Article 263Indemnisation pour une mesure abusive

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 5895/2551 (2008)

   Where the court has ordered a provisional measure before judgment and then decides the case against the plaintiff without saying anything about that measure, and the defendant does not apply under Section 263 for compensation, the measure lapses under Section 260 (1) once the case is final. The guarantors are then entitled to have their security returned, and the court must revoke the attachment of the land given as security.

   Two guarantors had given contracts of indemnity to the defendant and land title deeds as security, under an order of the Central Intellectual Property and International Trade Court prescribing a provisional measure before judgment. The plaintiff's claim was then dismissed, the judgment said nothing about the measure, and the case became final. Because the defendant never applied under Section 263 for compensation, the Supreme Court held the measure lapsed under Section 260 (1): the guarantors were entitled to their title deeds back and the attachment of the land had to be revoked.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 6424/2550 (2007)

   Where a provisional measure before judgment is granted on sufficient and proper grounds, the plaintiff is entitled to the protection, and if the defendant suffers loss the defendant's recourse is to claim compensation from the plaintiff under Section 263.

   The Supreme Court held that the plaintiff's application had sufficient and proper grounds for a provisional measure before judgment, so the plaintiff was entitled to protection. It noted that if the defendant were harmed, the defendant's remedy was to claim compensation against the plaintiff under Section 263.

3. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 3319/2542 (1999)

   Under Section 263(1) the plaintiff is liable to compensate the defendant only when the court decides against the plaintiff. While the plaintiff has not yet lost, the defendant's right to compensation has not arisen, so a counterclaim for such compensation cannot be entertained.

   The defendant counterclaimed for compensation, alleging the plaintiff had sued in bad faith and obtained a provisional measure that caused loss. The Supreme Court held that under Section 263(1) liability arises only when the plaintiff loses, and since the court had not yet ruled and it was uncertain the plaintiff would lose, the right had not arisen and the counterclaim could not be entertained.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.