Facts
Notary Public X. notarized a power of attorney in which three persons authorized two other persons to perform various acts. However, in the notarization formula, X. falsely stated that the parties had signed the power of attorney on June 24, 1983 in his presence in Lenzerheide. In reality, the parties had signed the power of attorney on other days and partially in the absence of the notary.
Furthermore, when certifying the signatures of two new members of the board of directors of Z. Immobilien AG, X. had incorrectly stated that they were personally known to him and had signed the documents in his presence, which was not the case.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court ruled that the facts incorrectly stated in the notarization and certification formulas were legally relevant, as they establish the notary's conviction about the parties' intent and the authenticity of the signatures. Even if the notary should have been convinced of the correctness based on other circumstances, the reader of the document assumes that the notary was convinced based on the facts stated in the formula.
By signing and circulating the false notarization and certification formulas, the notary fulfilled the…