公证制度改革的几个问题探析

【作者】 高士英；

【导师】 宋雅芳；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 法学， 2004， 硕士

【摘要】 一九八二年国务院通过的《中华人民共和国公证暂行条例》已“暂行”了二十余年，在许多方面不能满足社会发展的需要，尤其是公证行为的性质、公证体制、公证人员、必须公证、公证债权文书的执行及错证赔偿等制度，均与社会经济发展不相适应。本文拟就公证制度改革中的上述几个问题谈谈自己的浅见，以期对公证立法有所裨益。 公证行使证明权的性质主要有如下三种观点：一是公行为说(包括行政行为说、国家证明权说、司法属性说)；二是私行为说(包括社会中介说、市场中介说)；三是双重属性说。笔者认为，公证具有双重属性，其“公”职属性是一种行政行为，确切地讲是一种行政确认行为；其“私”行为性质，属于一种中介行为，具体地讲，是一种介于政府与当事人之间的社会中介行为。因为公证行为的“公”职性质是一种行政确认行为，行政确认行为具有行政可诉性，公证行为具有行政可诉性。 围绕公证体制模式的争议可归纳为五种观点：一是保留行政机关说；二是司法机关说；三是事业单位说；四是中介组织说；五是公证人事务所说。笔者认为，我国公证机构应为事业单位性质的社会中介组织。在公证机构设置上，根据“总量控制，合理布局”原则，按照人口、经济发展水平、公证收费情况等因素综合考虑，划分公证业务辖区，在业务辖区基础上设立公证处。公证人员是事业单位中的法律工作者。 必须公证的涵义有三种不同观点：一是成立要件说；二是生效要件说；三是成立生效要件说。笔者同意生效要件说。即认为法律法规规定或者当事人约定必须公证的事项，是法律关系确立、变更或者解除的生效要件，同时认为国家对重大经济行为进行适当的干预是必要的，在我国立法中应确立必须公证制度，但必须公证的具体事项不能规定在《公证法》中，公证立法不能代替民商实体立法。 人民法院对公证债权文书执行时的审查是实质性审查还是形式审查，认识不一。笔者认为，其审查应以“形式审查为主，实质审查为辅”为原则，即人民法院对公证债权文书进行审查时，一般只要形式完备，实体上没有“明显”违法情形，人民法院就应当依法执行。 公证债权文书申请执行的期限及如何起算，又是一个困绕理论界和实务界的问题。笔者认为，己经公证的债权文书的申请执行期间，应按照民诉法第219条规定来确定;未经公证的债权文书现办理公证赋予其强制执行效力的，其申请执行的期间适用民法通则第135条关于诉讼时效的规定;对于超过诉讼时效的债权文书，债务人自愿与债权人达成还款协议并共同申请办理强制执行公证的，公证机构根据司法解释的精神，仍可办理赋予强制执行效力的债权文书公证。 公证赔偿的性质是国家赔偿说、民事赔偿、还是中介赔偿?笔者认为，由于公证服务受益的并非是全社会所有的人，公证收费实行自收自支，故错证赔偿由公证机构或公证人承担。所以，公证赔偿属于民事赔偿。其归责原则适用过错责任原则，同时区分故意或过失，以利于赔偿责任轻重和范围大小的判定。其构成要件，适用一般民事责任的构成要件。 公证机构独立面向社会承担责任。但其存在赔偿能力的有限性与时即赔偿的无限性的矛盾，运用职业责任保险的方式转嫁执业风险是目前的有宜方式。笔者认为，在建立公证职业责任保险制度基础上还应建立公证赔偿基金和公证人员个人执业保证金制度。尽管赔偿并不经常出现，但赔偿制度的确立却标志着公证体系的完善。更多还原

【Abstract】 The INTERIM REGULATIONS OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA CONCERNING NOTARIZATION, which became into effect since 1982, has been on its way over 20 years. At present, it can’t meet the requirements of the developing society in many aspects, especially about the issues of the nature of notary action, the notary public institute and notary public individuals, the obligatory notary, the effect of compulsive execution of notarized documents of creditor’s right as well as notary compensation. This article will give its opinion about the issues above mentioned, hoping it may bestead to the notary legislation work.There are three kinds of viewpoints about the nature of notary officiating testimony as follows: one is the theory of public action (including administrative action theory, state testimony theory, justice nature theory), the other one is the theory of private action, the third is the theory of double nature. The author’s idea is that notary has double nature, the public nature is a kind of administrative confirmation action; the private nature is a kind of social agency action between government and the party. Since the public nature is a kind of administrative confirmation action, so it can be suited.There are five viewpoints about dispute on the pattern of notary system as follows: one is preserving administrative organization, one is justice organization, one is public-service organization, one is agency organization, the last one is notary public firm. The author thinks that the notary organization in our country should be a social agency with the nature of public-service organization. About the setting of notary public office, should take the principle of Quantity Control with a Reasonable Layout, slotting out notary popedom according to the comprehensive features such as population, economic level and notary fee, setting notary public office base on these popedoms. The position of notary public staff should be taken by juristic worker of public-service organization.There are three viewpoints about obligatory notary as follows: one is building up feature theory, one is taking effect feature theory, the other is building up and taking effect feature theory. The author agrees with taking effect theory.There are also some dispute on the checking notarized documents of creditor’s right by the people’s court. The author’s idea is that the format check giving priority toessential check..Calculating the limitation of applying execution of notarized documents of creditor’s right, is another problem that feazing theory and practice workers. The author’s idea is that, for the limitation of applying execution of notarized documents of creditor’s right should be calculated according to the Article 219 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE LAW OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA; for the non-notarized documents of creditor’s right, it should be notarized immediately to be endued with compulsive execution effect, the limitation of applying execution should be calculated according to the Article 135 of the GENNERAL PRINCIPLES OF THE CIVIL LAW OF THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA; in the case that the limitation of action of the documents of creditor’s right has expired, if the both parties make an agreement of giving back voluntarily and co-apply compulsive execution notary, notary public institute still write a notary public with compulsive effect, in the spirit of the Supreme People’s Court Regulation.The nature of notary compensation is national compensation, or civil compensation, or agency compensation? The author’s idea is that the beneficiary of notary is not the whole society, besides, the notary public possesses the notary fee, therefore, the mistake notary compensation cost should be beared by the notary public. So, the notary compensation is civil compensation.Notary public institute takes its responsibility independently. But, there is a conflict between the limitation of it’s compensation ability and limitless possibility of practical compensation. The professional responsibility insurance is the best way to tran更多还原