Act No. 120/2001 Coll., enforcement order, allows executors to issue execution orders for the recovery of claims, which, among other things, secure or block the debtor's property. For example, an execution order to execute an execution by selling immovable property and an execution order to execute an execution by commanding the debtor's claim from an account with a financial institution have fundamental impacts on the sphere of the debtor's property rights. By executing and stopping the execution, the effects of the execution orders cease and the executor sends a notice of the end of the execution to all authorities and persons who register the execution orders. But what about demands for the speed of the executor's progress, especially at the end of the execution?
Enforcement Order or Act No. 120/2001 Coll., does not set a deadline, in which the deblocking of the debtor's property is to take place after execution or cessation of execution. However, the blocking of assets has fundamental effects on the debtor's life. In the case of real estate blocking, the execution order is publicly marked on the title deed at the relevant cadastral office and is therefore not only mandatory limited in dealing with his property, but the public notice of the existence of the execution order also considerably reduces the credibility and creditworthiness of the obligee in the public eye. When blocking a bank account maintained at a financial institution, account attachment and the impossibility to perform normal banking operations.
The implementation of the execution is understood enforced compliance including accessories, the costs of the entitled person and the costs of execution or performance of the obligee on the basis of a call for voluntary compliance. TO suspension of execution it occurs if the execution should never have been carried out, or originally it should have been carried out, but the reason for its execution subsequently disappeared.
Relevant legislation
According to the provisions of § 47, paragraph 7 of Act No. 120/2001 Coll., enforcement regulations, it applies that by carrying out or stopping the enforcement ex lege the effects of all issued execution orders cease. At the same time, execution or suspension of execution is referred to collectively as the execution order the end of execution. In accordance with the provisions of § 46, paragraph 8 of Act No. 120/2001 Coll., on the enforcement order, the executor will therefore send a notice after the execution has ended to all authorities and persons who in their registers (lists) have a note about the ongoing enforcement or to whom it has been enforced some duty imposed. In the notification, they shall also indicate execution orders, the effects of which have ceased upon the end of the execution in accordance with the provisions of Section 47, Paragraph 7 of Act No. 120/2001 Coll., Execution Rules. Authorities and persons who are known to the executor to have, on the basis of a sent notification of the initiation of an execution or an execution order, marked an ongoing execution in their records, must be informed of the end of the execution in order to minimize the adverse consequences for the obligor from the already completed execution.[1]
As already mentioned in the introduction of this article, deadline for deblocking the property, and thus the end of adverse effects for the obligee, for example in the form of a publicly visible enforcement order for the sale of real estate, Act No. 120/2001 Coll., enforcement order, does not establish. A certain guide can be found in the provisions of § 46, paragraph 1 of the aforementioned law, according to which the executor proceeds in execution quickly and efficiently, while taking care to protect the rights of the parties to the proceedings and third parties affected by his procedure.
Jurisprudence and the speed of the executor's procedure
The jurisprudence on the interpretation of the concept of "speed" of the executor's procedure is not very comprehensive. However, it should be mentioned judgment of the Municipal Court in Prague of 27 June 6, No. 2019 A 10/38 – 2017, which discussed the mentioned requirement for the executor's speed in connection with the disciplinary liability of the executor. According to the Municipal Court in Prague, it is necessary to consider intervention by the executor in the obligee's property right as an intervention of only a temporary nature, when after the reasons for issuing an execution order or its effects cease, must occur to immediate notification of this fact to the relevant entities.
In this context, the Municipal Court in Prague also referred to its previous jurisprudence, specifically judgment of 10 March 3, No. 2016 A 11/76-2015, in which he stated that: "the law's requirement for speed and for the protection of the rights of the parties to the proceedings results from the specific nature of enforcement activity, which directly and very seriously interferes directly with the lives of the persons who are subjected to it". ... "the essence of the principle of proportionality is the duty of the executor as a person exercising state power to interfere with the rights of the parties to the proceedings only to the extent necessary and for the period required by the purpose of enforcement activity – forced recovery of the obligation imposed by the writ of execution. The legislator reflected this principle in the applicable procedural regulation precisely in the provisions of § 46, paragraph 1 of the Enforcement Code, according to which the executor is obliged to proceed with the execution quickly and efficiently. " In the present case, the executor's delay in deblocking the debtor's property was more than 2 months from the end of execution.
The immediacy of the executor's procedure
The legal term "immediately" to which the Municipal Court in Prague appeals as part of the request for speedy unblocking of the debtor's property, established jurisprudential practice connects with the legal terms "without delay","immediately","immediately" or "without undue delay", see judgment of the Supreme Court of 10 June 12, file no. stamp 2013 Cdo 32/2484. At the same time, the Supreme Court mentions that the deadline according to the aforementioned vague legal terms is several days, maximum weeks, in the shortest possible period of time, while in practice this term must be interpreted according to the specific case (i.e. ) depending on the purpose that the legislator wants to achieve with a specific provision with the help of this term. Even before issuing this judgment, this time the Supreme Administrative Court stated that the term "without undue delay” contained in Act No. 120/2001 Coll., on the Enforcement Code, must be applied in connection with the activities of the executor to the horizon of days, not weeks, viz judgment of 14 June 6, No. 2012 Kse 11/18 – 2009.
Deadline for property deblocking
With regard to the cited jurisprudence, I believe that after the end of the execution, or termination of the effects of enforcement orders, the debtor's property must be deblocked at most in a matter of days, in no case weeks, or even months, as happened in the considered case described in the aforementioned judgment of the Municipal Court announced under No. 10 A 38/2017 – 29, which resulted in the Ministry of Justice reprimanding the executor in question. In my opinion, the deadline in days can be interpreted even as a period not exceeding 5 working days, otherwise we would already reach the horizon of undesirable weeks. Such a short period is without a doubt justified by the significant limitation of the constitutionally guaranteed property rights of obligees, which often occurs to a considerable extent as a result of execution blocking.
At the same time, it also follows from established jurisprudence that the end of execution, or the termination of the effects of the enforcement order occurs after the termination of the effects of the enforcement orders, despite simultaneously submitted motions to postpone or stop the enforcement, see ruling of the Constitutional Court of 14 May 5, No. I. ÚS 2019/3520 – 18.
Summary
Although Act No. 120/2001 Coll., Enforcement Regulations, does not expressly provide for the deblocking of the debtor's property after the end of the enforcement, or the termination of the effects of execution orders, the deadline, it can be deduced from the jurisprudence that this deadline for deblocking of the debtor's property in the form of a notice of the end of execution to all authorities and persons who keep a note about the ongoing execution in their registers (lists) should make only a few days, not weeks or even a longer time horizon, from which it can be inferred that the latest deadline for taking actions within the framework of deblocking the debtor's property by the executor would it should not have been longer than 5 working days. However, the speed of the executor's progress can be crucial.
In the event of a possible delay by the executor in fulfilling his obligations within the framework of unblocking the property, it is possible to file initiative to supervise the activities of the executor, the so-called complaint, namely to the Ministry of Justice, the Executor's Chamber or the president of the district court in whose district the executor was appointed, or by which the executor was entrusted with the management of the execution. The details are set out in § 7 of Act No. 120/2001 Coll., enforcement order.
Source: epravo.cz
Do you need debt collection advice? Having problems with the executor? Contact us and we will advise you!
The team of the Vych & Partners law office
[1] KASÍKOVÁ, Martina. § 46 [Execution of enforcement]. In: KASÍKOVÁ, Martina, JIRMANOVÁ, Miroslava, HUBÁČEK, Jaroslav, PLÁŠIL, Vladimír, ŠIMKA, Karel, KUČERA, Zdeněk, NEKOLA, Václav. Enforcement order. 5th edition. Prague: CH Beck, 2022, p. 403, marg. No. 53.
