The good (civil law?) notary

Laburpena

 This article explains how structural differences between civil-law notaries and common-law notaries public create friction in cross-border circulation of public documents. Using Spanish case law and practice, it traces a pivot from “equivalence of forms” to “equivalence of authority,” and increasingly to a notary’s “judgment of sufficiency.” The shift relaxes formalism and centers which public functions were performed—identification, capacity, legality checks, authorship—reducing re-documentation. Evidence does not support a claim that common-law systems are less secure; rather, they relocate assurance to ex post remedies and professional accountability. The article proposes a functional, risk-weighted recognition framework: cross-border effects should turn on demonstrable delivery of safeguards—independence, competence proportionate to risk, verifiable record-keeping, and enforceable liability—regardless of institutional mix. On this view, hybrid pathways become coherent: modest liberalization in civil-law systems and “enhanced” notaries public with legal training in common-law settings.