July 2026 – Final Annulment of Payment Order, for the sum of €50,786.00

By decision No. 3272/2026 of the Single-Member Court of Appeal of Athens, the appeal filed by the opposing debt-management company against our client was dismissed. The appeal had sought to overturn decision No. 9405/2024 of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Athens (special proceedings for property disputes), and the Court of Appeal thereby upheld the first-instance ruling.

Specifically, by decision No. 9405/2024 of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Athens, our objection against the payment order in question had been upheld, in relation to an alleged claim of €49,289.00, plus court costs of €1,497.00, for a total amount of €50,786.00. As we argued and substantiated—despite the opposing party’s contrary claims—it was proven that on the copy of the payment order served on our client, the presiding judge’s full name had been left blank, with only the judge’s signature affixed, a defect that caused procedural prejudice to our client.

As characteristically held in the first-instance decision:

“…From the entirety of the documents lawfully invoked and submitted by the parties, which the Court has evaluated either as direct evidence or for the purpose of drawing judicial inferences, it is proven that the copy of payment order No. 1741/2019 served on the objecting party does not state the full name of the judge of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Athens who issued it. Upon review of the aforementioned copy of the contested payment order, it is established that only the initials/signature of the judge of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Athens who issued it have been affixed, without the judge’s identity being ascertainable. This deficiency causes procedural prejudice to the objecting party, since the latter, not knowing which judge issued the contested payment order, was deprived of the right to request the recusal of that judge in the proceedings on the objection, in the event that the same person were assigned. Accordingly, this ground of objection must be upheld as substantively well-founded, and consequently the objection under examination must be upheld in its entirety on the merits, and the contested payment order No. 1741/2019 of the Judge of the Single-Member Court of First Instance of Athens must be annulled, rendering examination of the remaining grounds of objection unnecessary (Piraeus Court of Appeal 526/2003, ΔΕΕ 2004.59; Athens Court of Appeal 5824/2001, ΕλλΔνη 2002.189)…” This decision confirms the importance of strict compliance with the procedural requirements governing enforcement proceedings, which safeguard the effective exercise of the debtor’s rights of defense.