Appeal against the decision of the debt collection office regarding the publication of the debt collection register

Facts

This judgment concerns an appeal against a decision of the debt collection office regarding the publication of the debt collection register. The appellant, a municipality, filed a timely objection to a debt collection proceeding, but the objection was not definitively dismissed. The appellant requested that the debt collection office set a time limit for the creditor to take action, but this request was rejected.

The parties involved are municipality X, the creditor, and the debt collection office. The procedure began on 25 July 2002, and the decision of the debt collection office was made on the same day. Municipality X filed an appeal against this decision, which was rejected by the Chamber of Debt Collection and Bankruptcy.

The issue at stake is the publication of the debt collection register and its consequences for the debtor who was wrongly pursued. Municipality X argued that the publication of the debt collection register damages its reputation and interests, and that it should be able to request the debt collection office to set a time limit for the creditor to take action.

Considerations

The Chamber of Debt Collection and Bankruptcy examined the question of whether the debtor who was wrongly pursued can request the debt collection office to set a time limit for the creditor to take action. The Chamber considered that the debtor who was wrongly pursued cannot initiate the action under Article 85a DEBA, as its objection was not definitively dismissed.

The Chamber also examined the solution proposed by GILLIÉRON, which consists of allowing the debt collection office to summon the creditor to initiate an action for recognition of debt or to request the lifting of the objection by setting a time limit of 10 days. However, the Chamber rejected this solution, considering that it went beyond the intention of the legislator and was not compatible with the principles of debt collection law.

The Chamber finally considered that the debtor who was wrongly pursued has a general action for a declaration of the non-existence of the debt claimed in…