Facts
In the context of the bankruptcy of Y., Bank X. was issued a certificate of loss. Y. filed a total objection to the payment order, disputing having returned to better fortune. The Court of First Instance and the Court of Justice of the Canton of Geneva upheld the action to establish the lack of return to better fortune. Bank X. appealed to the Federal Tribunal, which annulled the contested judgment and remanded the case to the previous authority for a new decision.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal clarified the notion of "return to better fortune" within the meaning of Art. 265 para. 2 DEBA. The debtor must have acquired new net assets, i.e. income exceeding the amount necessary to maintain a lifestyle commensurate with their situation and allowing them to make savings. Regarding the increase in the basic amount of the subsistence minimum, the Federal Tribunal ruled that an increase of 100% was excessive in the circumstances of the case, and an increase of 50% would be more equitable.
Regarding the consideration of tax liabilities, the Federal Tribunal found that the cantonal authority had counted the tax burden twice in the calculation of the subsistence minimum. It therefore remanded the case to the…