Supreme Court of Appeal
Civil Division 1

Public hearing on May 15, 2002 Rejection

Appeal No.: 99-19958
titled Unreleased Chairman: Mr. Lemontey




THE COURT OF APPEALS, FIRST CIVIL DIVISION, made the following ruling:

On appeal by the Regional Bank Mutual Agricultural (CRCAM) of the Gironde, which is based 304, boulevard du Président Wilson, 33076 Bordeaux, whose rights come CRCAM of Aquitaine,

to quash a decision of 3 August 1999 by the Bordeaux Court of Appeal (Civil Division first, Section A), for:

defendants to appeal;

The plaintiff relies in support of its appeal, the sole means of appeal annexed to this Order;

Given the communication made to the Attorney General;

THE COURT, in the public hearing on March 26, 2002, which were present: Mr. Lemontey, president, Gridel, reporting judge, Mr. Renard-Payen, counselor, Ms. Collet, Clerk of the Chamber;

On the report of Mr. Gridel, counselor, observations of SCP Celica, Blancpain and Soltner, lawyer for the Crédit Agricole Regional Bank Mutual of the Gironde, the CPS Boré, Xavier and boron, lawyer husband of R CPA TIFFREAU, counsel for Ms. Georgevail, the written submissions of Mr. Sainte-Rose, General Counsel, and after deliberating in accordance with law;

Acknowledges the Aquitaine CRCAM its recovery proceedings;

On the sole ground, taken in its five branches:

Whereas the Crédit Agricole Regional Bank of the Gironde mutual (CRCAM) agreed in 1989 to R whose daughter married Andrée Georgevail had a mandate to manage the accounts since 1980, a loan of 90,000 francs in 1992, constituents have revoked the power of attorney and assigned their daughter and her husband for repayment of misappropriated funds by them, they have also sought an order of CRCAM jointly and severally, for restitution of samples occurred under the loan subscribed and paid damages;

Whereas the CRCAM complains that stopping (Bordeaux, August 3, 1999) for hosting the various requests while it violates:

1 / and 2 / Section 1137 of the Civil Code, reproaching him for not having informed the couple Revidat on the burden of the loan while noting that the monthly payments do not exceed one third of their monthly income, and not having dissuaded to subscribe in order to help their daughter and son to acquire a building, criticism and for not having interfered in the affairs of its clients;

3 / Articles 1116, 1137 and 1304 of the Code, skirting a search for Liability Civil acquired extinctive prescription of an action for annulment for fraud;

4 / Articles 1892 and 1137, by exempting spouses Revidat any restitution, despite the persistence of this obligation, inherent in the loan ever be canceled;

5 / 1137 Article yet, taking into account the incentive to join a group insurance not proven useful, given purely incidental to credit and no impact on the suitability or otherwise of credit granted;

But given that the trial court noted the obvious weakness of intellectual husband R and the inability to practice one or the other to measure the extent of their debt, that they were entitled to infer a obligation to provide information and advice reinforced case and that, having observed the total lack of CRCAM, and the spontaneity with which, upon discovery of an incident on behalf of Mr. R had admitted her transfer bond loan of the spouses G. initial deposits, the Court of Appeal was able to retain its share of responsibility initial contract, while she appreciated the terms of sovereign monetary compensation appropriate, from which it follows that the plea is unfounded in all of its branches ;


Dismiss the appeal;

Condemns the Crédit Agricole Regional Bank Mutual Aquitaine expense;

Having regard to Article 700 of the new Code of Civil Procedure, rejected the request of the spouses Revidat;

Well done and tried by the Court of Cassation, First Civil Chamber, and pronounced by the President in a public hearing on 15 May two thousand and two.

Contested decision: Court of Appeal of Bordeaux (1st Civil Chamber, Section A) 1999-08-03


Posted on ខែមករា 11, 2012, in យុត្តិសាស្រ្ត. Bookmark the permalink. បាន​បិទ​ការ​បញ្ចេញ​មតិ នៅ case 44.


%d bloggers like this: