This analysis proposes enhancing the notary’s executive inscription to improve debt recovery in civil cases, highlighting legislative adjustments.
Reducing the judicial burden and simplifying procedures for reviewing and resolving civil cases is a modern task for domestic legislators. Judicial statistics indicate a high demand for order proceedings; however, their nature does not always meet the requirements for effective protection of the rights and lawful interests of creditors in uncontested civil claims, and the number of cases in order proceedings overloads the judicial system. Russian legislation establishes an extrajudicial possibility of recovery for uncontested civil claims through the execution note made by a notary. At the same time, the notary’s execution note is currently of little demand among the subjects of civil legal relations. The purpose of this study is to consider the institution of the notary’s executive inscription as an effective alternative to writ proceedings in the modern legislation of the Russian Federation. As a result of the analysis of the legislation of the pre‑revolutionary and Soviet periods, as well as judicial statistics data, the paper concludes that the potential of the executive inscription is not fully used by the legislator today, as well as by participants in civil legal relations. At the same time, the development of the institution of the writ of execution will not only contribute to the reduction of the judicial workload, but will also have a positive impact on the position of subjects of civil legal relations due to the possibility of more effectively (quickly and economically) obtaining execution of undisputed claims. The article substantiates proposals for improving the current legislation, including a proposal to expand the list of transactions for which collection can be carried out by making an executive inscription. In particular, it is proposed to secure the possibility of debt collection by making an executive inscription under civil law contracts concluded between commercial organizations and (or) individual entrepreneurs, if the contracts contain a condition on the possibility of debt collection under the notary’s executive inscription. In addition, it is proposed to change the procedure for notifying the debtor of the existence of a debt before the execution of an enforcement order, namely: to develop and approve a single form of this notification and assign the responsibility for sending it to the notary to whom the claimant applied for the execution of an enforcement order.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Natalya S. Zvyagina (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: