Facts
[D. AG] filed an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of the Canton of Zurich, 2nd Civil Chamber, of August 24, 2017. The subject of the proceedings was the distribution in the bankruptcy proceedings over [B.C.] . The appellant, [D. AG] , requested the annulment of the high court's judgment and the determination that [A.C.] was not actively legitimized in the bankruptcy proceedings over [B.C.] .
The bankruptcy proceedings were opened on November 23, 2010. On November 10, 2011, the bankruptcy office drew up the distribution plan, which included a claim by [A.C.] of CHF 420,000 and a claim by [D. AG] of CHF 532,314.35. [A.C.] filed a negative distribution complaint against [D. AG] on November 29, 2011.
The District Court of Zurich allowed [A.C.] 's negative distribution complaint, insofar as it was admissible. The High Court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed [D. AG] 's appeal and confirmed the district court's judgment in the contested scope.
Considerations
The Federal Court accepted the appellant's submission as a subsidiary constitutional complaint, since the appeal in civil matters was not admissible. The appellant argued that [A.C.] was not actively legitimized in the bankruptcy proceedings over [B.C.] , since their claim of CHF 420,000 had been deleted from the distribution plan.
The Federal Court examined the legitimacy to file a distribution complaint and found that [A.C.] was entitled to file a distribution complaint in the bankruptcy proceedings of [B.C.] , since they had registered two claims with the bankruptcy office. The lower court had found that [A.C.] 's claim of CHF 1,500 had been deleted from the distribution plan in the meantime, but the claim of CHF 420,000 was still included in the distribution plan.
The appellant argued that the lower court had not clarified the facts in a legally sufficient…