Creditor v. Debtor (Website Listing Liquidated Damages)
Sintesi Legislator
Generato dall'IAIn a debt collection matter where a creditor sought enforcement based on a written contract acknowledging debt for a website listing, the dispute concerned the extent to which a contractually agreed-upon liquidated damage clause (stipulated at 70% of the net price upon early termination) served as a provisional title for legal authorization. The court reasoned that the debt enforcement judge must summarily determine the permissible amount of a penalty or liquidated damage sum in the authorization procedure pursuant to relevant articles of the Debt Enforcement and Bankruptcy Act and the Code of Obligations; finding that the lower court's reduction of the liquidated damages to 15% of the net price was appropriate because, given the immediate cancellation just one business day after signing, this amount reasonably covered initial administrative costs while preventing compensation for work not yet performed, aligning with the principle that excessively high penalties must be judicially moderated.
Regesto Legislator
UfficialeArt. 82 SchKG; Art. 163 Abs. 3 OR. Der Rechtsöffnungsrichter hat im Rechtsöffnungsverfahren die zulässige Höhe einer Konventionalstrafe oder einer Schadenspauschale auf summarische Weise festzulegen und hierfür Rechtsöffnung zu erteilen. | Schuldbetreibungs- und Konkursrecht
Parole chiave
Generato dall'IADisposizioni normative citate
Generato dall'IADecisioni correlate
Generato dall'IAQuestioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator
Generato dall'IACited as the basis for granting provisional enforcement (Rechtsöffnung) based on the written recognition of debt.
Cited as the legal basis allowing the judge in the enforcement proceedings to summarily determine and reduce an excessively high penalty clause or fixed damages amount.
Testo completo
Rechtsprechung Luzern
Instanz: · Obergericht
Abteilung: · Schuldbetreibungs- und Konkurskommission
Rechtsgebiet: · Schuldbetreibungs- und Konkursrecht
Entscheiddatum: · 18.01.2006
Fallnummer: · SK 05 142
LGVE: · 2006 I Nr. 50
Leitsatz: · Art. 82 SchKG; Art. 163 Abs. 3 OR. Der Rechtsöffnungsrichter hat im Rechtsöffnungsverfahren die zulässige Höhe einer Konventionalstrafe oder einer Schadenspauschale auf summarische Weise festzulegen und hierfür Rechtsöffnung zu erteilen.
Rechtskraft: · Diese Entscheidung ist rechtskräftig.