Third-party Ownership Claim to Demand Ownership of a Seized Property in Execution
1. Definition of Third-Party Ownership Claim
A Third-Party Ownership claim is a lawsuit filed by a third party before the court to claim ownership of a property that has been seized, seeking the annulment of the execution procedures concerning the sale of that property. It is considered a substantive (main) claim submitted to the trial judge of the competent court and is filed by means of a statement of claim in accordance with the usual procedures for filing substantive lawsuits, as stipulated in Article (64) of the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law.
2. The Parties to the Third-Party Ownership Claim
1. The Claimant: The plaintiff is a third party — someone who is not part of the original case or the enforcement proceedings. Therefore, such a claim is inadmissible if filed by any party involved in the enforcement process.
2. The Defendant: The defendant includes the seizing creditor (the enforcement applicant), the creditors holding registered rights over the property, and the debtor (the person against whom enforcement is carried out), or as the case may be, the possessor or the real guarantor.
3. When the Third-Party Ownership Claim May Be Filed
The Third-Party Ownership claim must be filed after enforcement has commenced on the property — that is, after the debtor has been notified of the foreclosure warning, and before the sale is completed by the issuance of the sale confirmation judgment.
4. The Legal Basis for the Third-Party Ownership Claim
Article (408) of the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law provides that:
“A third party may request the annulment of enforcement procedures together with a claim of ownership of the seized property, or part thereof, by filing a lawsuit in the ordinary manner before the competent court. The lawsuit shall include as defendants the seizing creditor, the creditors referred to in Article (399), and the debtor, possessor, or real guarantor. The court shall, at the first hearing, order the suspension of the sale procedures if the statement of claim contains a precise description of the ownership evidence or the facts of possession on which the claim is based, and if it is accompanied by supporting documents. However, if the date set for the sale arrives before the court issues a suspension order, the claimant may request the enforcement judge to suspend the sale at least three days before the scheduled sale session. No appeal shall be allowed, by any means, against judgments issued under the two preceding paragraphs regarding suspension or continuation of the sale.”
5. The Effect of the Third-Party Ownership Claim on Suspending Enforcement Procedures
A ruling issued to suspend the sale or to proceed with it – that is, a rejection of the request to suspend the sale – is not subject to appeal by any means according to Article (408) of the Civil and Commercial Procedures Law.
If the entitlement claims concerns only part of the seized properties, the sale is not suspended with respect to the remaining properties. Nevertheless, the enforcement judge may, upon the request of the concerned party, order the suspension of the sale for all properties if strong reasons justify this, according to Article (409) of the same law.
The court considers the Third-Party Ownership claim in accordance with general rules, and the proof of ownership is subject to general rules. It is presumed that the possessor is the owner, and anyone claiming otherwise must prove their claim by legally acceptable means of evidence.
6. Copies of the Judgment Issued in the Third-Party Ownership Claim
There are two possibilities regarding the judicial ruling issued in the Third-Party Ownership claim, as follows:
- Judgment in favor of the claimant: If the court rules to accept the claim, it shall order the entitlement of the property to the claimant and annul the enforcement procedures accordingly. This judgment results in the cancellation of the enforcement measures already carried out, and it would not be possible to initiate them again on the same property by the creditors involved in the case.
- Judgment dismissing the claim: In this case, the court may include in its ruling an order for immediate enforceability, allowing the continuation of enforcement procedures that had previously been suspended by a court order.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, we ask Allah Almighty that this effort and work be sincerely for His noble sake. May Allah guide our steps, bless the efforts, and make this study and work beneficial. He is All-Hearing, All-Responding.
Prepared by: Dr. Mohammed Gharbawi
Al-Alawi & Co – Lawyers and Legal Consultants
Muscat, Sultanate of Oman