Arbitral Digest

Matter

Greylag Goose Leasing 1446 Designated Activity Company v Garuda Indonesia Holiday France (Paris Court of Appeal RG 23/01039)

  1. 25 November 2022France

    25 November 2022France

    Judgment of the Paris Commercial Court in case RG 2022042750 dated 25 November 2022

    Paris Commercial Court

    Case no.
    RG 2022042750
    Decision summary
    The Paris Commercial Court found that Greylag did not hold a certain, liquid and due claim against Garuda Indonesia Holiday France, rejected the application to open liquidation proceedings, dismissed Garuda France's abuse-of-process damages claim, and ordered Greylag to pay EUR 10,000 under Article 700 of the French Code of Civil Procedure.

    Supporting details

    2 participants
    Greylag Goose Leasing 1446 Designated Activity Company
    Garuda Indonesia Holiday France
    Paris Commercial Court

    2 months and 15 days later · 76 days

  2. 9 February 2023France

    9 February 2023France

    Judgment of the enforcement judge of the Paris Judicial Court dated 9 February 2023

    Paris Judicial Court, enforcement judge

    Decision summary
    The enforcement judge ordered the lifting of the conservatory seizures made by Greylag against Garuda Indonesia Holiday France, holding that the claim was not established because of the waiver imposed by the Jakarta Commercial Court judgment approving Garuda Indonesia's restructuring plan.

    Supporting details

    2 participants
    Greylag Goose Leasing 1446 Designated Activity Company
    Garuda Indonesia Holiday France
    Paris Judicial Court, enforcement judge

    10 months and 5 days later · 308 days

  3. 14 December 2023France

    14 December 2023France

    Decision of the Paris Court of Appeal in case RG 23/01039 dated 14 December 2023

    Paris Court of Appeal

    Case no.
    RG 23/01039
    Decision summary
    The Paris Court of Appeal held that Greylag's claim against Garuda Indonesia Holiday France was disputed and therefore did not constitute due and payable liabilities for purposes of opening insolvency proceedings. It set aside the first-instance finding that the application was inadmissible, rejected the request to stay proceedings, dismissed the applications to open liquidation or judicial reorganisation proceedings, upheld the rejection of Garuda France's abuse-of-process damages claim, and ordered Greylag to pay costs and EUR 30,000 under Article 700 of the French Code of Civil Procedure.

    Supporting details

    2 authorities · 13 participants
    Greylag Goose Leasing 1446 Designated Activity Company
    Representative
    Matthieu Boccon Gibod (For: Greylag Goose Leasing 1446 Designated Activity Company)
    Representative
    SELARL Lexavoue Paris-Versailles (For: Greylag Goose Leasing 1446 Designated Activity Company)
    Representative
    Nicolas Crocq (For: Greylag Goose Leasing 1446 Designated Activity Company)
    Representative
    Julien De Michele (For: Greylag Goose Leasing 1446 Designated Activity Company)
    Garuda Indonesia Holiday France
    Representative
    Benjamin Moisan (For: Garuda Indonesia Holiday France)
    Representative
    SELARL Baechlin Moisan Associés (For: Garuda Indonesia Holiday France)
    Representative
    Aude Dupuis (For: Garuda Indonesia Holiday France)
    Paris Court of Appeal
    Other
    Institutional administrator
    Saoussen Hakiri

    Authorities cited

    2
    • French Commercial Code
      statute
    • French Code of Civil Procedure
      statute

Matter record

Report a correction

Greylag Goose Leasing 1446 Designated Activity Company v Garuda Indonesia Holiday France (Paris Court of Appeal RG 23/01039) · Matter