Facts
In two debt collection proceedings of the Canton of Bern against the debtor, the latter requested that the employees of Debt Collection Office 2 in Bern as well as the members of the cantonal supervisory authority be recused, as they were employees of the debt collection creditor. The cantonal supervisory authority for debt collection and bankruptcy matters of the Canton of Bern rejected the recusal motion.
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by the debtor against this decision.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court stated that the duty of recusal provided for in Art. 10 para. 1 no. 3 of the Debt Collection and Bankruptcy Act (SchKG) does not apply simply because the debt collection is being carried out by the Canton, with which the official or employee in question is otherwise not involved. Otherwise, such debt collections could not be properly carried out at all, as the substitute or replacement would also have to be recused.
A duty of recusal within the meaning of Art. 10 para. 1 no. 3 SchKG would only be assumed if the official involved in the debt collection had a particularly…