Contested enforcement

Questions sometimes arise during enforcement proceedings that must be resolved before the enforcement matter can proceed. For example, questions concerning the debtor’s payment liabilities after the grounds for enforcement have been determined, or third-party allegations of ownership of distrained property are questions that must be resolved before enforcement can proceed.

The enforcement officer usually resolves such questions independently. Indeed, it is essential for the functioning of the system that not all disputes in enforcement matters are submitted to the courts for resolution. Because the methods for taking evidence available to the courts are not available in enforcement procedures, it can nevertheless be necessary to submit matters with disputed evidence to the courts for resolution to enable the enforcement matter to proceed. This procedure is termed “contested enforcement”. It is a type of interim trial in the enforcement matter, in which the issue with contested evidence is resolved by the court, after which the court’s ruling forms the basis for proceeding with the enforcement.

Instructions for and impediments to filing a contested enforcement claim

During enforcement proceedings, a party may make an allegation or claim against the enforcement which must be resolved before enforcement can begin or proceed. If the information required for resolving the matter can be acquired by the enforcement officer with the means available in enforcement proceedings, the enforcement officer will resolve the matter. But if the required information cannot be obtained in the enforcement procedure (such as personal evidence beyond the scope of the enforcement officer’s right of access to information), the enforcement officer will give the party that made the allegation or claim instructions for filing a contested enforcement claim. For a contested enforcement claim to be brought, the allegation or claim must also be supported by probable grounds that have brought the enforcement matter into dispute. The instructions can also be given by the court that is hearing an enforcement appeal. Interested parties can also bring contested enforcement claims without being instructed, even if no probable grounds have been presented to support the allegation or claim made against the enforcement proceedings in the enforcement officer’s opinion.

There are also situations in which instructions for filing a contested enforcement claim cannot be given and the claim cannot be filed without instructions. For example, when the final settlement has been carried out in an enforcement matter, it can no longer be contested.

Court hearing of contested enforcement claims

A contested enforcement claim is a normal civil claim instituted by delivering a written application for a summons to the office of the competent district court. The interested parties in contested enforcement are the creditor and debtor in the enforcement matter, along with any third parties whose rights are affected by the enforcement. If the contested enforcement claim was brought under instruction, the interested parties are generally liable for their own legal costs. But if the contested enforcement claim was brought without instruction, the losing party is, as a rule, liable to compensate the opposing party for their legal costs. Furthermore, the state can in certain cases be obligated to compensate the winning party’s legal costs in a contested enforcement.

In a contested enforcement, the court resolves a civil matter under private law. However, the procedural aspects of enforcement cannot be contested, nor will the court issue an opinion on the correctness of the enforcement officer’s actions in connection with the contested enforcement. Neither can questions of law alone be brought to a court for resolution as contested enforcement. Rather, the enforcement officer must resolve questions of law independently in connection with the enforcement matter.