DCSO/656/2005 · Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

DCSO/656/2005 • CJ GE DCSO/656/2005 Généré par l'IA

Security Requirement Benchmark Challenge

Numéro de cause DCSO/656/2005

Autorité / Tribunal Cour de Justice (Cour civile) · Chambre de surveillance en matière de poursuite et faillites

Juridiction

Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)

Date de la décision 2005-10-27

Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)

Ouvrir la source officielle Miroir Entscheidsuche Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The case involved a challenge to the legality of a procedure where a party was required to post security, determined by a specified benchmark value, to seek relief, with the court addressing the sufficiency of the initial security amount and the application of a secondary benchmark for determining the final required amount. The court reasoned that the initial benchmark was appropriate for the purpose of immediate relief, but ultimately upheld the discretionary decision to require a larger security amount based on the secondary, higher benchmark, finding that the procedural rules vested the lower court with the authority to adjust the security based on a broader set of considerations related to the merits and potential prejudice.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Security Requirement Benchmark Challenge: The court reasoned that the initial benchmark was appropriate for the purpose of immediate relief, but ultimately upheld the discretionary decision to require a larger security amount based on the secondary, higher benchmark, finding that the procedural rules vested the lower court with the authority to adjust the security based on a broader set of considerations related to the merits and potential prejudice.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA

condition de recevabilité obligation de fournir des sûretés risque pour la sécurité publique sûretés en garantie des dépens droit de conversion de titres motifs légaux LP.61

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

Cited for imposing procedural costs on the appellant.

Généré par l'IA

C/26706/2014

Appeal Security Requirement Upheld

C/20801/2012

Appeal Regarding Security for Costs Due to Solvency Concerns

C/9131/2021

Security for Appeal Costs Determination

P/27112/2024

Appellant Detention Challenge Security Grounds Burglary

C/18059/2008

Appeal Regarding Security for Costs and Suspension of Enforceability

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

Cited for imposing procedural costs on the appellant.

Texte complet

DCSO/656/05

9/-::90..:& !# /; "$ ,. ! 0..: ! " & $!# !! # 4$ < <#! = & ( #1(7

$!!##!5$>

!" !!$> <<#! = &( <!3#/+ /0.?#1(

!#$% !!$> <#@ A@ &( #, /0.?#1(

&&'# (% %$

! "!! !# "$$ ! % "$ $!&$ $#!' ! !!#(!#""! ! "!! ) !*!# +& ,-+.& /0// #1( ,2& 3#$ 4# ' $!!#$!!#5$&#!'61#!"!!# $#$!!# )7/87/2!#56#!1 ! ""#3)70.27 ! !#!5 !# 5 # !"!!# $!!# 5$ #$#!##!1(#13!"$$5!#(!$ $!!# #5!#!(!!#7

7 $$"'*!3#0-6!#0..+&<<#! = 5! #!# !#$!!#33!!!#B8-''''':/7& # #B CCCC& ! CCC& !# DCCCCCC& # #(&!##$ $!@!@ #<7CCCCCC#< =CCCCCC # 5!$ ! !$!& ! 3( !#&<=CCCCCC7

##' $5!#&<=CCCCCC&E3$?:#&(!$$ $$F3#F##!#86!#0..+5F(!!(# !!$ !# $!!'*!!&!(!F#!$ !F# $!'!#7

*!3#-6!0..+&4""! !)!* 1>4""!2 # ! $!$ 654 ,/ $ 0..+& # !!# 47?/7

/+6!0..+& $!@!@ "$ !## #!# !#B8-''''':/77$!!#;6!0..:)@ 9,8-9.:2& !!#$##$5 !#$!(##6# $&$! #!#$#!($$$#7

@!5% $!@!@ ## ! $&< =CCCCCC !!$ # #( #!# !& 654 ! 0..:7

*!3# /, ! 0..:& 4""! 6$ 5% $!$7 ## ! 5 ! 3(!$ 4!# #$ < =CCCCCC # "!! !!"!$! !!54#4$! # $3$""!#!#!##$7<=CCCCCC(! $$#$!3## $## $"#!#$%5F!#FG (!# ! ##( !#!$$7

7 ,. ! 0..:& < =CCCCCC "$ !# # $!!# $!$&H/8!0..:7

< =CCCCCC ' !5$ ## 54 (! 1 !""!!# !#54(!! ###"!5#$! & $!$54!(!#!# G$ !5!#' $# !# #!#!*$ #!*#'G!!57 !#!5$ 5 $!# !# $!# 4(! 5 $ (# #!! "# # $!# 54! ! # 54 $#$"!! 4# #!# ! 654 # !# !# $! !#$ $( 4"" !# #!*#$'& $(! 0..:7$3##!$$5 ! !$!4#!#6!"!$5 !!(! $#54 (!#$4##<7CCCCCC$!##7

4 ! !#&<=CCCCCC## !#!"!$! $! CCCCCC06!#0..:&##!(#>

I ! " ! # $ ! ! " %& &%' % ! " ' ( ! ! ! ) ! ! * ! * + # ! % ! " " !)* ! ! 'I7

7 # $ !!# $#& $! @! @ $#$ (!# !#&0/6!#0..:7

$! @! @ # # # 5 #!!# 47 ?/ #4$!# $!$7 $5 !15% #!# !(!$$!($ !#! # "!54$#$< =CCCCCC#! ! #$3!#(#3$3$&#!#4$! 5!#64!7

@43!#4$#$<=CCCCCC& $!@!@ 4# $ 4 $!!# !!#$#7"!($55#!# % !3## ! # !# # #$& #4! #!#!# $ !!#!#/88-&4# 54 (! #$ < <#! = $"# !#$%7 $! @! @ $3# ($ 54 (! 5! (# !# !!!0;6#(!0..,7

7 ## /;6!#0..:&4""! $#3!"! ""!$ (! $$ # $! $ !#$% (# # $!!##$7

4""!!#!5$5!3(!$4$#$<=CCCCCC#"!! &(!"!$$#$!3## $## $"#!#$%&# ##<<#! = & 54# #!!# 47 ?/ #4$! !7 # $ ! !##&4""! $!$54!(!$ !1 #!#4$ #$<=CCCCCC#! ! ##!#!#! ##!43!##!#4#$(#(#3$3$7

$#&4""!4# $4 $!!# !!#$#& ( !!$4 17

/7 !!# $# $# # !# "$ # !1 F'$!# "$ F## ## 5 (! 6!!!)7/;J7/.7/7//70J7:?K27 (!5!#F #!$)7/;7/27

$!!#F""!/,!0..:#6 !#7

##5!#!$!!#5$& !3##5!$ 3! (!7

!# $$ "$ # ! )7/; 70 27 !"! ' '!3#"## ! !)7/,7/027

#$$(7

07 !3##5! #!# !654! 0..:7

$! #!# 5! $# $& !# (# # 6 # $7

,77 @!(!#($#6& !!#$#4!6$7

#""&#47?/&#!3($!& $ $ # ! ## # $!#$7 ! $3 F# (! F $!!# $#& (# F# # # F#!##F 17 #!#*$ $!#$& ! #( * 5 !(!& "! 4# !# 3(#3#$ G!5 G!5&4$3$ ""!5F##!'!3!5F!$!3## $##&(!& #!!# 5 # 1 !#$5!# !#$% !(#& 5F# #!# ! $! 3(# F$(! F% !#$"! ! $F!#!#!!# !#! )!* !!$#& #!& 7 ?/ #B//J &!#@L&7?/#B?27

!!# #3!5 47 :; & #!# ! ! $3# % $ !(! # # ! !#! % ! !# 6! 5! 3(# !# # #$ )!* !!$#& #!&7?/#B/:J &!#@L&7?/ #B,27

,77 #F 1&4! !3##""$#4#!3(# ! !!#& " ! $$ #! 54 $$ # # #( $"#!#$%7

#F$! ! $! 5F# ! $ F'$!# "$#5!#!' !3##!#7

! " "! # F# # # F $!!# #!!# F! F# #!# 5F! F3!! F# # #!#& G#"!!# !1 #!#$!$ !'!!G#$ #"!###$7

F$!#!54""!(!6$5% !3##7

+7 $ !# 3! )70. 7/ 7/ J 7?/ 70 7 27# %$#$ #)7?07027

MMMMM

) *

+&,*

"4""! ! # !#B8-//87.:/77

%&.#*

07 #5 !#(##6# $7

,7 GN7

!/.$> <7 O< & $!#J<7!! @@ &63& <$! &63 $#7

# !!#(!#>

#G O< !*3""!1> $!#>

$#$!!##!5$ ! F""!##$ !3#' ! 3""!1

Security Requirement Benchmark Challenge

Synthèse Legislator

Regeste Legislator

Mots-clés

Dispositions légales citées

Décisions connexes

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Texte complet