Facts
The case concerns two successive debt collection proceedings initiated by A. B. against A. for the same claim. The first proceeding (proceeding n° 1) was initiated for an amount of x fr. with interest at 3 % per annum as of 1 November 2001, based on a judicial transaction valuing a final judgment concluded on 30 October 2001. The order to pay was notified to the debtor on 7 February 2012, who raised an objection.
The second proceeding (proceeding n° 2) was initiated on 1 May 2012 for the amount of x fr. with interest at 3 % per annum as of 15 June 2011 and costs, based on a validation of the seizure n° 3 and a report of 19 April 2012. The order to pay was notified to the debtor on 7 May 2012, who also raised an objection.
The two objections were finally lifted by the Justice of the Peace of the district of Morges on 3 September 2012. The Court of Debt Collection and Bankruptcy of the Vaud Cantonal Court dismissed the debtor's appeals and confirmed the final lifting on 28 February 2013.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined the civil law appeal ex officio (art. 106 al. 1 FSCA). It considered that the judge of the lifting is only competent to examine the existence of a lifting title and rule on the creditor's right to pursue the debtor, but cannot examine the regularity of the debt collection procedure.
The Federal Court recalled that the lifting procedure is a pure enforcement procedure and that the judge is only competent to examine the enforceable judgment or equivalent titles in the case of a request for final lifting. It also emphasized that the lifting judge cannot remedy a defect in the debt collection procedure that the…