Suspension of Auction Payment and Prevention of Guarantee Forfeiture Due to Fundamental Mistake by the Successful Bidder
The Court accepted the application for interim relief that we filed on behalf of our client, the successful bidder in a property auction. Specifically, the Court ordered both the temporary suspension of the obligation to pay the excessive auction price and the suspension of the guarantee forfeiture.
The Case
Our client participated as a bidder in an electronic auction with the intention of acquiring a property. Due to a clerical error during the bidding process, an offer of €1,600,010 was registered on the online platform instead of the intended €160,010. As a result, the property was awarded at a price several times higher than its market value. Despite immediate objections and requests for correction, the mistake was not remedied. Consequently, our client was exposed to the risk of losing the guarantee (equal to 30% of the opening bid) and facing an unbearable financial burden along with imminent enforcement measures against her entire real estate assets.
Our Approach
We reacted immediately by filing for interim measures (injunction) seeking a temporary suspension of the obligation to pay the excessive auction price, and by lodging an objection (legal challenge) against the auction proceedings.
We argued that the offer of €1,600,010 did not reflect our client’s true intent, constituting a fundamental mistake (error in negotio), and that insisting on such an outcome amounted to an abuse of rights. Enforcing payment of this amount would lead to extremely disproportionate consequences — namely, obliging our client to pay the auction price under threat of compulsory enforcement measures over her entire property. We demonstrated that such enforcement would cause irreparable harm, which would be difficult to reverse even after a final judgment on the objection.
The Court’s Decision
The Court accepted our arguments and temporarily suspended both the obligation to pay the auction price of €1,600,010 and the forfeiture of the guarantee, as well as any further enforcement actions against our client. This interim protection provides the necessary time for the dispute to be examined on the merits without our client suffering irreversible damage.
The Significance of the Case
This decision highlights the importance of interim relief in ensuring temporary protection in cases of manifest errors or disproportionate burdens. Although there was debate regarding our client’s legal standing and her right to challenge the auction at this stage — since Article 933 of the Greek Code of Civil Procedure does not expressly grant such right to the successful bidder — the Court accepted our reasoning for the analogical application of the provision and found the application admissible. This allowed the Court to proceed with a substantive review of the request.
In this way, a potential gap in judicial protection was effectively addressed; if left unfilled, it would have exposed our client to irreversible consequences.
Our Perspective
At Papatriantafyllou & Thanasenari, our goal is the effective protection of our clients. This case serves as yet another example of our litigation practice, demonstrating our commitment to safeguarding our clients’ rights with determination and strategic precision.
Related topics: