Background

A claimant filed a case against two defendants before the court requesting the dismissal of sales by auction of the disputed shops and vacation of these shops. The claimant said that he had rented the shops to a tenant who went bankrupt. The claimant said the tenant appointed a second defendant as their representative to deal with the creditors and the second defendant had sold the in an auction.

The court dismissed the case.

The claimant appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court dismissed the appealed ruling and ruled the first defendant should give the shops to the claimant.

Decision

The first defendant appealed the ruling before the court of cassation and said in his grounds of appeal that the ruling had erred in the application of law because the court had ruled that the claimant had the right to buy the shops before he deposited their value though this was condition for accepting his case.