progetti

Bankruptcy appeal declared inadmissible for insufficient reasoning

5A_158/2011Tribunale federale / II divisione civile7 mar 2011Inadmissible

Apri la fonte

Estratto da Omnilex

Sintesi Omnilex

The Federal Supreme Court declared inadmissible the bankruptcy appeal of A.________ SA against the cantonal judgment confirming its bankruptcy. The Court held that the appellant’s filing did not engage with the decisive reasons of the cantonal decision and merely alleged that it had a buyer for its restaurant, which was insufficient under the Federal Supreme Court Act. The cantonal finding that solvency had not been made plausible remained untouched. Court costs of CHF 500 were charged to the appellant.

Massima Omnilex

Art. 42 al. 2 and 106 al. 2 LTF; admissibility of a Federal Supreme Court appeal in bankruptcy matters: the appeal must specifically address the decisive reasons of the challenged judgment and, where applicable, meet the heightened reasoning requirements for alleging constitutional rights. A mere recital of unsupported factual assertions, without confronting the lower court’s reasoning, is insufficient and leads to non-entry under Art. 108 al. 1 let. b LTF. In bankruptcy-annulment proceedings under Art. 174 al. 2 LP, payment of the claim alone does not suffice; the debtor must also render solvency plausible, these conditions being cumulative (consid. 1).

Testo completo

{T 0/2}
5A_158/2011

Arrêt du 7 mars 2011
IIe Cour de droit civil

Composition
Mme la Juge Hohl, Présidente.
Greffière: Mme de Poret Bortolaso.

Participants à la procédure
A.________ SA,
recourante,

contre

B.________,
intimée,

Office des poursuites et des faillites de St-Maurice, rue du Chanoine-Broquet 2, 1890 St-Maurice,
Registre du Commerce de St-Maurice, rue du Chanoine-Broquet 2, 1890 St-Maurice,
Service du Registre foncier de Monthey, 1870 Monthey.

Objet
prononcé de faillite,

recours contre le jugement du Tribunal cantonal du canton du Valais, Autorité de recours en matière de faillite, du 31 janvier 2011.

considérant:
le jugement rendu le 31 janvier 2011 par le Tribunal cantonal du canton du Valais, Autorité de recours en matière de faillite, lequel rejette le recours interjeté par la société recourante contre un jugement prononçant sa faillite et confirme celle-ci;
que le jugement attaqué observe que, si la recourante avait bien prouvé la consignation du montant de la poursuite auprès de l'Office des poursuites, elle n'avait cependant pas rendu vraisemblable sa solvabilité au sens de l'art. 174 al. 2 LP, seconde condition cumulative permettant d'annuler la faillite;
que, devant le Tribunal de céans, la recourante se contente de prétendre qu'elle aurait un repreneur pour le restaurant, sans nullement critiquer les considérants pertinents de l'arrêt attaqué;
qu'en conséquence, son argumentation ne satisfaisant pas aux exigences des art. 42 al. 2 et 106 al. 2 LTF, son recours doit être déclaré irrecevable en procédure simplifiée selon l'art. 108 al. 1 let. b LTF;
que les frais de la présente procédure doivent être mis à sa charge (art. 66 al. 1 LTF);

par ces motifs, la Présidente prononce:

1.
Le recours est irrecevable.

2.
Les frais judiciaires, arrêtés à 500 fr., sont mis à la charge de la recourante.

3.
Le présent arrêt est communiqué aux parties, à l'Office des poursuites et des faillites de St-Maurice, au Registre du Commerce de St-Maurice, au Service du Registre foncier de Monthey et au Tribunal cantonal du canton du Valais, Autorité de recours en matière de faillite.

Lausanne, le 7 mars 2011
Au nom de la IIe Cour de droit civil
du Tribunal fédéral suisse
La Présidente: La Greffière:

Hohl de Poret Bortolaso

Parole chiave

bankruptcyinadmissibilityreasoning requirementssolvencycourt costs

Estratto da Omnilex

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Omnilex

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether the bankruptcy appeal was sufficiently reasoned to be admissible.

Decisione estratta

No. The appellant did not challenge the relevant reasoning of the cantonal judgment and its submissions did not meet the requirements of the Federal Supreme Court Act.

Motivazione estratta

The appeal merely asserted the existence of a potential purchaser without addressing the decisive findings; therefore the pleading failed to satisfy Arts. 42(2) and 106(2) LTF and could be dealt with under the simplified inadmissibility procedure.

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether the bankruptcy could be annulled under Art. 174(2) LP.

Decisione estratta

The cantonal court had held that solvency was not made plausible, so the cumulative conditions for annulling the bankruptcy were not met.

Motivazione estratta

Although payment of the seizure/claim amount had been proven, solvency remained unsubstantiated; the second cumulative condition of Art. 174(2) LP was therefore missing.

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.