Notarization of resolutions of general meetings of participants (shareholders), sole participants (shareholders) by a notary public

The article is devoted to the analysis of notary certification of decisions of general meetings of participants, as well as decisions of participants. Such organizational-legal form of a legal entity as a joint-stock company is chosen for the analysis due to the fact that disputes arise quite often in relation to it. In addition, the specificity of the plurality of participants is taken into account, which, to a certain extent, complicates the certification procedure. The issue of the presence or absence of the need to notarize decisions of participants of business companies has been a subject of discussions for a long time. At present, the dominant view is that preservation of the notarization procedure is necessary, because the notary, as performing the public function of certification, can be considered as increasing the guarantees of protection of participants from unfair actions of other persons. Nevertheless, the topic continues to provoke active discussions. In addition, the article pays attention to such a relevant topic as electronic certification, the possibility and expediency of its preservation for certifying decisions of participants of business companies. The procedure of electronic certification has not yet been developed at a high enough level to guarantee the observance of the rights of all participants and third parties. Therefore, there is a need to reflect on the possibility of its improvement and additional elaboration. The article also pays attention to such an issue as the possibility of changing not only the notarization procedure, but also in general the fixation of decisions taken at shareholders’ meetings. The procedure envisaged by the current legislation presupposes registration of the adopted decisions, i.e. there is a kind of additional confirmation of the fact of adoption of a certain decision by a specified number of persons at a certain time. To what extent it is necessary to keep such additional confirmation, whether it is acceptable to limit it to notarial certification, including in electronic form, is a subject of discussion. The results of the study and the author’s conclusions regarding the highlighted controversial issues are the outcome of the analysis presented in the article.