Facts

Parties:

  • Appellant: [A.A.]
  • Respondents: Swiss Confederation and Canton of Zurich

Facts:

  • The administration for direct federal tax of the Canton of Zurich issued seizure orders and arrest warrants against [A.A.] and his wife for various tax years.
  • The enforcement office of Thalwil-Rüschlikon-Kilchberg executed the arrests.
  • [A.A.] filed unsuccessful appeals against the seizure orders.
  • The Swiss Confederation and the Canton of Zurich initiated enforcement proceedings for security.
  • [A.A.] applied for the lifting of the arrests and the release of the affected assets.
  • The district court and the higher court of the Canton of Zurich dismissed the applications.

Main question:

  • Whether the arrests were enforced in a timely manner.

Considerations

The appeal is generally admissible, as decisions of cantonal supervisory authorities in debt enforcement and bankruptcy matters are subject to appeal in civil matters (Art. 19 DEBA in conjunction with Art. 72 para. 2 lit. a, Art. 74 para. 2 lit. c FSCA). The appellant, as the debtor in arrest, is particularly affected by the contested decision and has a protected interest in its annulment or amendment (Art. 76 para. 1 lit. a and b FSCA).

The seizure order is equated with the arrest warrant under Art. 274 DEBA (Art. 170 para. 1 DFTA; § 182 STC/ZH). The arrest is executed by the competent enforcement office and is a provisional security measure that lapses if it is not enforced within the deadline (Art. 280 no. 1 DEBA).

The appellant argues that the enforcement of the…