
