A businessman has been cleared by the Supreme Court (SC) in a P150 million loan case after the justices ruled that even notarized documents can be invalidated if proven to be forged.

In a decision dated 22 January penned by Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, the SC’s Second Division ruled in favor of Gil Chua, who had been previously held liable for the unpaid loan of Interbrand Logistics and Distribution Inc. to the Bank of Commerce.

The loan was supported by promissory notes and notarized Continuing Surety Agreements (CSAs) that allegedly bore Chua’s signature, along with those of other company officers.

But Chua denied ever signing the CSA or even appearing before a notary, insisting he had no role in securing the loan and held no official position in the company.

Despite lower court rulings from both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals finding Chua liable, the Supreme Court reversed those decisions. The justices concluded that the CSA lacked proof of Chua’s consent.

“Although the notarization of the subject CSA carries with it the presumption of regularity, it is not the intention nor the function of the notary public to validate and make it binding when such CSA, in the first place, was never intended to have any binding legal effect upon Chua,” the Court said.

The high court emphasized that notarized documents are not immune to scrutiny and that their presumed authenticity can be overturned when there is convincing evidence of forgery or absence of consent.

This decision serves as a reminder that while notarized papers carry legal weight, they are not above challenge — especially when someone’s signature or involvement is in question.