Index for Zandian French Court Documents
From Infogreffe: https://www.infogreffe.fr/societes/
|
1 |
Certificate of Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
Parties Involved (Zandian) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
Rulings, Ordinances, and Reports |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
Deadlines and Liabilities (3,048,980.34 euros) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
Assets (Says to see Canet) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
Outlook for Recovery |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
My Purchases |
|
|
French |
OCR |
Translated |
Certificate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97P01370 |
|
|
Translation from Canet. |
Zandian tagged with Computer World’s debts, up to 20M francs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2000L02400_2001 |
|
Zandian sued Damen Shipyard, case joined. |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2000L02400_2004 |
|
Damen settled by giving Zandian Hfl 2.1 million (Dutch Guiders) 1 NLG = eur 0.453780 = 952K euros. |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002L00750_2005 |
|
Vanan |
Shows creditors. Bank Melli is in for 19M francs. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002L00751_2014 |
|
Vanan |
Given that, according to Article 394 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the applicant may withdraw his request to terminate the instance and the action; |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004L02233 |
|
Replacing the Commissioner Judge |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007L01292 |
|
Vanan |
Zandian consented to the sale of an apartment, a cellar and a double parking. Located 23, Louis Poney Street, in Puteaux |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008L00380 |
|
Replacing the Commissioner Judge |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011L00791 |
|
Vanan |
The apartment in Puteaux brought in 300,000 euros; Zandian gave an additional 150,000 euros. The fate of 6 Fournier Street is not clear. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013L02353 |
|
Canet’s law firm took over for him as liquidator. December 2013. |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The French case might not even be valid anymore.
The reason is The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) (formally the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) which is an international treaty to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms in Europe, which France is obligated to observe.
There is a case on-point in the Paris International Litigation Bulletin no. 3 (Page 13) New decision against France due to the excessive length of judicial liquidation proceedings http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=446a6e1f-65ed-41f7-ad48-6347517c5dfd {File: pilb3.pdf}
New decision against France due to the excessive length of judicial liquidation proceedings
The right to have one's case tried within a reasonable period of time is one of the fundamental guarantees of a fair trial. As a consequence, the violation of Article 6, §1, of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (the "Convention") probably represents the ground having justified most of the sentences in criminal matters, but also in civil and commercial matters.
A new example is provided by the decision of the European Court of Human Rights ("ECHR") of 22 September 2011 in re Tetu v. France (no. 60983/09).
In this case, the claimant had initiated an action in 2009 before the ECHR to complain about the excessive length of the judicial liquidation of his farm, which had started in 1990 to end in 2011, i.e. 21 years later. According to him, the proceedings had not complied with the requirement of a reasonable time period and had deprived him of the availability of his goods, without ensuring an effective remedy.
These three grounds have been retained by the ECHR in its decision against France.
The case is about a farmer who had been in judicial liquidation for 21 years. France lost.
The article notes (starting first page, left column, last paragraph):
In light of these elements, the ECHR considered that the length of the proceedings was excessive and did not meet the requirement of a reasonable period of time pursuant to Article 6, §1, of the Convention. This decision is not the first decision handed down against France due to the excessive length of insolvency proceedings. A decision had notably already been handed down in 2002 (ECHR, 17 January 2002, no. 41476/98, Laine v. France).
The last paragraph of the article is the kicker:
This new decision against France handed down by the ECHR, on the triple ground of Articles 6, §1, and 13 of the Convention and Article 1 of Protocol 1, recalls the importance granted by the European Court to the measures that must be implemented by the bodies of the liquidation. The multiple constraints in terms of delays imposed by the French legislator, since the Company Safeguard Law no. 2005-845 of 26 July 2005, had already acted in favour of a restriction of the duration of insolvency proceedings. This decision will undoubtedly have a real impact on the future acts of the various parties involved.
Maybe Zandian should get himself a French attorney and see if he can make the French judgment go away.
Jed Margolin
November 20, 2016
.end