论文部分内容阅读
2013年6月,最高人民法院设立的“中国裁判文书网”登载了最高法院(2011)执监字第180号《执行裁定书》(以下简称“180号裁定”)。该裁定一经发布,立即在公证界引发热议。笔者认为,虽然业内对该裁定中的某些内容还存在争论(例如,诸多法官和公证员对人民法院“不予执行公证债权文书案件的审查标准”存在分歧)~①,但这份裁定无疑是对我国近十余年来实施赋予债权文书强制执行效力公证(以下简称“强制执行公证”)制度的一次完美总结,因为,这份裁定书澄清了实践中对强制执行公证若干问题的模糊认识,确立了人民法院审查强制执行公证书的基本原则。下面,笔者尝试解读该裁定书的精彩之处,与同仁分享。
In June 2013, the “Supreme Court (2011) Executive Director Zi No. 180” Executive Order (hereinafter referred to as “No. 180”) was published in the “China Judgment Document Network” set up by the Supreme People’s Court. Immediately after the verdict was released, a hot debate was held in the notary public. The author believes that although the industry still has some controversy over certain elements of the ruling (for example, many judges and notaries have disagreements with the People’s Court on “the standard of examination for not enforcing notarial claims”), The ruling is undoubtedly a perfect summary of the system of notarization (hereinafter referred to as “compulsorily notarized”) that enforces the enforcement of the creditor’s rights instruments in our country in the past decade or so because this ruling clarifies that in practice, it is necessary to enforce a number of notarized Vague understanding of the problem, established the basic principles of the people’s court review of compulsory certificate of notarization. Next, I try to interpret the wonderful aspects of the verdict, to share with my colleagues.