The relevance of the research topic is due to two reasons. On the one hand, the concept of notarial procedural legal relations features, nature and system to some extent covered by scholars who have made a significant contribution to the formation of the science of notarial process, on the other hand a large number of works were created under other socio-economic, political and legal conditions. significantly different from the current stage, which negatively affects the effectiveness of legislative regulation of notarial procedural relations. Thus, now there are prerequisites for scientific and doctrinal rethinking of theoretical concepts of the science of the notarial process, including the theory of notarial procedural legal relations, which necessitates this study.

The aim of the article is a comprehensive, systematic analysis of the doctrine formed in the doctrine of the notarial process (taking into account legislative and practical aspects)to understand the legal nature of notarial legal relations, the reasons for their emergence to perform notarial proceedings.

It is established that for the emergence of notarial procedural legal relations a necessary condition must be the very existence of notarial professional activity of persons authorized by the state, as well as the conditions of its implementation, which must be fixed in law and defined by scientists as a notarial procedure. Therefore, the formula of notarial legal relations should contain a defining provision that the subject of notarial procedural legal relations is a person who performs notarial acts, and not the notary in general.

The author came to the conclusion that notarial legal relations should form a system not only of internal notarial administrative and notarial procedural relations, but also to be consistent with external relations related to notarial legal relations and to form a certain intersectoral system, such as executive procedural legal relations. in particular, in matters of succession in the enforcement process in the event of the death of one of the parties to the enforcement process of the debt collector or debtor, who may also be the subjects of inheritance in the notarial process. At the same time, an important element of notarial procedural legal relations are the preconditions for their emergence, which should ensure their real emergence and development, and hence the realization of the rights of individuals to perform notarial proceedings.

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Rheinische Notarkammer, Notar und Rechtsgestaltung: Tradition und Zukunft (1998) (in German). 2. Diakovych M, Notarialne pravo Ukrainy (Alerta, KNT, TsUL 2009) (in Ukrainian).

3. Fursa S ta Fursa Ye, Notariat v Ukraini. Zahalna chastyna (Venturi 1999) (in Ukrainian).

4. Fursa S ta Fursa Ye, Notariat v Ukraini: teoriia i praktyka (ASK 2001) (in Ukrainian).

5. Fursa S, Notarialnyi protses. Teoretychni osnovy (Istyna 2002) (in Ukrainian).

6. Fursa Ye ta Koziar-Skok L, Okremi pytannia spadkuvannia z inozemnym elementom: konsul, notarius, sud (Alerta 2017) (in Ukrainian).

7. Glushhenko P i Sedov A, Osnovy notarial’noj dejatel’nosti (Izd-vo Mihajlova V A 1999) (in Russian).

8. Komarov V i Barankova V, Notariat i notarial’nyj process: uchebnik (Konsum 1999) (in Russian). 9. Romanovskij G i Romanovskaja O, Organizacija notariata v Rossii (PRIOR 2001) (in Russian).

Edited books

10. Fursa S ta Fursa Ye, ‘Notarialni protsesualni pravovidnosyny: oznaky, kharakter, systema ta elementy’ v Fursa S (red), Teoriia notarialnoho protsesu: naukovo-praktychnyi posibnyk (Alerta, Tsul 2012) (in Ukrainian).

11. Radziievska L (zah red), Notariat v Ukraini (IurinkomInter 2000) (in Ukrainian).

Journal articles

 12. Barankova V, ‘Notarial’naja dejatel’nost’ kak pravovaja forma’ (1996) 31 Problemy zakonnosti 185–92 (in Russian).

13. Fursa S, ‘Iurydychna pryroda ta systemna model notarialnykh pravovidnosyn’ (2000) 6 Visnyk Akademii pratsi i sotsialnykh vidnosyn 31–8 (in Ukrainian).

14. Fursa S, ‘Metodologija povyshenija kvalifikacii notariusov: aktual’nye problemy’ (2013) 2 Civilisticheskaja processual’naja mysl’ 11–26 (in Russian).

15. Komarov V ta Barankova V, ‘Problemy latynskoho notariatu: ukrainskyi dosvid normoutvorennia’ [2007] 1 (48) Visnyk Akademii pravovykh nauk Ukrainy 129–141 (in Ukrainian). 16. Liholat I, ‘Ontologicheskie osnovy notariata: postanovka voprosa’ (2013) 2 Civilisticheskaja processual’naja mysl’ 27–37 (in Russian).

Theses

17. Chernysh V, ‘Tsyvilno-pravovi zasady rozvytku notariatu v Ukraini’ (avtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, 2003) (in Ukrainian).

18. Fedorova K, ‘Administratyvno-pravove rehuliuvannia pryvatnoi notarialnoi diialnosti v Ukraini’ (avtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, 2008) (in Ukrainian).

19. Karnaruk N, ‘Derzhavnyi kontrol za notarialnoiu diialnistiu v Ukraini’ (avtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, 2007) (in Ukrainian).

20. Pantaliienko Ya, ‘Protsedura vchynennia notarialnykh provadzhen’ (avtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, 2010) (in Ukrainian).

21. Ral’ko V, ‘Teorija pravovoj dejatel’nosti notariata’ (avtoref dis dokt jurid nauk, 2010) (in Russian).

22. Rybachok V, ‘Protsedura notarialnoho posvidchennia dohovoru ipoteky: istoriia ta suchasnist’ (avtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, 2011) (in Ukrainian).