Bankruptcy Law

In the absence of an agreement or in the event of a dispute, Article L. 624-17 allows the claim to be brought before the bankruptcy judge who decides on the fate of the contract, in the light of the observations of the creditor, the debtor and the legal representative. Referral to the bankruptcy judge in the context of an action for recovery is not equivalent to the implementation of a compulsory  …

Second stage of the procedure

In the absence of an agreement or in the event of a dispute, Article L. 624-17 allows the claim to be brought before the bankruptcy judge who decides on the fate of the contract, in the light of the observations of the creditor, the debtor and the legal representative. Referral to the bankruptcy judge in the context of an action for recovery is not equivalent to the implementation of a compulsory enforcement measure , nor to a legal claim, so that it may be made by the receiver of the owner of the property, without the latter being required to justify his authority .

The decision of the legal representative to continue a contract, which does not constitute acceptance of the claim, does not exempt the lessor from bringing the matter before the bankruptcy judge . Similarly, the response of the legal representative, who recognizes the opposability to the insolvency procedure of a title retention clause on a stock of goods sold by a supplier, but disagrees on the value of the latter, is not equivalent to the acceptance of the claim and requires the claimant to refer the matter to the bankruptcy judge within the time-limit set by Article R. 624-13 of the Commercial Code .

In accordance with Article R. 624-13, paragraph 2, of the Commercial Code, if the petitioner fails to respond within one month of receiving the request, he must, under penalty of foreclosure, refer the matter to the bankruptcy judge within a further period of one month from the expiry of the time-limit for response. This time-limit may be extended to the next working day if it falls on a Sunday . However, owners who live in overseas territories or abroad cannot avail themselves of the extension of the time-limit provided for in Article 643 of the Code of Civil Procedure . Pursuant to Article R. 624-13, a seller who, in the absence of acceptance by the receiver to his claim within the one-month period, seizes the bankruptcy judge after the expiry of the one-month period available to him, must be declared foreclosed . The foreclosure resulting from the failure to seize the bankruptcy judge within the legal time-limit is likely to apply in the context of the action for reclaiming the price brought by the seller against the forfaiter . On the other hand, a seller who is the beneficiary of a title retention clause and who has sent his claim within the prescribed time-limit, and who is aware of his acceptance within the time-limit for bringing the matter before the bankruptcy judge, may not rely on the foreclosure attached to the failure to bring the matter before the latter9 .

The bankruptcy judge may only be seized by the claimant, the debtor or the legal representative, to the exclusion of any other person, such as the debtor's factor . The bankruptcy judge seized by the seller with retention of title for the purpose of restitution of the sums received from the sale of his property may, in the absence of the receiver's agreement, rule on the claim, even if it was made against a third party . An action for restitution before the bankruptcy judge is inadmissible if it has not been preceded by a request to the receiver or, failing that, to the legal representative . Before ruling, the bankruptcy judge must hear the observations of the interested parties .

Cass. com., 24 March 2004, LawLex202100001662JBJ (RJ).

Cass. com., 5 November 2003, LawLex202100003399JBJ (LJ) ; 6 March 2001, LawLex202100001669JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 12 April 2005, LawLex202100003395JBJ (RJ).

Cass. com., 2 October 2001, LawLex202100001667JBJ (RJ).

Cass. com., 12 January 2016, LawLex202100001699JBJ (S).

Cass. com., 3 May 2016, LawLex202100001700JBJ (RJ).

Cass. com., 11 October 2016, LawLex202100003401JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 28 September 2004, LawLex202100003391JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 3 April 2001, LawLex202100003301JBJ (RJ).

Cass. com., 15 March 2005, LawLex202100003394JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 7 February 2006, LawLex202100001671JBJ (LJ).

Cass. com., 24 January 2018, LawLex202100001729JBJ (LJ).

Bankruptcy Law

217. Second stage of the procedure

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

217. Second stage of the procedure

Demandez un accès gratuit au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise

Les décisions de justice citées dans ce paragraphe :

Les notions juridiques connexes

Demandez un accès gratuit
au contenu exclusif Livv – juristes d’entreprise