Facts
On 20 September 1993, Y Insurance, within the framework of the enforcement proceedings for the realization of the mortgage against P, applied for the auction of the property No. xxx in the land register of Tenero-Contra, which belonged to the debtor. On 14 March 1994, the Debt Collection Office Locarno sent the cost statement by registered mail to P. The registered letter was received the next day by the adult daughter L. at P's home address. On 19 March 1994, lawyer A, on behalf of P, contested the cost statement that had been served on him on 15 March 1994. By judgment of 4 October 1994, the Chamber for Debt Collection and Bankruptcy of the Court of Appeal of the Canton of Ticino dismissed P's complaint, in which he had claimed, among other things, that the cost statement had not been served on him personally. P then filed a complaint with the Federal Supreme Court, requesting that he be granted a new deadline to challenge the cost statement.Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court dismissed the complaint as inadmissible. According to Art. 79 para. 1 OG, the appellant must indicate in the complaint the requested changes to the contested decision and concisely present the provisions of federal law violated by the contested decision and their violation. These requirements for substantiation also apply to the complaint in civil matters, as Art. 79 para. 1 OG adopts the substantiation requirement of Art. 55 para. 1 let. c sentence 2 OG for the legal remedy of the complaint.
If the contested decision contains two independent grounds, the Federal Supreme Court can only enter into the complaint if the appellant challenges both grounds of the lower instance. In the present case, the…