[ De la saisie des rémunérations des salaries en droit congolais ]
Volume 67, Issue 1, June 2023, Pages 61–71
Tshibangu Musafiri Guelord1
1 Assistant, Université de KINDU, Avocat au barreau du MANIEMA et Doctorant à l’Université de Lubumbashi, RD Congo
Original language: French
Copyright © 2023 ISSR Journals. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The Democratic Republic of Congo has been a high contracting party to the OHADA treaty since 2012, in the name of supra-legality, the issue relating to the seizure of employees’ remuneration is gouverned by the uniform act on the organization of simplified procedures for the recovery of debts and means of execution which, it should be emphasized, leaves a small room for maneuver to domestic law. This is the precision on the so-called seizable portion. Readers will remember that the unseizability of employees’remuneration is a principe, which principle is accompanied by a derogation. Definition of the proportions likely to be seized on the grounds of the food character of which the remuneration of an employee dreams. It should be emphasized that, to achieve this, the plaintiff will have to meet a few conditions, in particular to provide himself with a constant enforceable title, a liquid and payable debt, obtain beforehand from the competent court a conciliation procedure without which his request can not be received... It is only in the event of failure of the said conciliation that the seizure could be authorized by the emergency judge. Hammer that certain responsibilities can be engaged in the event of obstruction in particular that of the employer and/ or the banker considered as garnishee.
Author Keywords: Claim, unseizability, principle, derogation, propotion, conditions, garnishee.
Volume 67, Issue 1, June 2023, Pages 61–71
Tshibangu Musafiri Guelord1
1 Assistant, Université de KINDU, Avocat au barreau du MANIEMA et Doctorant à l’Université de Lubumbashi, RD Congo
Original language: French
Copyright © 2023 ISSR Journals. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The Democratic Republic of Congo has been a high contracting party to the OHADA treaty since 2012, in the name of supra-legality, the issue relating to the seizure of employees’ remuneration is gouverned by the uniform act on the organization of simplified procedures for the recovery of debts and means of execution which, it should be emphasized, leaves a small room for maneuver to domestic law. This is the precision on the so-called seizable portion. Readers will remember that the unseizability of employees’remuneration is a principe, which principle is accompanied by a derogation. Definition of the proportions likely to be seized on the grounds of the food character of which the remuneration of an employee dreams. It should be emphasized that, to achieve this, the plaintiff will have to meet a few conditions, in particular to provide himself with a constant enforceable title, a liquid and payable debt, obtain beforehand from the competent court a conciliation procedure without which his request can not be received... It is only in the event of failure of the said conciliation that the seizure could be authorized by the emergency judge. Hammer that certain responsibilities can be engaged in the event of obstruction in particular that of the employer and/ or the banker considered as garnishee.
Author Keywords: Claim, unseizability, principle, derogation, propotion, conditions, garnishee.
Abstract: (french)
La République Démocratique du Congo est haute partie contractante au traité OHADA depuis l’an 2012, au nom de la supralégalité, la question relative à la saisie des rémunérations des salariés est régie par l’acte uniforme portant organisation des procédures simplifiées de recouvrement des créances et voies d’exécution qui, faudra-t-il le souligner, laisse une petite marge des manœuvres au droit interne. Il s’agit de la précision sur la quotité dite saisissable. Les lecteurs retiendront que l’insaisissabilité des rémunérations des salariés est un principe, lequel principe est assorti d’une dérogation. En effet, le législateur communautaire, tout en écartant toute possibilité d’une saisie conservatoire, renvoie à la compétence de chaque Etat membre la définition des proportions susceptibles d’être saisies au motif du caractère alimentaire dont revêt la rémunération d’un salarié. Il appert de souligner que, pour y arriver, le demandeur devra réunir quelques conditions notamment se munir d’un titre exécutoire constatant une créance liquide et exigible, obtenir préalablement de la juridiction compétente une procédure de conciliation sans laquelle sa demande ne saurait être reçue... Ce n’est qu’en cas d’échec de ladite conciliation que la saisie pourrait être autorisée par le juge d’urgence. Martelons que certaines responsabilités peuvent être engagées en cas d’obstruction notamment celle de l’employeur et/ou du banquier considérés comme des tiers saisis.
Author Keywords: Créance, insaisissabilité, principe, dérogation, proportion, conditions, juge d’urgence, tiers saisis.
How to Cite this Article
Tshibangu Musafiri Guelord, “Confiscation of the employee’s wages under Congolese law,” International Journal of Innovation and Scientific Research, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 61–71, June 2023.
