The Judge Who Engaged in Notarial Practice – Simon vs. Judge Aragon

Simon alleged that Judge Aragon engaged in unauthorized notarial practice 

1. No direct relations to performance of judiciary. Having undertaken the preparation and acknowledgment of private documents, contracts and other acts of conveyances which bore no direct relation to the performance of his functions as a member of the judiciary.
2. No certification attesting to the lack of any lawyer or notary public in San Pablo, Isabela.
3. Violated Circular 1-90 prohibiting MTC judges to notarize under some exceptions

Answer of Judge Aragon

1. he was constrained to notarize as there was no lawyer or notary public in San Pablo, Isabela from 1983 to 1992.
2. upon learning of Circular No. 1-90 sometime in 1993, he immediately and voluntarily desisted from further notarizing private documents.
3. he never profited from his acts
4. he could not be held liable for violating a circular that is not yet in existence.

Rulings: 

Referral to the Executive Judge of the RTC of Cabagan, Isabela

1. Found a violation
2. Circular No. 1-90 which was promulgated on February 26, 1990, should be applied prospectively

Office of the Court Administrator adopted Executive Judge decisions

Ruling of SC: Guilty of engaging in unauthorized notarial work.

When can MTC judges perform functions of notaries public ex officio?

MTC judges are empowered to perform the function of Notaries Public ex officio under Judiciary Act of 1948 with the following scope:

1. Notarization of documents connected only with the exercise of their official functions and duties [Borne v. Mayo]
2. Not to undertake the preparation and acknowledgment of private documents, contracts and other acts of conveyances which bear no direct relation to the performance of their functions as judges. 
3. Not to engage in extra-judicial activities in order to minimize the risk of conflict with their judicial duties, but also prohibits them from engaging in the private practice of law [Canon 5 and Rule 5.07].

When can MTC judges in notary-less locations perform functions of notaries public ex officio?

For MTC and MCTC judges assigned to municipalities or circuits with no lawyers or notaries public to validly perform any act of a regular notary public, two requisites must concur:

1. Charge for the account of government. All notarial fees charged must be for the account of the Government and turned over to the municipal treasurer;

2. Certification be made in the notarized documents attesting to the lack of any lawyer or notary public in such municipality or circuit.

After the effectivity of Circular No. 1-90, the respondent judge notarized seven (7) private documents without certifying the lack of any lawyer or notary public in such municipality or circuit.

Dispositive portion: Fined for P1,000 for each document, a total of SEVEN THOUSAND PESOS (P7,000.00).