Facts
[E.] and X. form a simple partnership and are joint owners of several properties. The Debt Collection Office B. seized the liquidation share of [E.] in the simple partnership in several debt collection proceedings. After unsuccessful conciliation negotiations, the cantonal supervisory authority ordered the dissolution and liquidation of the simple partnership. Thereupon, the Debt Collection Office determined that the simple partnership had been dissolved. Upholding a complaint by the creditor Y., the cantonal supervisory authority revoked this decision and instructed the Debt Collection Office to determine and realize the assets of the simple partnership.
X. (the complainant) appealed to the Federal Supreme Court. She requested the annulment of the supervisory decision and the remand of the case to the lower instance. Furthermore, it should be determined that the dissolution of the simple partnership must be effected by formal termination in accordance with the legal requirements, and the Debt Collection Office should be instructed accordingly.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It stated that the supervisory authority decides bindingly on the type of realization of the seized share. If it considers the dissolution of the community appropriate, it orders it. This constitutes an application of Art. 545 para. 1 no. 3 CO.
Through the dissolution decision of the supervisory authority, the community enters the stage of liquidation, leaving no room for formal termination. The Debt Collection Office merely has to take the necessary…