THE COURT, made up according to article L.131-8-1 of the Code relating to the Organisation of the Courts, at a public hearing of 5 February 2002 […]

Regarding the only ground being pleaded, taken in its two limbs:

In view of article L.313-22 of the Monetary and Financial Code;

Given that 1) by notarial deed of 17 August 1990, the Union de Crédit pour le Batiment (UCB) granted to RBK (a limited partnership engaged in real property activities) a loan for the acquisition of a building for business use; 2) Mr. Eric Sulli and his father became joint and several sureties; 3) when the principal debtor stopped making due payments, the bank, after fruitless formal warnings, commenced proceedings to seize Mr. Eric Sulli’s salary; 4) the latter opposed this on the grounds that he had not received from the bank the information stipulated by article L. 313-22 of the Monetary and Financial Code;

Given that 1) to refuse the surety’s claim, the Court of Appeal held that the obligation to provide information applies to loans granted to undertakings (“entreprises”) or traders and not to property partnerships;

2) by holding thus, without finding that RBK did not engage in economic activity which could be characterised as an undertaking (“entreprise”) as understood by the aforementioned text, the Court of Appeal’s decision lacks legal basis;

ON THESE GROUNDS:

QUASHES AND ANNULS [……]

Back to top

This page last updated Thursday, 15-Dec-2005 09:05:51 CST. Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.