Bidding through a representative: power of attorney, naming and liability at the hearing

Section 85(5) EO links admission of a representative bid to proof of authority. The proof is provided by public documents or a publicly certified power of attorney. The documents are placed in the court file. A representative should therefore have a version available that can be presented to the court.

Section 85(6) EO adds an immediate consequence: bids that do not meet the statutory requirements must not be admitted. The hearing is therefore the wrong time to explain the authority only through a private message or oral assurance. The representative’s official photo identification and the details in the bidder form must match the proof.

Section 85(5) EO contains a special rule for lawyers and notaries. Their reference to the authority granted to them replaces documentary proof. The bidder’s identity and the scope of the instruction must nevertheless be clear. The simplification concerns the form of proof and does not replace a clear attribution of the bid.

Section 85(5) EO permits, on application, the name of the principal to be made public only after the auction has closed if significant reasons exist. This is a narrowly defined exception to immediate public naming. It does not make the principal irrelevant to the court.

The application and the specific reason belong in the preparation for the hearing. The statute does not list the significant reasons exhaustively. The individual case must therefore clarify which circumstances support later naming and how the principal’s identity will nevertheless be communicated reliably to the court.

Later public naming does not change responsibility for the bid. The representative submits the bid at the hearing for the principal. The internal bidding limit is an instruction between the parties. The court must be able to identify the representation and the person to whom the bid is attributed without contradiction.

Under section 85(7) EO, every bidder whose bid has been admitted remains bound until a higher bid is made. When a representative acts effectively, the bid is attributed to the principal as the intended bidder. Admission is therefore a decisive point in the hearing process.

The binding effect ends when a higher bid is made. Section 85(8) EO provides that the auction continues as long as higher bids are made. A short period for consideration may be allowed on the request of one or more bidders. The representative must therefore know the internal upper limit before entering the bidding stages.

Discontinuance of the proceedings releases the bidder from the obligation under section 85(7) EO. This legal consequence must be distinguished from a voluntary withdrawal. The record should show whether the bid was admitted, which higher bid followed and whether the proceedings were discontinued.

The Vadium must be checked separately from the authority to represent. Section 179 EO governs the amount and form of the security. Before the award, the highest bidder is asked under section 180 EO to deposit it without delay. With a representative, the authority proof and the permitted savings certificate must therefore match the intended purchaser.

Section 181(2) EO provides that every item held by the court as the purchaser’s security is liable as a pledge from the time it is handed over for all claims arising from the auction against the purchaser. This liability attaches to the purchaser’s security. It does not automatically create personal liability for the representative for the principal’s obligations.

For the hearing, this means that the representative must make the statement for the correct bidder and assign the security to the purchase model. A private instruction about the maximum bid replaces neither the statutory form of the Vadium nor the review of effective authority. The Vadium overview deals with deposit and return separately.

At the hearing, the parties should keep the legal and financial sequence separate. The representative first makes clear their own identity and that they appear for the principal. The authority proof is then reviewed or the permitted reference by the lawyer or notary is recorded.

Only then can the bid be attributed to the correct person. The further bidding decision follows the court’s bidding stages and the internal upper limit. Before the award, the highest bidder must deposit the Vadium in the permitted form. These steps cannot be replaced by a general label such as family, investors or client.