February 2022

Judgment on the Suspension of the Auction under Article 1000 of the CCP

The Single Judge of the Syros Court of First Instance (injunction proceedings) issued the decision No. 23/2023, which accepted our client's application for the suspension of the auction of his properties located on an island in the Cyclades, under the conditions of article 1000 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It should be noted that, according to this provision, the suspension of the auction is possible if it is reasonably expected that, within the period of suspension - which cannot exceed six (6) months - the debtor will satisfy the bailiff or that, after this period, a higher bidding price will be achieved. The suspension is further granted on condition that the costs of accelerating the auction and ¼ of the capital due to the creditor are paid. 

In the present case, the above decision granted the application, presuming that a higher winning bid would be achieved after the six-month suspension period. It is interesting, in this context, to note the overall assessment of the current economic circumstances, which the decision makes in order to arrive at the decision to suspend the auction in question. According to the decisive considerations of the judgment, '... it is likely that, if the seized properties [...] are auctioned at a later date than the one set, namely after 22/8/2023 [...], the auction price obtained [...] will be [...] ] will be higher, given that in the current period of time, due to the energy crisis, the increase in the cost of living, the uncertainty about the economic conditions due to the war situation in the region of Ukraine, the increase in inflation and loan interest rates, as well as the lack of foreign visitors to the country, who wish to acquire holiday homes, potential buyers of real estate are taking a wait-and-see attitude, whereas, at the new auction date, as the auction will be in progress and the auction will be held in the near future, the auction will be held in the near future'. 

However, it is also important to note that the above decision accepted that the capital due to the garnishee, on which ¼ of the payment for the suspension is calculated, is the amount for which the attachment was imposed, and not any greater claim that the garnishee has against the debtor. This is particularly crucial since in most cases the attachment is made for a much smaller part of the outstanding claim in order to avoid costs, etc. This provides the debtor with the possibility to obtain the suspension of Article 1000 CCP by paying a small amount in relation to the alleged debt.