This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2005-05-09 |
DAVIDE, JR., C.J. |
||||
| This Court, however, is not persuaded. Any suspicion on the authenticity and due execution of the special power of attorney and the two secretary's certificates, which are notarized documents and as such, public documents cannot stand against the presumption of regularity in their favor absent evidence that is clear, convincing, and more than merely preponderant.[18] The rule of long standing is that a public document executed and attested through the intervention of a notary public is evidence of the facts in a clear, unequivocal manner therein expressed.[19] In the instant case, except for respondent's bare allegations to cast doubt on these documents, there was no evidence adduced in support thereof. Absent such evidence, the presumption must stand and the special power of attorney and secretary's certificates must be upheld. | |||||
|
2004-01-20 |
YNARES-SATIAGO, J. |
||||
| Anent the second issue, the Deed of Absolute Sale executed by Narcisa in favor of Tomas is contained in a notarized[21] document. In Spouses Alfarero, et al. v. Spouses Sevilla, et al.,[22] it was held that a public document executed and attested through the intervention of a notary public is evidence of the facts in a clear, unequivocal manner therein expressed. Otherwise stated, public or notarial documents, or those instruments duly acknowledged or proved and certified as provided by law, may be presented in evidence without further proof, the certificate of acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the execution of the instrument or document involved. In order to contradict the presumption of regularity of a public document, evidence must be clear, convincing, and more than merely preponderant. | |||||