Dismissal of the appeal against the non-applicability of court vacations in debt enforcement proceedings

Facts

A.A. and B.A. (appellants) are the owners of a property in V. The Pfannenstiel Debt Collection Office informed them of the result of the official valuation of the property. The appellants filed an appeal against this with the District Court of Meilen, which, however, was not accepted due to late filing. The appellants then filed an appeal against this decision with the High Court of the Canton of Zurich, which was dismissed.

Considerations

The Federal Court states that the debt collection law appeal and the procedure for a new valuation of a property are not judicial matters of debt collection and bankruptcy law pursuant to Art. 1 lit. c CPC. Therefore, the court vacations pursuant to Art. 145 para. 1 CPC and the obligation to inform about their non-applicability pursuant to Art. 145 para. 3 CPC do not apply to the present proceedings.

Rather, the question of compliance with the time limit is governed by Art. 56 no. 2 DEBA (debt collection vacations) and Art. 63 DEBA (effects of debt collection vacations on the running of time limits). Neither in these provisions nor elsewhere in the DEBA or in the VZG is there a requirement to inform about the non-applicability of the court vacations under the CPC.

Therefore, the Federal Court assumes that the…