Cedula No Longer Valid For Document Notarization In The Philippines
Many thanks to G. for pointing out a major change now embodied in the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court in 2004 regulating notarial practice in the Philippines: a Philippine notary public is now required by law to demand “competent evidence of identity” from parties who may want certain documents, such as contracts of sale, to be acknowledged, or who may want to swear an oath to attest the truth of certain statements, like those contained in an affidavit.
So, what constitutes a “competent evidence of identity”? The Court defined it in Rule II, Section 12:
“SEC. 12. Competent Evidence of Identity. – The phrase “competent evidence of identity” refers to the identification of an individual based on:
“(a) at least one current identification document issued by an official agency bearing the photograph and signature of the individual [Emphasis mine - Ed.]; or
“(b) the oath or affirmation of one credible witness not privy to the instrument, document or transaction who is personally known to the notary public and who personally knows the individual, or of two credible witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrument, document or transaction who each personally knows the individual and shows to the notary public documentary identification.”
So, according to Section 12(a), a Philippine notary public can no longer accept a cedula or a community tax certificate (CTC), the successor document to the residence certificate originally required by the Notarial Law as proof of identity, for the simple reason that it does not contain a photograph of the person to whom it is issued.
Moreover, it is common knowledge that a CTC may be easily obtained by anyone, without any supporting papers, thereby debasing its value as an identity document. One blogger knows it all too well.
So, what forms of photo-bearing identification will a Philippine notary public accept? Off the top of my head, here is a partial list:
- A driver’s license issued by the Land Transportation Office
- A passport issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs
- An identification card issued by either the Government Service Insurance System or the Social Security System
- An identfication card issued by the Professional Regulation Commission
- A taxpayer’s identification card issued by the Bureau of Internal Revenue
- A postal identification card issued by the Philippine Postal Corporation
Take note that what the rule requires is an ID issued by an “official agency” and not necessarily by a government agency. It is unfortunate, however, that the Court failed to promulgate a definition on what an “official agency” is, although I suspect that such an office will be interpreted as one belonging to the State.
What is the significance of notarization, or in other words, why is it such a big deal?
“Notarization converts a private document into a public document and renders the document admissible in court as evidence without need for further proof of its authenticity. A notarized document is entitled, by law, to full faith and credit upon its face. Notarization also vests upon the document the presumption of regularity unless it is impugned by strong, complete and conclusive proof [Citations omitted - Ed.].”
In her 1993 Ateneo Law Journal article “A Manual For Filipino Notaries”, Anna Leah T. Castañeda underscored the need to safeguard the notarial act, one that many Filipinos take for granted:
“The notarial act is a solemn one fraught with serious consequences. As a natural and logical effect, the commission of acts which flout the safeguards imposed by law on the notarial act is met with severe penalties for the notary. The safeguards are not empty ceremonies, for they are meant to guard against fraud and guarantee to the courts, to administrative agencies, and to the public at large that documents upon which the signature and seal of the notary appear may be relied upon.”
By demanding a more stringent personal identification standard, the Supreme Court has taken another step in reinforcing the credibility of notarization.
banks still ask for your CTC number when submitting loan documents
Aside from notarization, the CTC number is also required when filing your income tax returns.
You forgot to mention in your list, of all IDs, IBP Membership ID.
Hindi po ako lawyer pero confirm ko lang nababasa ko sa ibang site.
(http://www.lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_02_8_13_sc_2008.html)
(http://phbar.org/viewtopic.php?t=779&sid=590f7ffc1b7091b0bb901f9696164996)
“Component” po ba talaga yung word?
Hello Emmanuel, tingin ko nagkamali lang and Lawphil.
Pwede rin yong CTC, basta personally known ng notary ang principal.
SEC. 12. Competent Evidence of Identity. – The phrase “competent evidence of identity” refers to the identification of an individual based on:
(a) at least one current identification document issued by an official agency bearing the photograph and signature of the individual; orchan robles virtual law library
(b) the oath or affirmation of one credible witness not privy to the instrument, document or transaction who is personally known to the notary public and who personally knows the individual, or of two credible witnesses neither of whom is privy to the instrument, document or transaction who each personally knows the individual and shows to the notary public documentary identification.
Ito ay para lng sa hindi personally known ng notary.
In my opinion.
I suppose you can do it this way but it seems to be a complicated procedure.
ask ko lng po… pag nag pa notaryo ba kailangan ang presence ng both parties? kapag ang transaction is a hundred thousands na.. or pwede na ang xerox ng IDs ang i present…? kasi ganito po ang nangyari. AM A MEMBER OF A NON STOCK CORPORATION POW, para lang mag withdraw ako being a member of the said corp, nagpa buyout ako, we agreed na 120t ang ibayad nila sa akin, pero 100t lng ang ipapaalam sa iba pang mga member ng corp na naunang nag pa buyout kc un lng ang halaga na binayad sa kanilang naunang nag buyout, yet, 20t ko ay naka check, pero ang nasa internal agreement namin is 100t lng,yong pinermahan ko. ngayon po nung dumating ang date na pwede ko na i encash is hindi ito nag good , sa madaling salita naisahan po ako… may pinirmahan ako na agreement na ako ay tumanggap ng quit claim na 100t, plus may xerox sila ng IDs ko… pwde na po ba nilang ipa notaryo po yon???
ano kaya ang dapat kong gawin against them….. tnx
bale, 100t natanggap ko ng cash ung 20t naka cheke pero di nag good
Oo, requirement na kailangan magpakita sa harap ng notary public ang lahat ng mga parties sa isang kasunduan. Iyan ang requirement ng Notarial Law pero naging kaugalian na ng maraming notaries public na mag-notarize kahit wala ang mga parties.
Be that as it may, kahit defective ang notarization, tulad ng sa kaso mo, valid pa rin ang kasunduang pinasukan mo.
huhuhu….. ganon.. .ano kaya ang pwede kong pang resbak sa kanila kasi naloko nga po ako diba? dapat 120t ang matatanggap ko pero 100t nalng….
isa pa po, may cheke syang naka issue, which is pinapa stop nya ang payment kaya di nag good……
ano ba ang kaso na pwede ko ilaban dun poww… tnx
Ito, bigyan kita ng scenario…
Gaya ng binanggit mo, mayroon kang pinasukan na verbal agreement na makakatanggap ka ng PHP 120,000 at bilang katunayan nito ay binigyan ka ng check worth PHP 20,000 na post-dated.
Pero, sa kilanaunan, pumirma ka ng isang written na kasunduan na hanggang PHP 100,000 lang ang matatanggap mong salapi. Maaring sabihin ng mga kausap mo na itong written contract ay amendment o pagbabago sa naunang oral contract ninyo, at pumayag ka na palitan ito.
pero po nauna ang date ng kasunduan kaysa date ng cheke
Ok, kung ganoon masasabi na ang pagbigay sa iyo ng PHP 20,000 na check ay pagpapatunay na binago ninyo ang nauna ninyong usapan.
Mas titibay ang theory na ito kung ang pumirma sa check na ibinigay sa iyo ay pumirma din sa contract mo.
company check po yon, at ang signatory is ung president at ang treasure ng school po. pero ang nakalagay sa contract is pangalan ko lng nakalagay dun.
gusto ko lng po sanang manghingi sa inyo ng advice regarding sa problem naming mga investors nitong isang corporation which is a school tertiary level po.
Nong 2003 po ini encourage po ako at ang iba ko pong mga kasamahan na mag invest sa naturang pinauumpisahang school po, I was in abroad at that time, at pinalalagay na ng isa sa incorporators ang pangalan ko sa SEC, para lang ma sure na mag invest ako, so, when I came back nandun nga ang name ko sa SEC registration, so that’s why I gave my contribution/investment since nandun na ang name ko sa registration.
Sila daw bahala sa pera then, pagmaayos na ang kita pwde kaming mga members mag work or tumanggap ng allowances. Besides my yearly meeting naman daw na magaganap. The following are the problems that we encountered since 2005;
the Presidents and CEOs of the 2 corporations have continuously and deliberately failed to call and conduct a meeting neither with the majority of the members of the board or the entire membership of the same since 2005;
b) There is no election occurred since 2005;
c) Failure to submit a General Information Sheet to SEC since 2005;
d) Appearing of the new names as Board of Trustees of the corporation on the corporation’s documentations such as the documents needed in applying courses at TESDA and CHED, without further notices to the entire membership of the corporations, and that they are not a true members of the corporations;
e) That the said corporations are now being managed and run as a family business of both Presidents and CEOs, as a matter of fact majority of its employees are their relatives. During the time we the majority members of the corporations asked about that issue, they simply answered us, that we’re just a “dummy.” and all our money are just considered as a contributions since its a non-stock corporations, that they’re just using our name for the sake of complying the numbers of members to consider it a corporation. Maybe, its true, as far as non-stock corporation law is concern. If that is the case, is it their modus operandi? Encouraging us to invest yet at the end of the day, it becomes a family business? Maybe our ignorance about non-stock corporation is there, yet , how can we sold a problem like this, these people who were promising us of something just to encourage us of investing yet, at the end of the day, we are just a dummy, using our money and names to comply the SEC requirements?
Because of the above-metioned problems we PETITIONED at SEC office, of an ORDER to CALL and CONDUCT the meeting in line with Sec. 50 of the Corporation Code of the Philippines.
Pero ang deretsahang sagot ng SEC sa bagay na to ay dumiretso daw po kami sa korte.
Kung ganon nalang ang nakikitang solusyon ng SEC, eh napakadali lng palang gumawa ng family business po. Kami pa hinahamon ng 2 incorporators na irereklamo namin na pahabaan daw kami ng lubid, palibhasa sila may maraming pera.
ANO BA ANG LABAN NAMIN SA PROBLEMA NA ITO: PLZ ADVISE US.. TNX
company check po yon, at ang signatory is ung president at ang treasure ng school po. pero ang nakalagay sa contract is pangalan ko lng nakalagay dun.
sya ang presidente ng company ang signatory sa cheke powww
Hi,
I am just a little confused with this whole notary thing. Recently, my business partners and I decided to make our company into a corporation hence we need to submit notarized documents to SEC. One of my business partners got us a lawyer. Our business address is in a different city from the lawyer’s house/office address. The lawyer then told us, that he can’t notarize our documents, and he will seek another lawyer to do it for use.
Another thing that concerns me is that when I look up into the list of lawyers from the Supreme Court website, I didn’t see the name of this said lawyer.
I would like to ask two things: First, is it ok to have my SEC documents notarized in a law office in Marikina when in fact my business address is in Quezon City? Second, where should I go to verify if we really got a real licensed lawyer, I mean a bar passer and a real practitioner?
Your answers will be truly appreciated, thanks a lot and more power!
The rules say that a document can only be notarized in the place where it was executed by the parties. I suppose the lawyer in Marikina whom you got in touch reviewed your documents, saw your proposed corporation’s place of business and assumed that they were signed in that locality. He can’t notarize them. You will have to approach a notary public in Quezon City for that.
The list of lawyers posted online by the Supreme Court may be incomplete. You can call the Office of the Bar Confidant at (02) 526-8122.
Jill… you said nagpabuy-out ka. However, non-stock corporation yung dating company mo. In non-stock corporations, there’s no such thing as “buy-out” kasi nga there’s no “stock” to purchase in the first place. In non-stock corporations, members “contribute” money and not purchase stocks. The SEC should have looked into this because bawal ito. You may want to ask SEC and the BIR to look into this. Ask the BIR kasi baka may issue sila involving tax evasion.
You can definitely sue the president and the treasurer for violation of B.P. Blg 22 for issuing a worthless check. The fact of issuance of such worthless check is a ground for indictment. However, consult your lawyer first. You may have a problem with the “stop payment” order.
Just my 2 cents worth.
can you please cite supreme court decisions in support of your claim that a ctc is no longer a competent evidence of identity under the notarial law.=)
No need to cite SC decisions: this principle is embodied in a rule promulgated by the Court itself, as I mentioned at the top of this entry.
Sir, good day to you. Ask ko lang po, halimbawa you have a deed of sale, where the contracting parties aside from their signatures also put their finger prints, then nalimutan mo na ipa-notarized on that same year, pwedi pa rin po bang ipa-notarized iyon?
Your answer will be highly appreciated. Thank you.
Malou
Legally speaking, hindi puwede kasi dapat sa harap mismo ng notary public dapat lagdaan ang deed of sale.
good day po. pag ang principal po sa isang Special power of attorney ay taga-caloocan at ang binigyan ng SPA ay taga-caloocan, pwede po ba ipanotaryo ang SPA sa bulacan kung sa bulacan naman po nila inexecute ang SPA? ang subject po ng SPA ay leasing ng property ng principal na nasa caloocan din. salamat po.
Tama. Since executed ang SPA sa Bulacan, kailangan doon din siyang ipanotaryo.
greetings!
may i know what is the effect on the notarized document, in the event that the notarizing officer (lawyer/non lawyer) has no competent authority to administer the act, ie, his commission has expired, he did the act outside his jurisdiction, etc.
thanks ahead for the enlightenment…
greetings!
may i know what is the effect on the notarized document, in the event that the notarizing officer (lawyer/non lawyer) has no competent authority to administer the act, i.e, his commission has expired, he did the act outside his jurisdiction, etc.
thanks ahead for the enlightenment…
It’s as if the document was never notarized at all.
Take note, however, that the underlying document retains its validity in spite of the defective notarization.
Some people are of the impression that a Cedula or Community Tax Certificate (CTC) was required as competent proof of identity. This is wrong!
A CTC is required by law to be presented by a person when he acknowledges any document before a Notary Public. This is required under Section 163 of the Local Government Code of 1991.
The 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice did not repeal the Local Government Code of 1991 and did not do away with the requirement that a person acknowledging a document before a Notary Public must present his current CTC.
Is it possible to request for a copy of MTC Court’s Decision from the Court? Public document ba ito? Im neither the plaintiff nor the defendant. Thank you for your answer.
Yes you can. You will need to go to the court that promulgated the decision. All you need is the case title and the docket number. The clerk of court may ask you for a letter of request as well. Also you will need to pay for the cost of the copy.