Facts
On 14 February 1967, the debt collection office of Meggen retained 34 paintings (partially with frames) in the apartment of Mr. Meier, at the request of Dr. Scherer, for an outstanding rent amount of CHF 690.- and a current rent amount of CHF 2'070.-, estimating the total value of the paintings at CHF 3'020.- (retention no. 2/1967). Following the complaint of Mr. Meier, the cantonal supervisory authority annulled the retention record and ordered the debt collection office to conduct a new appraisal of the paintings with the assistance of an expert, and to retain only the assets necessary to cover the claim, the interest, and the costs. Dr. Scherer appealed this decision to the Federal Tribunal.Considerations
The Federal Tribunal considers that, contrary to seizure (Art. 90 DEBA), the establishment of the inventory for the safeguarding of the right of retention (Art. 283 DEBA) does not have to be communicated to the debtor. Art. 97 para. 1 and 2 DEBA, which provides that the official must, if necessary, call in experts to estimate the seized objects and can only seize what is necessary to cover the creditor's claim with the interest and costs, applies by analogy to the establishment of the retention inventory.
In the present case, the cantonal authority was right to order a new appraisal of the retained paintings with the assistance of an expert. However, it went too far in annulling the retention record, which would force the creditor to file a new retention request and initiate a new debt collection procedure, depriving him of the legal protection to which he is entitled. It is sufficient to order…