Although the upper court did not invalided the auction the court’s decision was to repeat the case at the previous court but with different judges but this time to take in to consideration the facts presented from the side of the debtors which can be the basis on invalidation of the auction because it would be the breach of the civil procedure law 600 which states that bailiff has to notify a debtor about the creditor request against immovable property and invite debtor to repay the debt or if the auction is organised the initial auction price. This then would be interpreted as procedural law and according to section 617 of the Civil Procedure Law point 1.6 which states that: “A court shall declare an auction invalid, if by enforcing recovery towards immovable property, the bailiff has allowed important procedural violations...” this would be invalid auction because the bailiff had made procedural violations by not sending the auction notice to the debtors thus the court would have no choice but to declare the auction invalid.
As another example where the court has declared the auction invalid can be looked at the case nr. SKC-724 from the Latvian Republic Supreme Court Senate Department of Civil Cases in year 2005 which was about stopping auction procedure of an immovable property and the bailiff’s procedural violations. The property was planned to sell in an auction in October 4, 2005. The Upper court received appeal from party. As there was an issue about immovable property rights, the auction procedure must be stopped, it regulates by Latvian Civil Procedure Law Article 139, first part, 7th point, which is about Securing of Claims Prior to the Bringing of an Auction. Otherwise, if the auction procedure will be allowed, the auction could be impossible to happen, because the issue about, who holds rights of an immovable property, is unclear. The Senate decided that previous court decision, from September 22, 2005, must be left unchanged.
…
