Facts
In debt collection proceedings against [A.] , the creditor [E.] Ltd. filed a request for continuation. The lower cantonal supervisory authority instructed the Lucerne Debt Collection Office to inquire with the legal representatives of [A.] how their fees were paid by the debtor and whether the debtor had any further assets. [A.] appealed this decision to the Cantonal Court of Lucerne, which dismissed the appeal.
[A.] then filed a civil law appeal with the Federal Supreme Court. The Federal Supreme Court partially overturned the decision of the Cantonal Court and limited the Debt Collection Office's request for information from the legal representatives to any possible possession of the appellant's assets, including any potential cost advances in the client money account.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court stated that, according to Art. 91 para. 4 DEBA, lawyers are only obliged to provide information about the debtor's assets if they have such assets in their custody or if the debtor asserts claims against them. A further duty of lawyers to provide information on how their fee claims are settled cannot be derived from this provision.
The attorney-client privilege under Art. 13 FMLA and Art. 321 SCC protects…