Facts
The appellant [A.] filed an appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Basel-Stadt dated November 9, 2023, which had dismissed his appeal against a debt enforcement notice issued by the Debt Collection Office of Basel-Stadt.
The appellant argued that the debt collection system in the Canton of Basel-Stadt was organized in violation of Art. 2 of the Federal Debt Collection and Bankruptcy Act (SchKG), as it was subordinate to the judiciary. This, he claimed, violated the principle of separation of powers. Furthermore, the signature on the debt enforcement notice was only printed and therefore invalid.
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It found that the organization of the debt collection system in the Canton of Basel-Stadt did not violate Art. 2 SchKG or the principle of separation of powers. The use of a digitized signature on the debt enforcement notice was also permissible.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court explained that according to Art. 2 para. 5 SchKG, the cantons determine the organization of the debt collection and bankruptcy offices. The SchKG does not exclude the possibility of the debt collection offices being organizationally attached to a court. The appellant had not demonstrated how the organization in the Canton of Basel-Stadt violated cantonal law.
Regarding the use of…