Commentary on Judgment No. 9670 of 2024: Property Release and Enforcement Title

The recent order No. 9670 of April 10, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers important insights into real estate enforcement proceedings. The central issue concerns the nature of the order for the release of the foreclosed property and its legal consequences for the parties involved.

Regulatory Context

The Court ruled on the provision set forth in Article 560, paragraph 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure, as amended by Decree-Law No. 59 of 2016 and Law No. 119 of 2016. According to these provisions, the release order is not considered an independent enforcement title, but rather an act within the real estate expropriation process. This implies that it cannot be used to initiate a separate enforcement for eviction.

• The release of the property is an act that must follow the procedures established by the enforcement process.
• Parties adversely affected by the release order can protect their rights through an objection to enforcement acts, as provided for by Article 617 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
• This approach aims to prevent abuses and ensure that debtors' rights are respected during forced execution.

The Ruling's Principle

The provision by which the enforcement judge, pursuant to Article 560, paragraph 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure, as amended by Decree-Law No. 59 of 2016, converted with modifications by Law No. 119 of 2016, orders the release of the foreclosed property does not constitute an independent enforcement title suitable for founding a separate eviction enforcement, but rather an act of the real estate expropriation process subject to de-formalized implementation directly by the judge's auxiliaries who issued it, with the consequence that the parties involved or prejudiced by such provision can seek protection of their claims exclusively through objections to enforcement acts.

This principle clarifies that, although the release order may seem like a simple measure, it requires correct interpretation by all parties involved in the enforcement process. Indeed, debtors and third parties who believe they have been harmed by such an order have specific defense mechanisms available.

Conclusions

The Court of Cassation's judgment represents an important reference point for legal professionals and citizens involved in forced execution procedures. It is crucial to understand that the release order must not be underestimated and that it is possible to oppose its effect through the appropriate legal channels. In this context, legal advice becomes crucial to ensure that the rights of all parties involved are adequately protected.