Sequestration Enforcement and Diligence in Main Action

The case involved a dispute over the enforcement of a prior judgment where a lower court had authorized a sequestration of property pending a final decision on the main dispute, and the party against whom the sequestration was ordered subsequently sought the removal of the sequestrator based on the grounds that the judgment authorizing the measure was no longer provisional and that the principal claim had not been actively pursued within the time frame stipulated by law for such authorizations. The Court of Cassation rejected the appeal, reasoning that the authorization to sequester, even if confirmed by an appeal decision, remained provisional in nature concerning its execution and could be revoked if the party who obtained it failed to diligently pursue the main action, thereby justifying the removal of the sequestrator when evidence demonstrated such a lack of diligence.