Facts
The dispute concerns the seizure of amounts owed to the spouse Roland [H.] pursuant to Arts. 159, 163 and 164 CC, for the purpose of recovering the maintenance payments owed to his daughter Manuela S. The facts are as follows:
- On October 10, 1980, Roland [H.] acknowledged his paternity of Manuela [S.] and committed to paying her maintenance. On November 2, 1988, he was sentenced by the District Court to 6 months in prison for persistent neglect of his maintenance obligations.
- On February 15, 1989, the St. Gallen debt collection office issued a certificate of unpaid debts for the outstanding maintenance payments of CHF 2,471.
- On March 9, 1989, the debt collection office issued a new certificate of unpaid debts in the amount of CHF 4,557 for the outstanding maintenance payments from October 1987 to January 1989.
- Manuela [S.] appealed against this decision, requesting that the subsistence minimum of the H.-H. couple be determined and that a garnishment of income be ordered.
- The appeal was rejected by the cantonal supervisory authority for debt collection and bankruptcy.
Considerations
The main issue is whether the claims of Roland [H.] against his spouse, based on Arts. 163 and 164 CC, can be seized for the recovery of the maintenance payments owed to his daughter.
Regarding Art. 163 CC, the Federal Tribunal has not yet ruled on the seizability of these claims during the joint life. However, only the portion of the claim aimed at allowing Roland [H.] to pay his maintenance debt to his non-common child could be seized.
As for Art. 164 CC, the Federal Tribunal has ruled that the claim itself is not seizable, but that the individual benefits can be, provided that the seizure does not…