281.1
SCHKGLPLEF
CH
CH
Art. 32 Bundesgesetz vom 11. April 1889 über Schuldbetreibung und Konkurs (SchKG)
SchKG; Erster Titel: Allgemeine Bestimmungen; II. Verschiedene Vorschriften; A. Fristen; 2. Einhaltung
Art. 32 SchKG
...
Eine Frist ist auch dann gewahrt, wenn vor ihrem Ablauf ein unzuständiges Betreibungs- oder Konkursamt angerufen wird; dieses überweist die Eingabe unverzüglich dem zuständigen Amt.
...
Bei schriftlichen Eingaben, die an verbesserlichen Fehlern leiden, ist Gelegenheit zur Verbesserung zu geben.
Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (136)
BGE 82 III 101 (Art. 32 SchKG)
Burden of proving timely postal mailing of an objection where the postmark shows a late date after a deadline extended by court holidays.
Main ground for the verdict: the court applied this provision on postal dispatch fulfilling the deadline, holding the postage stamp is presumptive evidence of mailing time.
BA 2024 56 · zg (Art. 32 Abs. 2 SchKG)
Foreign Company v. Bankruptcy Office on Timely Extension Request in Assetless Bankruptcy
Cited implicitly through reference to the procedure the Konkursamt should have followed regarding the request for an extension of time.
PS240225 · zh (Art. 32 Abs. 4 SchKG)
Challenge to Provisional Seizures and Vexatious Proceedings Finding
Cited in the reasoning, but not explicitly in the dispositive orders (Orders 1-6).
ZSU.2024.139 · ag (Art. 32 Abs. 2 SchKG)
Creditor's Debt Enforcement Proceedings Denied Due to Expired Statute of Limitations
Cited regarding the consequences of filing a debt enforcement request with an incompetent authority and its effect on the interruption of prescription.
A/2960/2023 · ge (art. 32 al. 2 LP)
Creditor Complaint Regarding Certificate of No Seizure and Jurisdictional Transfer
The appeal was partially admitted to order the transmission of the request to continue the proceedings to the competent collection office, as per the subsidiary conclusion.
A/494/2024 · ge (art. 32 al. 2 LP)
Insurance Premium Seizure Notice Nullified Due to Improper Service to Homonym
The provision concerning the transmission of the case to the competent authority was used to declare the appeal admissible.
A/2720/2023 · ge (art. 32 al. 2 LP)
Property Management Firm v. Heirs of Deceased Property Owner (Procedural Validity of Payment Order and Creditor Legitimacy)
This procedural rule was discussed concerning the timely filing of the complaint with an incorrect authority, but was not the main ground for the final decision.
A/3004/2023 · ge (art. 32 al. 2 LP)
Claimant's Appeal Regarding Debt Collection Seizure Dismissed as Inadmissible
Cited in the reasoning explaining why the appellant cannot benefit from the deemed timely filing rule, leading to the finding of inadmissibility.
A/3283/2023 · ge (art. 32 al. 2 LP)
Complaint Against Debt Enforcement Office Regarding Consigned Funds and Access to Archives Deemed Inadmissible and Outside Jurisdiction
The complaint (specifically the request for information) was transmitted to the Office for a decision as per this provision.
A/279/2023 · ge (art. 32 al. 1 LP)
Challenge to Enforcement Proceedings Due to Insufficient Notification
Cited to confirm that the complaint was not prejudiced by being addressed to the wrong authority (Chambre de céans instead of the Office).
A/4212/2022 · ge (art. 32 al. 2 LP)
Creditor v. Debtor: Validity of Enforcement Order Service and Timeliness of Opposition
The court explicitly transmits the opposition filed with the wrong authority, applying the rule for timely filing with an incompetent office.
BA 2022 47 · zg (Art. 32 Abs. 2 SchKG)
Debtor's Appeal of Bankruptcy Notice Upheld Due to Incorrect Interest Accrual Date
Cited in the reasoning to confirm that a continuation request filed with an incompetent debt collection office is considered timely.
A/1990/2022 · ge (art. 32 al. 2 LP)
Creditor v. Debtor: Dismissal of Debt Enforcement Proceedings Due to Debtor's Relocation to UAE
Cited to confirm admissibility because the complaint was timely filed with an incompetent authority, deemed respected the deadline.
A/1887/2022 · ge (art. 32 al. 2 LP)
Creditor Foreclosure Opposition Lifting Defect Due to Non-Citation of Spouse/Co-Owner
Cited to justify the admissibility of the complaint, even though it was initially misdirected, based on the request for reconsideration.
A/2015/2022 · ge (art. 32 al. 2 LP)
Creditor Foreclosure Opposition Lifting on Multiple Debtors
Applied because the initial filing with an incompetent authority (the Office) was deemed to respect the deadline as it requested retransmission to the supervisory authority for the appeal.