Koen Geens, the Minister of Justice, has announced his intention to make collective debt settlement a competence of the peace courts. Explanation follows.
A Project Under Consideration
In the fall of 2017, the Minister of Justice Koen Geens announced an upcoming reform of the legal aid system for the most disadvantaged individuals. It was on this topic that the daily newspaper Le Soir granted him an interview. It concluded with the question of the abolition of the peace courts. The minister denied this decision! And even announced an enhancement of their competences, notably mentioning collective debt settlement.
In October 2017, while presenting his “Court of the Futur”, which is his vision of the court of the future. The minister expressed his desire for the competence of collective debt settlement to be managed by the peace judges. This competence was, until 2007, handled by the seizure court, then the labor court.
The government, which was then focused on preserving human dignity (notably regarding personal loans), aimed to understand the social realities of indebted individuals who do not benefit from credit consolidation. They turned to suitable tools for collective debt settlement. A digitalization project named Phenix, intended to radically change the justice management system, was considered but never materialized. Consequently, from 2007, all new cases were transferred to the labor court.
Besides attempting to have a more social approach regarding these cases, the goal of this transfer was also to lighten the workload of the seizure court. However, within a few years, the labor court also showed its limitations, particularly in terms of personnel to handle this overload.
So Why Now a Project to Transfer to the Peace Court?
It is thought that the establishment of the family court has greatly reduced the workload of the peace courts, and that they are therefore able to accommodate the transfer. Nevertheless, they are now (since summer 2014) dealing with a massive caseload related to the recovery of various unpaid debts originating from water providers, electricity, personal loans recovery, credit consolidation, etc. If the transfer happens, the peace court would need to ensure both the protection of the individual placed under temporary administration and the protection of creditors. A somewhat complicated situation…
In terms of availability, it is certain that there are more peace judges than labor judges and that they could better divide the cases. Especially those related to personal loans and credit consolidation, which are very numerous. Furthermore, the minister asserts that this intention to transfer aligns with a digitalization project of the justice system in order to reduce workload. This digitalization, planned for 2018, but will it really be possible? It is one of the questions that remain. Notably, extensive training will be necessary for magistrates and court clerks to manage this new tool.
Finally, a problem arises at the level of jurisprudence. Regarding collective debt settlement, it can vary within the same jurisdiction. It should not, therefore, that this transfer creates an even greater divergence.
Many Questions…
Ultimately, several questions arise regarding this transfer. Wouldn’t a revision of the law be preferable for now? Do peace judges really have the time to handle personal loan recovery and credit consolidation? Isn’t the timeline until digitalization implementation too short given the training it requires?
All of this requires serious consideration by all the concerned stakeholders.
