Supreme Court rules on jurisdiction for granting execution clauses

The Supreme Court said it has clarified the proper court jurisdiction for lawsuits filed by creditors seeking an execution clause when they cannot provide required proof of condition fulfillment.

In a decision announced April 16 regarding case 2025Da220131, the high court ruled that such lawsuits regarding indirect coercion decisions must be filed with the specific district court collegial panel that originally rendered the judgment. The court broke the lower court's ruling, canceled the first-instance judgment and remanded the case to the competent first-instance court.

The case centered on the interpretation of Article 33 of the Civil Execution Act, which allows creditors to file a suit for an execution clause at the "first-instance court" if they are unable to submit documents proving that conditions attached to a judgment have been met, as stipulated in Article 30 Paragraph 2. The Supreme Court determined that the term "first-instance court" refers specifically to the court that adjudicated the claim indicated in the title of execution, making its jurisdiction exclusive by nature. This classification applies because subject-matter jurisdiction is a type of official jurisdiction, which is inherently exclusive.

The ruling relied on the provision that rulings appealable only by objection serve as titles of execution under Article 56 Item 1 of the act. Article 57 mandates that Article 33 applies mutatis mutandis to compulsory executions based on such titles. Consequently, the court concluded that a lawsuit for granting an execution clause concerning an indirect coercion decision tried by a district court collegial panel falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of that specific panel.