-
- Art. 3 FC
- Art. 5a FC
- Art. 6 FC
- Art. 10 FC
- Art. 13 FC
- Art. 16 FC
- Art. 17 FC
- Art. 20 FC
- Art. 22 FC
- Art. 26 FC
- Art. 29a FC
- Art. 30 FC
- Art. 31 FC
- Art. 32 FC
- Art. 42 FC
- Art. 43 FC
- Art. 43a FC
- Art. 45 FC
- Art. 55 FC
- Art. 56 FC
- Art. 60 FC
- Art. 68 FC
- Art. 74 FC
- Art. 75b FC
- Art. 77 FC
- Art. 81 FC
- Art. 96 para. 1 FC
- Art. 96 para. 2 lit. a FC
- Art. 110 FC
- Art. 117a FC
- Art. 118 FC
- Art. 123a FC
- Art. 123b FC
- Art. 130 FC
- Art. 136 FC
- Art. 164 FC
- Art. 166 FC
- Art. 170 FC
- Art. 178 FC
- Art. 189 FC
- Art. 191 FC
-
- Art. 11 CO
- Art. 12 CO
- Art. 50 CO
- Art. 51 CO
- Art. 84 CO
- Art. 97 CO
- Art. 98 CO
- Art. 99 CO
- Art. 100 CO
- Art. 143 CO
- Art. 144 CO
- Art. 145 CO
- Art. 146 CO
- Art. 147 CO
- Art. 148 CO
- Art. 149 CO
- Art. 150 CO
- Art. 633 CO
- Art. 701 CO
- Art. 715 CO
- Art. 715a CO
- Art. 734f CO
- Art. 785 CO
- Art. 786 CO
- Art. 787 CO
- Art. 788 CO
- Art. 808c CO
- Transitional provisions to the revision of the Stock Corporation Act of June 19, 2020
-
- Art. 2 PRA
- Art. 3 PRA
- Art. 4 PRA
- Art. 6 PRA
- Art. 10 PRA
- Art. 10a PRA
- Art. 11 PRA
- Art. 12 PRA
- Art. 13 PRA
- Art. 14 PRA
- Art. 15 PRA
- Art. 16 PRA
- Art. 17 PRA
- Art. 19 PRA
- Art. 20 PRA
- Art. 21 PRA
- Art. 22 PRA
- Art. 23 PRA
- Art. 24 PRA
- Art. 25 PRA
- Art. 26 PRA
- Art. 27 PRA
- Art. 29 PRA
- Art. 30 PRA
- Art. 31 PRA
- Art. 32 PRA
- Art. 32a PRA
- Art. 33 PRA
- Art. 34 PRA
- Art. 35 PRA
- Art. 36 PRA
- Art. 37 PRA
- Art. 38 PRA
- Art. 39 PRA
- Art. 40 PRA
- Art. 41 PRA
- Art. 42 PRA
- Art. 43 PRA
- Art. 44 PRA
- Art. 45 PRA
- Art. 46 PRA
- Art. 47 PRA
- Art. 48 PRA
- Art. 49 PRA
- Art. 50 PRA
- Art. 51 PRA
- Art. 52 PRA
- Art. 53 PRA
- Art. 54 PRA
- Art. 55 PRA
- Art. 56 PRA
- Art. 57 PRA
- Art. 58 PRA
- Art. 59a PRA
- Art. 59b PRA
- Art. 59c PRA
- Art. 60 PRA
- Art. 60a PRA
- Art. 62 PRA
- Art. 63 PRA
- Art. 64 PRA
- Art. 67 PRA
- Art. 67a PRA
- Art. 67b PRA
- Art. 73 PRA
- Art. 73a PRA
- Art. 75 PRA
- Art. 75a PRA
- Art. 76 PRA
- Art. 76a PRA
- Art. 90 PRA
-
- Art. 1 IMAC
- Art. 1a IMAC
- Art. 3 para. 1 and 2 IMAC
- Art. 8 IMAC
- Art. 8a IMAC
- Art. 11b IMAC
- Art. 16 IMAC
- Art. 17 IMAC
- Art. 17a IMAC
- Art. 32 IMAC
- Art. 35 IMAC
- Art. 47 IMAC
- Art. 54 IMAC
- Art. 55a IMAC
- Art. 63 IMAC
- Art. 67 IMAC
- Art. 67a IMAC
- Art. 74 IMAC
- Art. 74a IMAC
- Art. 80 IMAC
- Art. 80a IMAC
- Art. 80b IMAC
- Art. 80c IMAC
- Art. 80d IMAC
- Art. 80h IMAC
- Art. 80k IMAC
-
- Vorb. zu Art. 1 FADP
- Art. 1 FADP
- Art. 2 FADP
- Art. 3 FADP
- Art. 4 FADP
- Art. 5 lit. c FADP
- Art. 5 lit. d FADP
- Art. 5 lit. f und g FADP
- Art. 6 para. 3-5 FADP
- Art. 6 Abs. 6 and 7 FADP
- Art. 7 FADP
- Art. 10 FADP
- Art. 11 FADP
- Art. 12 FADP
- Art. 14 FADP
- Art. 15 FADP
- Art. 18 FADP
- Art. 19 FADP
- Art. 20 FADP
- Art. 22 FADP
- Art. 23 FADP
- Art. 25 FADP
- Art. 26 FADP
- Art. 27 FADP
- Art. 31 para. 2 lit. e FADP
- Art. 33 FADP
- Art. 34 FADP
- Art. 35 FADP
- Art. 38 FADP
- Art. 39 FADP
- Art. 40 FADP
- Art. 41 FADP
- Art. 42 FADP
- Art. 43 FADP
- Art. 44 FADP
- Art. 44a FADP
- Art. 45 FADP
- Art. 46 FADP
- Art. 47 FADP
- Art. 47a FADP
- Art. 48 FADP
- Art. 49 FADP
- Art. 50 FADP
- Art. 51 FADP
- Art. 52 FADP
- Art. 54 FADP
- Art. 55 FADP
- Art. 57 FADP
- Art. 58 FADP
- Art. 60 FADP
- Art. 61 FADP
- Art. 62 FADP
- Art. 63 FADP
- Art. 64 FADP
- Art. 65 FADP
- Art. 66 FADP
- Art. 67 FADP
- Art. 69 FADP
- Art. 72 FADP
- Art. 72a FADP
-
- Art. 2 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 3 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 4 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 5 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 6 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 7 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 8 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 9 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 11 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 12 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 16 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 18 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 25 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 27 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 28 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 29 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 32 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 33 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
- Art. 34 CCC (Convention on Cybercrime)
-
- Art. 2 para. 1 AMLA
- Art. 2a para. 1-2 and 4-5 AMLA
- Art. 2 para. 2 AMLA
- Art. 2 para. 3 AMLA
- Art. 3 AMLA
- Art. 7 AMLA
- Art. 7a AMLA
- Art. 8 AMLA
- Art. 8a AMLA
- Art. 11 AMLA
- Art. 14 AMLA
- Art. 15 AMLA
- Art. 20 AMLA
- Art. 23 AMLA
- Art. 24 AMLA
- Art. 24a AMLA
- Art. 25 AMLA
- Art. 26 AMLA
- Art. 26a AMLA
- Art. 27 AMLA
- Art. 28 AMLA
- Art. 29 AMLA
- Art. 29a AMLA
- Art. 29b AMLA
- Art. 30 AMLA
- Art. 31 AMLA
- Art. 31a AMLA
- Art. 32 AMLA
- Art. 33 AMLA
- Art. 34 AMLA
- Art. 38 AMLA
FEDERAL CONSTITUTION
MEDICAL DEVICES ORDINANCE
CODE OF OBLIGATIONS
FEDERAL LAW ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW
LUGANO CONVENTION
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE
FEDERAL ACT ON POLITICAL RIGHTS
CIVIL CODE
FEDERAL ACT ON CARTELS AND OTHER RESTRAINTS OF COMPETITION
FEDERAL ACT ON INTERNATIONAL MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
DEBT ENFORCEMENT AND BANKRUPTCY ACT
FEDERAL ACT ON DATA PROTECTION
CRIMINAL CODE
CYBERCRIME CONVENTION
COMMERCIAL REGISTER ORDINANCE
FEDERAL ACT ON COMBATING MONEY LAUNDERING AND TERRORIST FINANCING
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
FEDERAL ACT ON THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSFER OF CULTURAL PROPERTY
- I. General Provisions
- II. Requirements for Assignment
- III. Assignment and Its Consequences
- IV. Distribution of the Proceeds of the Lawsuit (para. 2)
- V. Possibility of Realization under Art. 256 DEBA (para. 3)
- Bibliography
I. General Provisions
A. Purpose
1 Pursuant to Art. 240 of DEBA, the bankruptcy administration must carry out all transactions necessary for the preservation and realization of the estate and, pursuant to Art. 243 para. 1 DEBA, collect undisputed, due claims of the estate or the debtor.
2 Art. 260 DEBA establishes the method of realization for all those items of the bankruptcy estate that are not (or cannot be) primarily converted into cash through a private sale (Art. 256 DEBA) or an auction (Art. 257 et seq. DEBA). Furthermore, Paulian avoidance claims are, by law, excluded from both private sales (Art. 256 DEBA) and auctions (Art. 257 et seq. DEBA) (Art. 256 para. 4 DEBA); the enforcement of Paulian avoidance claims is therefore only possible in accordance with Art. 260 DEBA (see also, in particular, para. 1 of Art. 10 of the VPAV).
B. Legal Nature
3 Legal doctrine and case law characterize the legal nature of the assignment under Art. 260 para. 1 DEBA as a sui generis institution under debt enforcement and procedural law. The legal nature of the assignment is likened to that of assignment, agency law, and litigation representation: The two elements that assignment and the assignment under Art. 260 DEBA have in common are, on the one hand, the conduct of a lawsuit in one’s own name, at one’s own expense and risk. On the other hand, the right to sue is accessory as a secondary right to the bankruptcy claim within the meaning of Art. 170 CO. It passes to the assignee upon assignment of the bankruptcy claim. With regard to the law of agency, the Federal Supreme Court has on various occasions likened assignment to a debt collection mandate. Ultimately, the Federal Supreme Court characterizes assignment as an institution that can be described as litigation representation. Litigation representation grants the representative the right to assert the legal claim of the substantive rights holder in their own name.
II. Requirements for Assignment
A. Ongoing Bankruptcy Proceedings
4 The assignment takes place during ongoing (ordinary or summary) bankruptcy proceedings. The bankruptcy must therefore not have been revoked, suspended, or concluded at the time of the assignment.
5 After the conclusion of the bankruptcy, however, newly discovered, doubtful claims are brought to the attention of the bankruptcy creditors in accordance with Art. 269 para. 3 DEBA, whereupon the procedure under Art. 260 DEBA applies; without, however, the entity deleted from the Commercial Register (Art. 935 CO; Art. 159a para. 1 lit. b CRO) would have to be re-registered.
B. Assignable Legal Claims
6 Para. 260(1) DEBA provides that legal claims may be assigned to creditors of the bankrupt debtor. This includes claims on assets and liabilities (i.e., powers to increase and preserve the estate) alike.
7 Claims for the increase of the estate include, for example, claims in rem or contractual claims to which the estate is entitled. As a rule, these are disputed claims, such as claims for rescission under the Act of Paul or liability claims against corporate bodies (Art. 754 et seq. CO).
8 Claims for the preservation of the estate include, in particular, the contestation of a claim for separation, claims against the debtor that were already pending at the time of the opening of bankruptcy proceedings, or doubtful estate liabilities (e.g., the trustee’s fees).
C. Creditor Status
9 By law, the right of assignment is available only to those creditors who have been admitted to the list of claims or whose claim has not been definitively dismissed. If the admission of a bankruptcy creditor to the list of claims is not yet final, the assignment is subject to a resolutive condition. Upon the final dismissal of the admission to the list of claims, the assignment lapses eo ipso.
10 According to Federal Supreme Court case law and prevailing doctrine, so-called chain assignment is permissible. Such a situation arises when an assignee creditor himself goes into bankruptcy and the right to sue against the third-party debtor to which he is entitled is assigned to his bankruptcy creditors.
11 The assignment to the third-party debtor or the purported obligor against whom the assigned claim is directed (or to a person closely related to him) is void.
D. Waiver Resolution by the Body of Creditors
12 The waiver resolution, which takes effect within the bankruptcy proceedings, must be adopted with the involvement of all bankruptcy creditors, whereby silence on the part of the bankruptcy creditors regarding the motion for the resolution is deemed consent.
13 In ordinary bankruptcy proceedings, the waiver resolution is generally adopted at the second creditors’ meeting; in rare cases, the waiver resolution may also be adopted at the first meeting, at a special creditors’ meeting, or by circular resolution.
14 In summary bankruptcy proceedings, the waiver resolution is generally adopted by circular resolution, as creditors’ meetings are not usually provided for or are convened only under special circumstances (para. 231(3)(1) DEBA).
E. Assignment Request by at Least One Bankruptcy Creditor
15 The request for assignment may be filed by any bankruptcy creditor within the time limit set by the bankruptcy administration.
16 In ordinary bankruptcy proceedings, the minimum time limit is 10 days.
17 For summary bankruptcy proceedings, the bankruptcy administration generally sets a time limit of 10–20 days following service of the circular letter.
III. Assignment and Its Consequences
A. Mandatory Use of Form
18 The assignment is effected by a formal order using Form 7k (Art. 80 KOV), which must contain the following mandatory information:
“1. The assignment of the right to sue to a third party is only permissible in conjunction with an admitted bankruptcy claim.
2. The bankruptcy administration must be promptly notified of the outcome of the assertion of the rights in question, whether judicial or extrajudicial, with supporting documents attached.
3. If the steps taken to assert the rights are wholly or partially successful, the proceeds, insofar as they consist of cash, may be retained after deduction of costs to cover the aforementioned claim; any surplus must be remitted to the estate. If the proceeds do not consist of cash, they must be handed over to the bankruptcy administration for realization.
4. Receipts for the costs incurred must be submitted to the bankruptcy administration. Any awarded litigation costs against the opposing party must either be deducted or assigned to the bankruptcy administration for collection.
5. If multiple assignments regarding the same estate rights have been made to different creditors, they must appear as intervenors in any legal proceedings, and the shares of the proceeds attributable to each will be determined by the bankruptcy administration in a distribution list to be prepared following receipt of the report on the outcome of the assertion of claims.
6. The bankruptcy administration reserves the right to annul the assignment if a claim is not asserted in court within a period to be set by it.
7. The creditors concerned are liable for any disadvantage incurred by the estate as a result of negligent litigation.”
19 These requirements therefore constitute the minimum content that the assignment order must contain. It is also required that the assignment creditors be named by name or business name in the assignment order; at the same time, the amount of the bankruptcy claim is to be recorded in CHF (Art. 211 para. 1 DEBA applies analogously to foreign currency claims), provided this amount has already been determined; otherwise, a pro memoria note is made (see Art. 63 para. 1 KOV). This information is necessary so that the respective assignee can identify themselves accordingly, whether vis-à-vis the obligor and/or the respective authority.
20 In addition, in our view, it is permissible to include additional conditions in Form 7k (e.g., if there are multiple assignees, certain coordination aspects may be listed).
21 By analogy with Art. 129 CPC, the assignment order is drafted in the official language of the place of bankruptcy.
B. Duration of the Assignment
22 The bankruptcy administration sets a deadline for judicial enforcement for the assignee(s) (no. 6 of Form 7k).
23 This deadline is a procedural deadline intended to ensure prompt action by the assignees. The deadline may be extended. The expiration of the procedural deadline does not automatically result in the lapse of the assignment order. Rather, this requires formal revocation by the bankruptcy administration.
24 The deadlines set forth in Art. 33(1) BIV-FINMA (bankruptcy of banks) and Art. 32(1) VKV-FINMA (insurance bankruptcy) are structured not as procedural deadlines but as forfeiture deadlines.
C. Assignment to Multiple Assignment Creditors in Particular
25 The assignment order grants each assignee the right to sue regarding the claim against the third-party debtor to which the bankrupt debtor is entitled.
26 In the context of the plaintiff’s enforcement of the claim, the assignees constitute so-called non-proper necessary co-plaintiffs. As with necessary joinder, the assignees must seek a uniform judgment.
27 According to Federal Supreme Court case law and prevailing doctrine, each assignee is entitled to a right to bring an individual action based on the granted right to sue. Against this background, it is conceivable that an assignee might initiate an action without the others. In our view, neither a court nor the bankruptcy administration can compel the other assignees to participate in an individual action.
28 Courts review the composition of the co-litigants using Form 7k, which lists the names of all assignees as of the date of the order.
29 If it turns out that only one or a portion of the assignees is proceeding with the lawsuit, the courts must issue a decision to dismiss the case for lack of standing to sue, which is examined as a prerequisite for the lawsuit.
30 A decision to dismiss the case can be avoided, in particular, if the assigned creditors not involved in the proceedings waive their standing to sue, join the proceedings as intervenors, or assign their bankruptcy claims to the assigned creditor bringing the individual action.
31 The initiation of parallel proceedings with consolidation is also conceivable. In our view, the bankruptcy administration cannot compel the remaining assignees to exercise any of the aforementioned coordination options. For this reason, the only effective means of enforcing claims is, in principle, the joint initiation of legal action by the assignees. If the assignees cannot agree on the elements necessary for initiating the action, such as territorial or subject-matter jurisdiction or the timing of the action, the bankruptcy administration must issue authoritative guidelines. The bankruptcy administration revokes the assignment order for assignees who act contrary to the guidelines.
32 The Federal Supreme Court and prevailing doctrine permit the assignees to conduct the proceedings inconsistently. The rationale is the differing interests of the assignees regarding the distribution of proceeds. For courts, this means that they may be confronted with multiple submissions from the assignees. Courts must resolve contradictions regarding factual allegations or motions for evidence through their judicial assessment of the evidence.
33 Another distinctive feature of non-genuine necessary joinder is that assignees have a right to withdraw from the proceedings at any time without the proceedings ending for the other parties to the action.
34 For further details regarding the preceding elements of non-genuine necessary joinder under Art. 260 DEBA and regarding further specific issues, such as the effect of an individual lawsuit or individual debt enforcement proceeding on the interruption of the statute of limitations, the modalities of a genuine or separate settlement with the third-party debtor, the joinder of an assignee-creditor with a subsequent assignment order within the meaning of Art. 251 DEBA, the assignment of the bankruptcy claim and its effect on the joint litigation, and the allocation of litigation costs, reference is made to Stähli.
D. (Partial) Revocation of the Assignment
35 Pursuant to No. 6 of Form 7k, the bankruptcy administration may revoke the assignment against an assignee after setting a deadline for the judicial assertion of the claim. This authority ensures that assignees do not delay the enforcement of the claim. If there is disagreement among assignment creditors as to how the claim should be enforced, the bankruptcy administration may issue instructions to the assignment creditors. If some of the assignment creditors refuse to comply with the instructions, the bankruptcy administration may revoke their assignment after the deadline has expired.
36 The legal effect of the revocation—namely, the loss of the right to sue by the assignee creditors affected by the revocation order—does not take effect upon the expiration of the deadline, but only upon the issuance of the revocation order. The issuance of the revocation order after the deadline has expired is at the discretion of the bankruptcy administration.
E. Liability of Assignment Creditors
37 Form 7k provides in no. 7 that assignment creditors are liable to the estate for losses arising from negligent litigation by the assignment creditors. Form 7k does not further define what exactly is meant by “negligent litigation.” The Federal Supreme Court has held in this regard that assignees are not liable if they do not assert the debtor’s full claim against the third-party debtor. Assignees are free to enforce even only a portion of the claim in the form of a partial action or through a settlement.
38 Liability to the estate, on the other hand, is conceivable if an assignee, through his actions, places the estate in a situation that is less favorable than it would have been had no assignment taken place. An example of this is an assignee who has the claim assigned to him and subsequently fails to interrupt the statute of limitations.
IV. Distribution of the Proceeds of the Lawsuit (para. 2)
39 Entitled to proceeds are assignees who have participated in the enforcement of the plaintiff’s claim, i.e., who have not withdrawn from the proceedings prior to the pronouncement of the judgment. The proceeds constitute “the premium for the effort expended to achieve the outcome of the proceedings and, in particular, for assuming the risk of having to bear the litigation costs.”
40 To calculate the proceeds to be distributed among the assignees, the costs incurred in the context of the claim and which are deductible are first deducted from the generated proceeds. The proceeds are distributed in accordance with the system set forth in Art. 219 DEBA. Assignment creditors whose bankruptcy claims have been collated in a preceding class are satisfied first. Within the same class, the allocation is made according to the value ratio of the collated claims. If there are multiple assignment creditors, the bankruptcy administration prepares a special distribution list by class and amount of the respective bankruptcy claims (Art. 86 KOV).
41 If there is a surplus exceeding the collated claims of the assignee creditors, this surplus accrues to the estate. In practice, such a surplus is extremely rare, as an assignee creditor will typically limit the amount of the claim to the amount of their collated claim in order to reduce the risk of litigation costs.
V. Possibility of Realization under Art. 256 DEBA (para. 3)
42 Art. 260 para. 3 DEBA provides that, in the event that all creditors waive the assertion of the claims to be assigned and do not demand an assignment, the claims may be realized pursuant to Art. 256 DEBA. This means that such claims may be realized through auction or private sale.
43 This is intended to allow the bankruptcy administration, as a last resort, to attempt to realize even these illiquid claims—for which no assignee could be found. However, claims for avoidance under the Act of 1864 are not subject to realization under Art. 256 DEBA (Art. 256 para. 4 DEBA); they consequently lapse and must be written off in the bankruptcy inventory.
44 Unlike in the case of assignment under Art. 260 DEBA and Art. 80 KOV, a realization pursuant to Art. 256 DEBA results in the illiquid claim being removed from the estate; therefore, both the award in a forced sale (Art. 258 DEBA) and any private sale (Art. 256 DEBA), as acts of public authority, result in the acquisition of the illiquid claim. Consequently, Art. 260 para. 2 DEBA also does not apply. Any positive outcome of the proceedings is always due solely to the acquirer. Consequently, the acquirer is under no obligation to surrender any surplus that may be realized.
45 However, the bankruptcy administration is not required to always attempt to realize illiquid, non-assigned claims pursuant to Art. 260(3) in conjunction with Art. 256 DEBA, as is evident from the discretionary wording in para. 3 of Art. 260 DEBA. In our view, it is rather within the discretion of the bankruptcy administration to decide whether realization pursuant to Art. 260 para. 3 in conjunction with Art. 256 DEBA is even an option.
46 However, if the illiquid claim cannot be realized even through a forced sale and/or private sale, it falls out of the bankruptcy estate. With reference to Lorandi, this means nothing other than that the bankrupt regains the power of disposal under Art. 204 DEBA partially and solely with respect to the relevant claim. The debtor regains the power of disposal eo ipso by virtue of the fact that a realization within the meaning of Art. 260 para. 3 in conjunction with Art. 256 DEBA cannot or could not take place.
Bibliography
Amonn Kurt/Walther Fridolin, Grundriss des Schuldbetreibungs- und Konkursrechts, 9. Aufl., Bern 2013.
Bachofner Eva, Kommentierungen zu Art. 260 SchKG, in: Staehelin Daniel/Bauer Thomas/Lorandi Franco (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Bundesgesetz über Schuldbetreibung und Konkurs, Bd. 2, 3. Aufl., Basel 2021 (zit. BSK SchKG II-Bachofner).
Bommer Florian, Kommentierung zu Art. 48 KOV, in: Milani Dominik/Wohlgemuth Marc, Verordnung über die Geschäftsführung der Konkursämter (KOV) - Kommentar, Zürich 2016 (zit. KOV Komm.-Bommer).
Bürgi Urs, Kommentierungen zu Art. 251 SchKG, in: Staehelin Daniel/Bauer Thomas/Lorandi Franco (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Bundesgesetz über Schuldbetreibung und Konkurs, Bd. 2, 3. Aufl., Basel 2021 (zit. BSK SchKG II-Bürgi).
Bürgi Urs, Kommentierungen zu Art. 260 SchKG, in: Hunkeler Daniel (Hrsg.), Kurzkommentar SchKG, Schuldbetreibungs- und Konkursgesetz, 3. Aufl., Basel 2025 (zit. Kuko SchKG-Bürgi).
Daetwyler George/Stalder Christian, Zum Verfahren des Zürcher Handelsgerichts: Allgemeiner Verfahrensgang und Zuständigkeit des Handelsgerichts, in: Alexander Brunner/Peter Nobel (Hrsg.), Handelsgericht Zürich 1866–2016: Zuständigkeit, Verfahren und Entwicklung, Zürich 2016, S. 139–162.
Flachsmann Jean, Die Abtretung der Rechtsansprüche der Konkursmasse nach Art. 260 SchKG, Diss. 1927.
Fritzsche Hans/Walder Hans Ulrich, Schuldbetreibung und Konkurs nach schweizerischem Recht, Bd. II, Zürich 1993 (zit. Fritzsche/Walder, Bd. II).
Gilliéron Pierre Robert, Commentaire de la loi fédérale sur la poursuite pour dettes et la faillite, Articles 159–270, Lausanne 2001 (zit. Gilliéron, Commentaire LP).
Gilliéron Pierre Robert, Poursuite pour dettes, faillite et concordat, 5. Aufl., Basel 2012 (zit. Gilliéron, Poursuite).
Grolimund Pascal/Ammann Dario, Kommentierung zu § 13, in: Staehelin Daniel/Grolimund Pascal, Zivilprozessrecht: Unter Einbezug des Anwaltsrecht und des internationalen Zivilprozessrechts, 4. Aufl., Zürich 2024 (zit. Grolimund/Ammann, in: Staehelin/Grolimund).
Habscheid Walther, Schweizerisches Zivilprozess- und Gerichtsorganisationsrecht: Ein Lehrbuch seiner Grundlagen, 2. Aufl., Basel 1990.
Handschin Lukas/Jung Peter, Zürcher Kommentar, Die Aktiengesellschaft, Rechte und Pflichten der Aktionäre, Art. 660-697m OR, 2. Aufl., Zürich 2021.
Häuptli Matthias, Kommentierung zu Art. 80 KOV, in: Milani Dominik/Wohlgemuth Marc, Verordnung über die Geschäftsführung der Konkursämter (KOV) - Kommentar, Zürich 2016 (zit. KOV Komm.-Häuptli).
Jeanneret Vincent/Karina Beaud, Kommentierung zu Art. 260 SchKG, in: Dallèves Louis /Foëx Bénédict/Jeandin Nicolas (Hrsg.), Commentaire romand, Commentaire de la Loi fédérale sur la poursuite pour dettes et la faillite ainsi que des articles 166 à 175 de la Loi fédérale sur le droit international privé, 2. Aufl., Basel 2025 (zit. CR LP-Jeanneret/Beaud).
Kren Kostkiewicz Jolanta, Orell Füssli Kommentar, SchKG Kommentar, 20. Aufl., Zürich 2020 (zit. OFK SchKG-Kren Kostkiewicz).
Leuch Georg et al., Die Zivilprozessordnung für den Kanton Bern, Kommentar samt einem Anhang zugehöriger Erlasse, 5. Aufl., Bern 2000.
Leuenberger Christoph, Die Streitgenossenschaft der Abtretungsgläubiger nach Art. 260 SchKG, in: Riemer Hans et al. (Hrsg.), Schweizerisches und internationales Zwangsvollstreckungsrecht, Festschrift für Karl Spühler, Zürich 2005, S. 195–206 (zit. Leuenberger, Streitgenossenschaft).
Leuenberger Christoph/Uffer-Tobler Beatrice, Kommentar zur Zivilprozessordnung des Kantons St. Gallen, Bern 1999.
Lorandi Franco, Abtretung gemäss Art. 260 SchKG bei Vergleich und im Prozess, BlSchK 2008, S. 41–49 (zit. Lorandi, Vergleich).
Lorandi Franco, Abtretung gemäss Art. 260 SchKG an mehrere Gläubiger, Die Entzauberung der bedingt notwendigen Streitgenossenschaft, AJP 2019, S. 281–286 (zit. Lorandi, Gläubiger).
Lorandi Franco, Abtretung von Rechtsansprüchen gemäss Art. 260 SchKG, Grundlegendes und ausgewählte Fragen, in: Jeandin Nicolas et al. (Hrsg.), Sviluppi e orientamenti del diritto esecutivo federale: atti della giornata di studio del 20 ottobre 2011, Lugano 2012, S. 63–89 (zit. Lorandi, Abtretung).
Lorandi Franco, Entgeltliche Verwertung von strittigen Rechtsansprüchen in der Generalexekution, Teleologische Reduktion von Art. 260 Abs. 3 SchKG, AJP 2013, S. 1758–1764 (zit. Lorandi, Verwertung).
Lorandi Franco, Löschung einer Gesellschaft im Handelsregister nach Abschluss des Insolvenzverfahrens, Können Abtretungsgläubiger i.S.v. Art. 260 SchKG weiterhin vorgehen?, AJP 2018, S. 724–733 (zit. Lorandi, Löschung).
Lorandi Franco, Unzulässigkeit Insolvenzmassen übergreifender «Kettenabtretungen» gemäss Art. 260 SchKG, AJP 2007, S. 305–310 (zit. Lorandi, Kettenabtretung).
Lorandi Franco, Zirkularbeschlüsse im SchKG, ZZZ 2019, S. 31–40 (zit. Lorandi, Zirkularbeschlüsse).
Lötscher Cordula, Die Prozessstandschaft im schweizerischen Zivilprozess, Basel 2016 (zit. Lötscher, Prozessstandschaft).
Mabillard Ramon, Abtretung nach Art. 260 SchKG – Cession selon l'art. 260 LP – Cessione giusta l'artl 260 LEF, SZZP 2018, S. 158 ff.
Meier Isaak, Schweizerisches Zivilprozessrecht: Eine kritische Darstellung aus der Sicht von Praxis und Lehre, Zürich 2010 (zit. Meier, Zivilprozessrecht).
Milani Dominik, Die Koordination unter mehreren Abtretungsgläubigern nach Art. 260 SchKG, BlSchK 2019, S. 145–158 (zit. Milani, Koordination).
Muster Eric, Cession des droits de la masse (art. 260 LP) à de nombreux cessionnaires et consorité nécessaire : comment gérer cela?, in: Peroz Anne/ Haldy Jacques/Piotet Denis (Hrsg.), Du Plaict aux plaideurs, Mélanges en l'honneur du Professeur Denis Tappy, Bern 2024, S. 679 ff.
Schlaepfer Ralf, Abtretung streitiger Rechtsansprüche im Konkurs, Zürich 1990.
Schneller Yves, Die Organe der Aktiengesellschaft bei einer ordentlichen Fusion, Stellung, Pflichten und Verantwortlichkeit nach Fusionsgesetz, Zürich 2006.
Staehelin Matthias/Stojiljković Mladen, Kommentierungen zu Art. 261 SchKG, in: Staehelin Daniel/Bauer Thomas/Lorandi Franco (Hrsg.), Basler Kommentar, Bundesgesetz über Schuldbetreibung und Konkurs, Bd. 2, 3. Aufl., Basel 2021 (zit. BSK SchKG II-Staehelin/Stojiljković).
Stähli Jonas, Die aktive uneigentliche notwendige Streitgenossenschaft nach Art. 260 SchKG in der ZPO, Zürich 2024 (abrufbar unter diesem Link).
Stoffel Walter/Chabloz Isabelle, Voies d’exécution, Poursuite pour dettes, exécution de jugements et faillite en droit suisse, 3. Aufl., Bern 2016.
Tschumy Jean-Luc, Quelques réflexions à propos de la cession des droits de la masse au sens de l'art. 260 LP, JdT II 1999, S. 34–55.
Vogel Oscar, Die Rechtsprechung des Bundesgerichts zum Zivilprozessrecht im Jahre 1995, ZBJV 1996, S. 808–826.
von Holzen Cristina, Die Streitgenossenschaft im schweizerischen Zivilprozess, Basel 2006.