Article 278: Executing officer's authority under the writ

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 2564/2567 (2024)

   Section 278 paragraph one fixes the status of the execution officer: once the court issues the writ appointing him, he acts as a court official carrying out the execution under the writ and under Book 4 Title 2. It does not itself create the remedy for defective execution. That remedy is section 295 paragraph two, the provision enacted specifically for the purpose, under which a judgment creditor, judgment debtor or interested third party who is harmed because the execution was carried out defectively, mistakenly or unlawfully may apply to the court to set aside or correct the whole or any part of the execution, or to direct the officer as the court thinks fit. The application must be made in the original case or to the court that issued the writ, and a fresh action is not available.

   The plaintiff sought by a fresh action to set aside an execution auction of the disputed land. The Supreme Court explained that once the writ appoints the execution officer he carries out the execution as a court official under the writ and Book 4 Title 2, in accordance with section 278 paragraph one. The right of a judgment creditor, judgment debtor or interested third party harmed by defective, mistaken or unlawful execution to have it set aside or corrected is given by section 295 paragraph two, which the Court described as the provision enacted specifically for that situation, and it is exercised by application in the original case or to the court that issued the writ under section 7(2) with section 271. A fresh action was therefore not open to the plaintiff.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 2262/2564 (2021)

   The executing officer, as the representative of the judgment creditor under Section 278 paragraph one, receives payment and holds seized or attached property in the debtor's estate for distribution; even the creditor who obtained the judgment must let the officer distribute proceeds among the creditors.

   The Supreme Court held that property falls into the judgment debtor's estate under the executing officer's authority, the officer acting as the judgment creditor's representative to receive payment and to seize or attach the debtor's property. Even the plaintiff, though a judgment creditor, had to let the officer distribute the proceeds among the creditors, with any surplus dealt with under Section 322.

3. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 2925/2559 (2016)

   The executing officer is the representative of the judgment creditor, not of the judgment debtor, under Section 278; a promise the debtor makes to an auction buyer does not concern the officer's auction sale and does not bind it.

   An auction buyer complained that the debtor had promised to transfer a lease right to the buyer and then breached. The Supreme Court held that this was a matter between the buyer and the debtor, since the executing officer represents the judgment creditor, not the debtor, under Section 278; the debtor's promise therefore did not concern or bind the officer's auction sale.

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