2 Likavittou Street, Kolonaki
210 36 41 214 - 210 36 46 874
   EL

main image

December 2021

Decision of the Athens Multimunicipal Court of First Instance on the Revocation of Conservative Seizure of 450.000 Euro


revocation-of-a-conservative-seizure

The decision of the Athens Court of First Instance (interim measures procedure), number 208/2021, was issued, which ordered the total revocation of the conservative attachment imposed by a final decision of the Athens Court of First Instance on bank accounts of 450.000 Euro (in a total of 6 credit institutions) against the applicant company - our client. More specifically, a final judgment had been issued in the meantime, which dismissed the opposing party's action as partly indefinite and partly unfounded in substance and annulled the final judgment, pursuant to which the aforementioned conservative attachment was imposed. For that reason, the company - our client - filed an application for interim measures before the Athens Court of First Instance for the revocation of the conservatory attachment imposed on its bank accounts. On the above application, the decision on interim measures No. 208/2021 was issued, which presumed, on the one hand, the non-existence of the claim in the part that the claim of the opposing party was dismissed as essentially unfounded, and on the other hand, the non-existence of the risk of frustration of the satisfaction of (any) claim of the opposing party and therefore ordered the revocation of the conservative attachment. It is important to note that the court made reference to the fact that a conservatory attachment which took place on the basis of a final judgment (pursuant to Article 724 of the CCP) is revoked not only when the claim is finally dismissed but also when it is presumed that there is no risk that the claim at issue will not be satisfied in the future. In the case at issue, it was held that 'in view of the applicant's sound financial situation, its profitability and the fact that it is in good financial and tax standing, there is no reason to believe that there is any risk of the defendant's claim being frustrated because of the imminent alienation of its opponent from its seized property'.

Read more
 
back to top