Виконавчий напис нотаріуса у контексті права особи на захист: нотаріат, суд, виконавче провадження

The article is devoted to the analysis of such a method of extrajudicial protection as the execution of an executive inscription by a notary. The analysis of the right to protection in judicial, notarial and enforcement proceedings helped to understand the essence of an executive inscription as a notarial action, which is carried out in accordance with the law and on the basis of indisputable evidence. The difference between the concepts of “right to sue” and “right to apply to a notary for the execution of an executive inscription” is established, but the goal of the court and the notary is the same - to protect, respectively, the right of a person by resolving the dispute and/or by ascertaining the offense in an indisputable out-of-court procedure. The notary will execute an executive inscription if the creditor provides him with indisputable evidence of the debtor’s failure to fulfill his obligations, otherwise he must refuse to perform notarial proceedings. Such a simple scheme of perception of differences in the activities of the court and the notary provides an opportunity to talk about a certain similarity in their powers and at the same time about a significant difference between the judicial and extrajudicial form of protection, respectively, of disputed and undisputed rights. The judicial practice regarding the recognition of an executive inscription as not subject to execution is analyzed. The emphasis is placed on the legal consequences that arise when such a case is considered by the court, that is, the suspension of enforcement proceedings. The essence of the executive inscription and the peculiarity of its nature are analyzed, since it has a double meaning, that is, on the one hand, it is regarded as a notarial act, on the other - as an executive document. The conducted scientific research proves that the executive inscription of a notary is an extrajudicial method of protecting the rights of individuals, but with improper regulation of the procedure for its execution in the law, it becomes a mechanism for abuse of rights not only by creditors, but also, quite often, by debtors. Proposals are made to improve the relevant legislation.