Manila: The Supreme Court (SC) has reiterated that while notarized documents are presumed authentic, they will be invalidated if proven fake. This was emphasized by the SC's 2nd Division when it cleared an individual of liability for a firm's unpaid loan from a bank.

According to Philippines News Agency, the SC's decision was highlighted in a news release, which stated that Interbrand Logistics and Distribution, Inc. had secured a PHP150 million loan from the Bank of Commerce. This was facilitated through promissory notes and notarized Continuing Surety Agreements (CSAs) signed by several officials of Interbrand. However, Gil Chua, listed as one of the sureties, differed from the other signatories, as he was not an officer, director, or shareholder of the company.

When Interbrand defaulted on the loan, the bank pursued legal action against the company and all the sureties. Chua contested his involvement, asserting that he neither signed a CSA nor appeared before a notary public. Despite the bank's claim that the CSA's notarization rendered it valid, both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals initially held Chua accountable, along with the other sureties.

The SC ultimately overturned these rulings, determining that the CSA in question was dubious and did not bind Chua. The court stressed that notarization does not rectify a forged or fabricated document. The SC noted that although notarization implies regularity, it is not the notary public's role to enforce a document that was never intended to have a legal effect on Chua.

Chua successfully challenged the CSA's validity by consistently denying his signature and claiming he never appeared before a notary. He had no position or interest in Interbrand, and the bank lacked a signature specimen to authenticate the CSA. Further, discrepancies were uncovered, such as identical witnesses for CSAs allegedly signed on the same day but in distant locations, casting further doubt on their legitimacy. The notary public linked to the CSA was also not presented in court.

As a result, the SC directed Interbrand and the remaining sureties to settle the PHP150 million debt with the bank, including interest, penalties, and PHP1 million in attorney's fees.