Facts
On 23 December 2002, Y. requested the opening of two debt enforcement proceedings against [Z.] and Mrs [Z.] with the Debt Collection Office of Geneva, mentioning Mr X., a lawyer in Geneva, as the creditor's representative. On 14 May 2003, the lawyer received from the office, against reimbursement of CHF 421.80, the copies of the payment orders subject to opposition, intended for the creditor. On the same day, the lawyer contested this procedure by means of two complaints, alleging that he had never signed a request for debt enforcement nor accepted to represent the creditor. The Cantonal Supervisory Commission dismissed the complaints, but the Debt Collection and Bankruptcy Chamber of the Federal Tribunal finally upheld the appeal.Considerations
According to the Chamber, the cash-on-delivery dispatch of the copy intended for the creditor constitutes a measure that can be the subject of a complaint within the meaning of Art. 17 DEBA. A lawyer appointed without their knowledge as the creditor's agent has standing to file a complaint against such a measure, which affects them personally.
Although the office had all the necessary elements to draft the payment orders, including the indication of an agent with standing under cantonal law, the debt collection officer was not required to verify the agent's powers ex officio. However, in the complaint proceedings, it was found that the agent's powers of representation were lacking from the outset. The…