This analysis reveals the overlap between court and notary roles in certifying legal facts, suggesting notary jurisdiction can alleviate court burdens.
This article examines the problems of intersecting competence of the court and the notary in matters of certifying legal facts. The issue of unloading the court’s activities by increasing the number of types of facts having legal significance that can be established by notaries is examined. Considering the indisputable nature of the said actions, the author concludes that for most facts established within the framework of special proceedings, judicial procedure is practically absent, which gives scope for delegating the resolution of these issues to the notary, as a body operating in an indisputable jurisdiction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alexander V. Begichev (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: