Facts
On May 25, 1992, the bank X., headquartered in Lyon (France), granted the French general partnership company Y. a "commercial real estate loan" of 2,500,000 FF, secured by a personal and joint surety of A., domiciled in Cologny (Geneva). On May 30, 1992, Y. acquired a real estate property in France, encumbered by a mortgage in favor of X. On January 26 and June 16, 1995, X. and Y. agreed to extend the loan term until September 30, 1995 and to constitute an additional mortgage of 800,000 FF. A. declared that he did not stand as surety for this amount.
At the maturity of September 30, 1995, Y. did not repay the loan. X. then put A. in default to pay 3,637,291.67 FF plus interest, as well as 319,171.88 FF. Having not obtained full repayment through the forced realization of Y.'s properties, X. had a payment order served on A. for 969,437.74 CHF and 52,835 CHF.
A. filed a total objection to this enforcement. The Court of First Instance of Geneva ordered the provisional release of this objection. A. then brought an action for release from debt before the same court.
Considerations
The Cantonal Court upheld the jurisdiction of the Geneva courts to hear the action for release from debt, considering that this solution did not contravene the Lugano Convention. The defendant (X.) appealed against this decision, arguing that the action for release from debt could not escape the principle of the jurisdiction of the State of the defendant's domicile provided for in the Convention.
The Federal Tribunal dismissed the appeal. It considered that, when the creditor domiciled in a State party to the Lugano Convention does not bring a claim for payment, but chooses the route of enforcement at the debtor's domicile…