If the delegant's claim against the

Application pratique:

Under this case law, once the builder (the delegatee) accepted the delegation, the rent money became unavailable to the landlord or his creditors. The bank’s attachment is ineffective. The builder should inform the tenant of the delegation’s legal effect and continue receiving payments. If challenged, the builder should file a motion to lift the seizure, citing the delegatee’s exclusive right to immediate payment.

Application pratique:

Because the delegation was accepted by the manager before Alice’s purchase, the tenant’s obligation is to pay the manager, not Alice, until the €4,800 is paid off. Alice cannot disrupt this arrangement. She should request the delegation agreement from the seller and the manager, then consider seeking compensation from the seller for non-disclosure. As the new owner, she must wait or negotiate a buyout of the remaining delegated amount.

Application pratique:

Once the plumber accepted the delegation, the service charge funds became exclusively his, shielded from the co-owner’s other creditors (including the ex-spouse). The condominium association, as delegate, must pay the plumber directly and disregard the attachment order. The plumber should immediately challenge the seizure in court, referencing the 2006 ruling that nullifies competing claims against delegated sums. Keeping a copy of the accepted delegation agreement is essential evidence.