8/9/2019 Jandoquile vs Atty Revilla Jr

1/2

Bernard Jandoquile, complainant

Atty Quirino Revilla Jr, respondent

Facts:

 The facts of the case are not disputed. Atty Revilla Jr notarized a complaint

a!davit si"ned #y $eneraline Brosas, $erizalyn Brosas %edrosa and &lmer

Alvarado. $eneraline Brosas is a sister of $eizel 'ynda Brosas Revilla, Atyy

Revilla Jr(s )ife. Jandoquile complains that Atyy Revilla Jr is disquali*ed to

perform the notarial act per +ection -c, Rule /0 of the 1223 Rules on

4otarial %ractice. 5omplainant also complains that respondent did not

require the three a!ants in the complainta!davit to sho) their valid

identi*cation cards.Atty Revilla did not deny #ut admitted complainant(s

material alle"ations.

/ssue: 'hether or not the sin"le act of notarizin" the complainta!davit of 

relatives )ithin the fourth civil de"ree of a!nity and, at the same time, not

requirin" them to present valid identi*cation cards is a "round for

dis#arment.

Rulin"s:

4o. +ince the facts are not contested, the court deems it more prudent to

resolve the case. /ndeed, Atty Revilla, Jr. violated the disquali*cation rule

under +ection 6, Rule /0 of the 1223 Rules on 4otarial %ractice. The court

a"ree )ith him, that respondent(s violation is not su!cient "round fordis#arment. 7iven the clear provision of the disquali*cation rule, it #ehooved

upon Atty. Revilla, Jr. to act )ith prudence and refuse notarizin" the

document. 8n the second char"e, Atty Revilla, Jr. cannot #e held lia#le. /f the

notary pu#lic 9no)s the a!ants personally, he need not require them to

sho) their valid identi*cation cards. This rule is supported #y the de*nition

of a ;urat< under +ec =, Rule // of the 1223 Rules on 4otarial %ractice. A

Jurat< refers to an act in )hich an individual on a sin"le occasion: -a

appears in person #efore the notary pu#lic and presents an instruments or

documents> -# is personally 9no)n to the notary pu#lic or identi*ed #y thenotary pu#lic throu"h competent evidence of identity> -c si"ns the

instrument or document in the presence of the notary> -d ta9es an oath or

a!rmation #efore the notary pu#lic as to such instrument or document. /n

this case, $eneraline Brosas is a sisterinla) of Atty Revilla, Jr(s )ife>

$erizalyn Brosas %edrosa is his )ife(s sisterinla)> and &lmer Alvarado is the

livein house #oy of the Brosas family. Respondent 9no)s the three a!ants

8/9/2019 Jandoquile vs Atty Revilla Jr

2/2

personally, thus he )as ;usti*ed in no lon"er requirin" them to sho) valid

identi*cation cards. But respondent is not )ithout fault for failin" to indicate

such fact in the ;urat< of the complainta!davit. 'hile he has a valid

defense as to the second char"e, it does not e?empt him from lia#ility for

violatin" the disquali*cation rule.