Facts
On 18 December 1990, A. SA entered into a pledge and assignment agreement with X., which included four statues. By an agreement dated 23 April 1992, another statue entitled "Sphinx and Siren 3/8" was also pledged to A. SA. In 1995, A. SA initiated debt enforcement proceedings for the realisation of the chattel pledge, concerning the 5 statues. During the sale requisition, K. claimed ownership of the "Sphinx and Siren 3/8" statue, invoking a sales agreement dated 29 March 1994 with X. The debt collection office then granted A. SA a 10-day deadline to file an action against K., pursuant to Art. 109 DEBA. A. SA filed a complaint with the cantonal supervisory authority, which confirmed the decision of the office. A. SA appealed to the Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Chamber of the Federal Supreme Court.Considerations
The Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Chamber allowed the appeal. It considered that the analogous application of Arts. 106 et seq. DEBA to debt enforcement proceedings for the realisation of a pledge implies taking into account the differences in character between this type of proceedings and ordinary debt enforcement proceedings by way of seizure. In debt enforcement proceedings for the realisation of a chattel pledge, the claim procedure to be followed is in principle that of Arts. 106 and 107 DEBA, exceptionally that of Art. 109 DEBA or 108 DEBA when, for example, it is evident that the pledge right no longer exists.
In the present case, the Chamber…