Date: July 28, 2015 E.C.

Legal Rule (Interpretation of Law):

1. Judicial Review of Factual Findings: The Cassation Bench's role is to correct errors of law, not to retry facts. The Cassation Bench gives significant weight to the factual findings of lower courts, especially when those findings are based on the evaluation of evidence and witness testimony. It will only intervene if there is a fundamental error in the evaluation of that evidence.
2. Foreclosure and Auction Procedures: While certain procedural steps must be followed in a foreclosure and auction sale, minor irregularities do not automatically invalidate the sale. The challenging party must prove that the alleged irregularity materially affected the outcome of the sale and caused them prejudice.
3. Proof of Prejudice: A party challenging a sale must demonstrate actual harm or prejudice resulting from the alleged irregularities. Speculative or hypothetical harm is insufficient.
4. Contract Interpretation: The terms of a contract, including a loan and mortgage agreement, are determined by the language of the agreement itself and the surrounding circumstances. Courts will strive to give effect to the parties' intentions as expressed in the contract.
5. Evidence of Sale: Evidence of a sale can include various forms of documentation, such as auction records, sales contracts, transfer documents, and witness testimony. The totality of the evidence is considered in determining whether a valid sale occurred.
6. Acquiescence and Waiver: A party who, with knowledge of irregularities, accepts the benefits of a sale or acts in a manner inconsistent with challenging it, may be deemed to have acquiesced to the sale or waived their right to object. For example, accepting rent from the buyer after the sale may constitute acquiescence.

Summary:

These consolidated cases involved disputes related to a foreclosure sale of commercial properties. The applicants challenged the sale, alleging various irregularities, including issues related to the valuation and sale of one of the properties. The Cassation Bench upheld the lower courts' decisions, finding that the applicants had failed to prove that the alleged irregularities materially affected the outcome of the sale or caused them prejudice. The court emphasized the importance of respecting the factual findings of lower courts and the need to show actual harm resulting from procedural deviations. The court also pointed to evidence suggesting that the applicants had acquiesced to the sale by accepting benefits from it.