Post by account_disabled on Dec 31, 2023 2:26:40 GMT -5
ACode of Civil Procedure regulates the conditions for the admissibility of the challenge to the execution in relation to the category of the enforceable title on the basis of which the forced execution began and with the reasons invoked by way of the challenge to the execution and in para. criticized in this case provides for the possibility of nonpursuing creditors to promote a challenge to the execution by granting them the right to intervene in the execution carried out by other creditors in order to take part in the execution or in the distribution of the.
Amounts obtained from the enforced pursuit of the assets of the debtors Country Email List depending on the time at which they intervene. At the same time the Court notes that by art. with the marginal name Intervening creditors of the Code of Civil Procedure expressly enshrines the right of creditors other than those who initiated the foreclosure of the debtor to intervene in the enforcement procedure and the conditions and consequences of the intervention are established. Therefore according to art. of the Code of Civil Procedure any creditor of the debtor may under the conditions of art. et seq. to intervene in the enforcement procedure in progress until the date the bailiff sets the term for.
The capitalization of traceable assets and after depositing or recording the amounts obtained from the trace may participate in the distribution of these amounts according to art. . and the following. . In this case the author of the exception of unconstitutionality criticizes the provisions of art. para. of the Code of Civil Procedure as being unconstitutional to the extent that it is interpreted that a nonpursuing creditor is admissible only to the extent that he has previously intervened in the forced execution with regard to which he is formulating the challenge to execution or in relation.
Amounts obtained from the enforced pursuit of the assets of the debtors Country Email List depending on the time at which they intervene. At the same time the Court notes that by art. with the marginal name Intervening creditors of the Code of Civil Procedure expressly enshrines the right of creditors other than those who initiated the foreclosure of the debtor to intervene in the enforcement procedure and the conditions and consequences of the intervention are established. Therefore according to art. of the Code of Civil Procedure any creditor of the debtor may under the conditions of art. et seq. to intervene in the enforcement procedure in progress until the date the bailiff sets the term for.
The capitalization of traceable assets and after depositing or recording the amounts obtained from the trace may participate in the distribution of these amounts according to art. . and the following. . In this case the author of the exception of unconstitutionality criticizes the provisions of art. para. of the Code of Civil Procedure as being unconstitutional to the extent that it is interpreted that a nonpursuing creditor is admissible only to the extent that he has previously intervened in the forced execution with regard to which he is formulating the challenge to execution or in relation.