Enforcement Proceedings and Attachment: The Court of Cassation on the Burden of Renewing Transcription (Order 15241/2025)

The law of forced execution is crucial for the protection of creditors, but it requires strict adherence to procedures. Order No. 15241 of June 7, 2025, from the Court of Cassation, firmly rules on the effectiveness of the transcription of real estate attachment and the serious consequences of its failure to be renewed. This decision reiterates established principles and offers crucial insights for all legal professionals.

The Essential Function of Real Estate Transcription

Real estate attachment initiates the forced expropriation of an asset. Its effectiveness depends on transcription in the Real Estate Registers. This publicity, governed by the Civil Code, makes the act enforceable against third parties: anyone acquiring rights on the property after transcription is aware of the attachment and cannot prejudice the proceedings. It is a fundamental mechanism for protecting the creditor.

The failure to renew the transcription of the attachment within the twenty-year period, as per Articles 2668-bis and 2668-ter of the Civil Code, results in the impossibility of continuing the enforcement proceedings at all times and under any circumstances, given the centrality of transcription in real estate expropriation which, in order to achieve its purpose, is subject to the publicity rules of real estate circulation, nor are there any acts that can survive the failure to renew. (In this case, the Supreme Court, confirming the decision to reject the opposition against the order of the Enforcement Judge declaring the closure of the proceedings adopted on the grounds that the suspension of the enforcement judgment did not exempt the creditor from the burden of renewing the transcription within the twenty-year period, deemed the provisional award of the property, which occurred under the regime prior to the 2006 amendment, irrelevant for the decision and devoid of effect).

With Order No. 15241 of 2025, the Court of Cassation reiterated an absolute principle: the transcription of attachment has a twenty-year validity. If not renewed within this period (Articles 2668-bis and 2668-ter of the Civil Code), the enforcement proceedings become "impossible to continue at all times and under any circumstances." Every other act in the proceedings loses its value. The Supreme Court emphasized the "centrality of transcription," clarifying that without valid transcription, real estate expropriation cannot achieve its purpose. The ruling stated that "there are no acts that can survive the failure to renew," rendering even provisional awards that had already occurred ineffective. The expiry of the transcription nullifies all progress.

Twenty-Year Period: Burden and Consequences for the Creditor

Articles 2668-bis and 2668-ter of the Civil Code impose on the creditor the burden of renewing the transcription of attachment before the twenty-year period expires. Order No. 15241 of 2025 clarifies:

• The suspension of the enforcement judgment does not exempt the creditor from the obligation to renew the transcription. The burden of monitoring the deadline remains.
• Failure to renew results in the closure of the enforcement proceedings due to impossibility of continuation.
• Any act previously performed, including a provisional award, loses effect, rendering the proceedings void.

This ruling serves as a reminder for creditors and legal professionals to exercise the utmost diligence. Failing to monitor the expiry date means risking years of proceedings and substantial expenses without results. The reason for this is to ensure legal certainty and the fluidity of the real estate market.

Conclusions: Professional Diligence and Legal Certainty

Order No. 15241 of 2025 from the Court of Cassation, with President D. S. F. and Rapporteur R. M., is a fundamental clarification on the regime of real estate attachment transcription. It reinforces the principle that the correct management of procedural deadlines is an indispensable burden for the creditor. The failure to renew the transcription within twenty years, even in the presence of a suspension of proceedings, leads to the impossibility of continuing the enforcement proceedings and the loss of all effects of the attachment. This decision reiterates the consistency of our legal system with the principles of certainty and transparency of real estate publicity and serves as a powerful call for maximum professional diligence. To effectively protect one's rights, it is always advisable to rely on experienced professionals.