| Canton: | VD |
| Case number: | ML/2020/105 |
| Instance: | Kantonsgericht |
| Department: | Kammer für Strafverfolgung und Konkurs |
| Date: | 12.05.2020 |
| Force of law: | - |
| Summary: | The court confirms the decision of the Justice of the Peace of Lausanne to authorize the provisional lifting of the objection to an attachment. The objection was made by p.________ from [...] against the seizure measure of the Bankruptcy Office of the District of Lausanne. P._______ had argued that the attachment was inadmissible, as it led to undue hardship. The court has ruled that P.________s complaint is well-founded and that the attachment must therefore be lifted. The verdict is final. More detailed summary: On 12 May 2020, the Bankruptcy and Probate Chamber of the Cantonal Court of Vaud issued a judgment confirming the decision of the Justice of the Peace of Lausanne. On October 24, 2019, the justice of the Peace had approved the provisional lifting of the objection to a seizure. The objection was made by p.________ from [...] against the seizure measure of the Bankruptcy Office of the District of Lausanne. P._______ had argued that the attachment was inadmissible, as it led to undue hardship. The court has ruled that P.________s complaint is well-founded and that the attachment must therefore be lifted. The court has found that the attachment would endanger P.________s livelihood and that there is therefore an unreasonable hardship. The verdict is final. |
| Rule of Law: | Art. 100 BGG;Art. 144 ZPO;Art. 148 ZPO;Art. 149 ZPO;Art. 321 ZPO;Art. 50 BGG;Art. 74 BGG; |
| BGE reference:: | - |
| Comment: | Spühler, Basler Kommentar ZPO, Art. 149 ZPO, 2015 Spühler, Basler Kommentar zur ZPO, Art. 321 ZPO ; Art. 311 ZPO, 2017 |
Please note that there is no claim to topicality/accuracy/format and/or completeness and that therefore any guarantee is excluded. Original decisions may be ordered or made on the basis of the competent court.
Click here to return to the page search engine.