V ° DOL

Supreme Court
Commercial Division

Public hearing on February 7, 1983 RELEASE


Appeal No.: 81-15339
Published in the Bulletin Pdt M. Jonquères CDFF Rpr M. Dupre of Pomarède Av.Gén. Mr. Laroque Av Applicant: Mr de Grandmaison Av Defendant: M. Boulle

FRENCH REPUBLIC


ON BEHALF OF THE FRENCH PEOPLE


On the sole ground: It is clear from the judgment (TOULOUSE, June 15, 1981) until 14 October 1977, became surety GOOD CARING FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE FRP, CURRENT CREDIT PYRENEES TOULOUSE (BANK) FOR ALL ARE THEY MIGHT BE DUE Baragne, HOTEL-RESTAURANT, up to 100,000 francs;
THE 3 March 1978, the Bank RATED GOOD FOR PAYMENT OF BALANCE OF Baragne AMOUNTING 82,570.73 WHEREAS FRANCS IT IS ADVERSELY AFFECTS THE COURT DISMISSES APPEAL TO HAVE THE BANK OF THE APPLICATION, THEN, AS THE APPEAL, that the contested decision did not really CHARACTERIZED THE ILLEGAL OPERATIONS WHICH WAS SUBMITTED TO THE DIRECTOR OF BANK THAT THE FACTS ESTABLISHED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL are based only on mere suppositions developed by judges, but lack any objective basis, in violation of Article 1116 OF THE CIVIL CODE,
OR TO ITS POWER OF REVIEW on the legality of the facts alleged as constituting DOL, THE COURT OF APPEALS Be sure to censor the assessments were made ​​BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 1166 OF THE CIVIL CODE,
BUT UNTIL AFTER CONSIDERING NOTES on the eve of the guarantee, the situation Baragne was very clear and that his account was liable for 82570.73 FRANCE, THE COURT OF APPEAL STATEMENT ACCORDING TO THE DECLARATION OF GOOD, confirmed by those of a witness, an office manager of the bank was intervened to assure him that the situation was healthy and Baragne THERE WAS NO RISK TO GOOD TO BE DEPOSIT
IS THAT THESE STATEMENTS THE COURT OF APPEAL THAT FOUND THAT SOME DAYS LATER, THE ACCOUNT HAD BEEN CLOSED, COULD REMEMBER THE EXISTENCE OF misrepresentation on the part of the Bank,
that the plea is UNFOUNDED
FOR THESE REASONS : reject the appeal against the Judgement of 15 JUIN 1981 BY THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TOULOUSE;



Publication: Bulletin of Judgments Supreme Court Commercial Division N. 50
The contested decision: Toulouse Court of Appeal (Room 2) 1981-06-15


Supreme Court of Appeal
Civil Division 3

Public hearing on November 6, 1970 RELEASE


Appeal No.: 69-11665
Published in the Bulletin de Monts PDT RPR M. FABRE AV.GEN. Mr. TUNCA Plaintiff AV. MM. CHOUCROY Defender GOUTET

Posted on ខែមករា 10, 2012, in យុត្តិសាស្រ្ត. Bookmark the permalink. Comments Off on case 16.

ការ​បញ្ចេញ​មតិ​ត្រូវបានបិទ។

%d bloggers like this: