Admissibility of Assignment of Claims Despite Incorrect Designation of the Debtor

Facts

- On 29 May 2008, the sole proprietorship "[C.] " of [B.] (landlord) concluded a lease agreement for a café with [D.] and [E.] (tenants). In this agreement, the landlord undertook to repurchase the operating inventory upon termination of the contract and to reimburse the tenants' building investments of CHF 106,000.--. - On 25/28 February 2014, [F. AG] in liquidation gratuitously assigned these claims of CHF 90,000.-- (building investments) and CHF 410,555.75 (operating inventory) to [A. AG] . In the assignment agreement, the "[C. AG] " was erroneously designated as the debtor instead of [B.] . - The Cantonal Court of Bern considered the assignment agreement to be null and void, as the debtor was not sufficiently specified.

Considerations

- The Federal Supreme Court overturns the decision of the Cantonal Court and remands the case for a new assessment. - The formal requirement of Art. 165 CO serves legal and commercial security, in particular the protection of the debtor. The decisive factor is that the assigned claim is sufficiently individualized, not that the debtor is…