This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2004-02-03 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Time and again, the Court has emphasized that notarization is not an empty, meaningless, routinary act.[19] It is invested with substantive public interest, such that only those who are qualified or authorized may act as notaries public. It converts a private document into a public one, making it admissible in court without further proof of its authenticity.[20] A notarial document is, by law, entitled to full faith and credit upon its face. Courts, administrative agencies, and the public at large must be able to rely upon the acknowledgment executed by a notary public and appended to a private instrument. | |||||
|
2000-03-07 |
DAVIDE JR., C.J. |
||||
| It is worthy to note that the Extrajudicial Partition with Deed of Absolute Sale is a notarized document. As such, it has in its favor the presumption of regularity, and it carries the evidentiary weight conferred upon it with respect to its due execution.[20] It is admissible in evidence without further proof of authenticity[21] and is entitled to full faith and credit upon its face.[22] He who denies its due execution has the burden of proving that contrary to the recital in the Acknowledgment he never appeared before the notary public and acknowledged the deed to be his voluntary act.[23] It must also be stressed that whoever alleges forgery has the burden of proving the same. Forgery cannot be presumed but should be proved by clear and convincing evidence.[24] Private respondents failed to discharge this burden of proof; hence, the presumption in favor of the questioned deed stands. | |||||