The Disciplinary appellate panel rules in the matter of punishment for notarial certification of possession

The Disciplinary appellate panel of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic dismissed the appeal of the Minister of Justice of the Slovak Republic against the decision of the first-instance disciplinary panel of the Supreme Administrative Court, by which the notary Igor Čabra was found guilty of committing a disciplinary offence (Case No. 42Do/1/2023).

First instance disciplinary proceedings

In the first instance proceedings it was examined whether the notary Igor Čabra acted with sufficient professional competence in the performance of notarial activities. In her application, the Minister argued that the notary had drawn up a notarial deed certifying the retention of immovable property without sufficient proof of the existence of a contract on the transfer of ownership. In her disciplinary application, she requested the most severe form of disciplinary punishment, namely the removal from the notary’s office, since the disciplinary defendant had already been punished for a similar offence by the Chamber of Notaries of the Slovak Republic.

The Disciplinary panel stated that although a notary does not have the status of an investigative body, he cannot be seen as a mere administrative employee of the state in the activities in question. A notary is a lawyer authorised by the state who, when drawing up a notarial deed, must examine whether the parties’ declarations produce the legal effect intended by them. However, the notarial deeds lacked a detailed description of all the relevant facts showing that the holder of the property could objectively regard the property as his own. Notary Čabra thus clearly circumvented the law in drawing up the notarial deeds by failing to examine sufficiently whether the affidavits of the parties and the documents submitted by them demonstrated that the statutory conditions had been met. By doing so, he breached his duty to act with professional competence.

The Disciplinary panel found Mr Čabra guilty and imposed a disciplinary measure on him in the form of a fine of EUR 3 300 (Decision No. 33D/7/2022 of 29 November 2022). The Minister continued to insist on the imposition of a penalty in the form of disqualification from the notarial office and, for that reason, lodged an appeal against the first-instance decision.

Disciplinary appeal procedure

The Disciplinary appeal panel, sitting in open session on 28 November 2023, found that the first instance Panel had sufficiently, convincingly and comprehensibly explained the imposition of the financial penalty. In the opinion of the five-member panel, the disciplinary measure imposed is sufficient and fulfils the purpose of both general and individual prevention.

The Disciplinary Procedure Code provides for an appeal against the disciplinary decision to be brought both by the disciplinary defendant and by the applicant. A disciplinary defendant may appeal if he has been subjected to a disciplinary measure consisting of removal from office, suspension from office, disqualification from holding office or removal from office. The applicant may lodge an appeal if he has proposed one of the two most severe forms of disciplinary measure but the Disciplinary panel has not imposed that disciplinary measure.

In this disciplinary case, the Disciplinary appellate panel No. 42 of the Supreme Administrative Court was composed of: the President of the Panel JUDr. Jana Hatalová, PhD., LL.M. (Judge-rapporteur) and members of the Panel JUDr. Katarína Cangárová, PhD., LL.M., JUDr. Rastislav Dlugoš, PhD., Mgr. Peter Mach, PhD., JUDr. Monika Valašiková, PhD., LL.M.