Auction Annulment Against Debtor – Legal Standing of a Fund Challenged
PPapatriantafyllou & Thanasenari successfully secured the auction annulment in Greece of a high-value property enforcement initiated against its client. The enforcement procedure had been brought by a loan servicing company (fund), which claimed rights over the debtor’s property. The court ruled that the claimant failed to prove its legal standing (active legitimation), fully accepting our legal arguments.
Through this judgment, we prevented the loss of significant real estate and achieved full vindication for our client through both legal precision and strategic argumentation.
This ruling adds important precedent in the context of improperly substantiated enforcement proceedings and emphasizes the importance of clear, legally documented transfers of claims between banks and funds. In the current climate of frequent property foreclosures, protecting debtors requires not only legal knowledge but also an effective strategic approach.
Court Grants Auction Annulment in Greece Due to Lack of Documentation
In reviewing the case, the court found the documentation submitted by the fund regarding the transfer of the claim to be insufficient. Specifically, the reference to generic forms and contract excerpts was deemed inadequate: the documents lacked any specific loan agreement number, account reference, or identifying details of the claim.
Moreover, the absence of reference to the debt amount or other clear connections to the transferred claim further undermined the legality of the process. The court accepted that the payment order was not accompanied by the required authorizing documentation, as mandated by the Greek Code of Civil Procedure.
Legal Framework: Formal Documentation Is Substantive
The court based its judgment on Articles 919 para. 1 and 925 paras. 1 & 2 of the Greek Code of Civil Procedure, which clearly outline the obligations of the enforcing party. When the claimant is not the original creditor, it must submit documentation proving lawful succession of the claim. Failure to do so constitutes absolute nullity—no proof of actual damage is required.
The court emphasized that enforcement proceedings cannot begin or proceed without proper and lawful documentation, as repeatedly confirmed in case law (e.g., Supreme Court 345/2006, Piraeus Court of Appeal 736/2019).
What This Means for Debtors
This legal success by our team strengthens the legal protection available to debtors facing unclear or unsubstantiated enforcement actions. It also creates practical precedent: any attempt to auction or seize property by a fund lacking proper documentation can be lawfully contested.
For debtors, this translates into a real and effective defense. In many cases, auctions are initiated based on general documents that lack specific reference to the loan agreement or the exact legal acts that substantiate the transfer.
Conclusion
This case serves as a clear example of targeted and effective procedural defense. With a well-planned strategy and detailed handling, we identified key procedural gaps, secured the annulment of the enforcement, and protected our client’s valuable asset.
The court confirmed that procedural accuracy is not a formality, but a requirement of legality. This ruling justifies our clients’ decision to act quickly and strategically.