Global E-commerce

Buy Online

     Lex Traditia




    Judge can notarize, When, Requirements.   Undoubtedly, respondent judge acted beyond the scope of his
    authority as notary public ex officio when he notarized the aforestated documents not in connection with
    the exercise of his functions and without complying with the requirement of certification as to lack of a
    notary public within his municipality or circuit. In Doughlas v. Lopes, Jr., the respondent judge was
    fined the amount of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) for unauthorized notarization of a private
    document. Since in the instant case, the respondent judge committed seven (7) acts of unauthorized
    notarization, we adopt the recommendation of the Office of the Court Administrator that the respondent
    judge be fined Seven Thousand Pesos (P7,000.00). (SIMON vs. JUDGE ARAGON, A.M. No.
    MTJ-05-1576, February 3, 2005)

    Enter here for complete text.




   Download Supreme Court of the Philippines Jurisprudence here.

   Download Philippine Laws, Issuances and Circulars  here.

BACK TO MAIN PAGE



  EO 52, PD 46, PD 1602, PD 1613, RA 7796, RA 7844, RA 7975, RA 8369, RA 8533, RA 8552, RA 8559, RA 8560, RA 8791, RA 9225, RA 9255,
  AO 01, s. 2002 (PHILCOA), RA 8048

     More downloads added weekly