AGVE_2002_87•Disciplinary suspension of notary; official publication disproportionate
AGVE_2002_87Administrative Court / Chamber 2Oct 23, 2002Partially Granted
Extracted by Omnilex
The administrative court reviewed a disciplinary case against a notary arising from problematic drafting and notarization of a real-estate purchase agreement. It held that it had jurisdiction and that the disciplinary sanction was not time-barred. The court found the notary's contradictory drafting, partly untrue statements, and serious breach of the duty to inform sufficient to justify a temporary suspension because substantial harm to a contracting party could result. However, it held that publication of the suspension in the official gazette was disproportionate under Art. 45(1) NO, so that part of the sanction was annulled.
Art. 45 Abs. 1 NO; disciplinary sanctions against notaries; temporary suspension and publication: A temporary suspension from office is justified where the notary, in connection with the notarization of a land-sale agreement, has drafted the instrument in a contradictory manner, made partly untrue statements, and seriously breached the duty of disclosure, provided that the conduct is capable of causing substantial damage to a contracting party. By contrast, publication of the suspension in the official gazette is disproportionate in the case of a merely temporary suspension and must be set aside. The absence of a limitation period for such disciplinary sanctions is affirmed; the reviewing court's jurisdiction is not excluded by the refusal of another disciplinary body to act.
2002Disziplinarrecht (Anwälte, Notare)373 dend ist, dass es sich um Verpflichtungen handelt, die sich aus der Tätigkeit alsUrkundspersonableiten; deren Verletzung disziplinarisch zu ahnden, fällt deshalb ausschliesslich in die Kompetenz der Notariatskommission und des Regierungsrats (siehe vorne Erw. b). 3. Die Notariatskommission hat es abgelehnt, dem Regierungsrat Antrag auf Disziplinierung zu stellen, da sie sich für die vom Anzeiger vorgeworfene Pflichtverletzung nicht als zuständig erachtete. Aus den vorangehenden Darlegungen ergibt sich, dass das Verwaltungsgericht diese Ansicht nicht zu teilen vermag. Ob ein Verfahren vor Notariatskommission/Regierungsrat zu einer disziplinarischen Sanktion geführt hätte, muss hier offen bleiben. So oder anders vermag das Nichthandeln der Notariatskommission keine "ersatzweise" Zuständigkeit der Anwaltskommission zur Disziplinierung zu begründen. 87 Anwaltskommission, Disziplinarverfahren.
Extracted by Omnilex
Whether the administrative court had jurisdiction over the disciplinary matter of a notary.
The court held that it had jurisdiction to review the disciplinary sanction.
Disciplinary measures against notaries fall within the court's review competence when challenged by appeal.
Whether disciplinary sanctions against notaries were time-barred.
The court held that the sanctions were not time-barred.
There is no limitation period barring disciplinary sanctions against notaries in the circumstances considered.
Whether a temporary suspension from the notarial profession was justified.
The court held that the temporary suspension was justified by the notary's contradictory contract drafting, partly untrue statements, and serious breach of the duty to inform during notarization.
The misconduct was serious and could cause major harm to a contracting party, so a temporary suspension was proportionate.
Whether publication of the disciplinary measure in the official gazette was proportionate.
The court held that publication in the official gazette was disproportionate for a temporary suspension from the profession.
Given the nature of the sanction, public notice under Art. 45(1) NO exceeded what was necessary.
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.