View full case

BETTY GEPULLE-GARBO v. SPS. VICTOREY ANTONIO GARABATO

FACTS:

The case involves a dispute over a parcel of land in Pasay City. Nick Garbo was originally married to Eduviges Garabato and they had a daughter named Florence Garabato. During their marriage, Nick began cohabiting with Betty Gepulle-Garbo. In 1977, Eduviges sold a 303-square meter parcel of land to Florence, which was signed by Nick Garbo. Eduviges passed away in 1978 and Nick married Betty a few months later. Florence registered the property in her name in 1988 and was issued a new certificate of title. In 1996, Florence sold the property to respondent Victorey Garabato, who registered it in his name. Petitioner Betty then filed a petition for cancellation of Victorey's certificate of title, alleging that the signatures on the deed of sale were forged. She also claimed that she was bequeathed the property in a holographic will by Nick. The trial court dismissed Betty's complaint for insufficiency of evidence, ruling that she failed to prove forgery of the signatures and that there was no legal ground to declare the deed of sale invalid. The court also noted that Nick never questioned the alleged forgery during his lifetime. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the signatures of Nick and Eduviges in the Deed of Sale were forged

  2. Whether the subsequent deed of sale executed between Florence and respondent Victorey is valid and notarized

  3. Whether the burden of proof lies on the party alleging forgery.

  4. Whether comparison between the alleged forged signature and the authentic and genuine signature is necessary to establish forgery.

  5. Whether the opinion of handwriting experts is binding upon the court.

RULING:

  1. The Supreme Court held that the petition is without merit. It affirmed the findings of the trial court and the Court of Appeals that the signatures of Nick and Eduviges in the Deed of Sale were not forged. The Court emphasized that the determination of whether a signature is forged is a factual matter which is best left to the lower courts. The Supreme Court also noted that the findings of the trial court were undisturbed by the appellate court. Therefore, the Court refused to further scrutinize the factual findings and deferred to the lower courts' interpretation of the evidence.

  2. Yes, the burden of proof lies on the party alleging forgery. Forgery cannot be presumed and must be proved by clear, positive, and convincing evidence.

  3. Yes, comparison between the alleged forged signature and the authentic and genuine signature is necessary to establish forgery. The fact of forgery can only be established by a comparison between the alleged forged signature and the authentic and genuine signature of the person whose signature is theorized to have been forged.

  4. No, the opinion of handwriting experts is not binding upon the court. The expert's function is to provide data for the court to form its own opinion. The judge must conduct an independent examination of the questioned signature to arrive at a reasonable conclusion as to its authenticity.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts and its function in petitions for review on certiorari is limited to reviewing errors of law committed by the lower courts.

  • The Court defers and accords finality to the factual findings of trial courts, especially when such findings are affirmed by the appellate court.

  • The determination of whether a signature is forged is a factual matter best left to the lower courts.

  • The burden of proof is the duty of a party to prove the truth of his claim or defense, or any fact in issue by the amount of evidence required by law.

  • Forgery cannot be presumed and must be proved by clear, positive, and convincing evidence. The burden of proof lies on the party alleging forgery.

  • The fact of forgery can only be established by a comparison between the alleged forged signature and the authentic and genuine signature of the person whose signature is theorized to have been forged.

  • Dissimilarities in the characteristics of the questioned signature and the genuine signature are not decisive in determining the authenticity of the questioned signature. Other factors, such as the position of the writer, the condition of the surface, the writer's state of mind and feelings, and the kind of pen and/or paper used, should be taken into consideration.

  • The opinion of handwriting experts is not necessarily binding upon the court. The court must conduct an independent examination of the questioned signature to arrive at a reasonable conclusion as to its authenticity.