Facts
The appellant was subject to debt enforcement proceedings for two claims and filed a complaint against the cost statement of the debt enforcement office. The High Court dismissed the complaint insofar as it was entertained. The appellant requested the Federal Supreme Court to overturn the judgment and reduce the official fees to CHF 65.
The cost statement of the debt enforcement office included, among other things, costs for serving payment orders, notifications of attachment, certificates of loss, and travel allowances. The appellant disputes the legality of individual cost items.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court examined the cost liability for the collection of summonses and the notification of attachment. It concluded that the collection of summonses is not a chargeable official act, as it is not prescribed by law. The notification of attachment, on the other hand, is a prescribed official act, but serving by A-mail is not provided for and therefore cannot be chargeable.
The Federal Supreme Court also examined the cost liability for the certificates of loss and the travel allowances. It concluded that the costs for the certificates of loss are not objectionable, but serving by A-mail is not provided for and…