RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
09/05/2024
Thursday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
9 May 
2021 Victory Day.
2020 Victory Day
1944 The city of Sevastopol was liberated.
1944 The city of Sevastopol was liberated.
1936 Mussolini announced the accession of Ethiopia to Italy.
1936 Mussolini announced the accession of Ethiopia to Italy.
9 May
2021 Victory Day.
2020 Victory Day
1944 The city of Sevastopol was liberated.
1944 The city of Sevastopol was liberated.
1936 Mussolini announced the accession of Ethiopia to Italy.
1936 Mussolini announced the accession of Ethiopia to Italy.
THE COURT DID NOT DECLARE THE VICTIM OF FRAUD BANKRUPT
In March 2022, Norvik Bank applied to the Moscow Arbitration Court (AC GM) with an application for insolvency of Valentina Filina (case no. A40-51907/2022). The representative of the credit institution indicated that the citizen had a debt in the amount of 4,425,799.97 rubles.
The basis for the debt to the bank was a loan agreement, under which the woman received 3,699,400 rubles at 24% per annum. The deal was concluded on July 24, 2021, with the condition of repayment of the debt by March 21, 2028. The security under the contract was a Moscow apartment (44.5 square meters), whose value was estimated at 3.7 million.
Filina at the same time referred to the fact that she had become a victim of fraudsters. A copy of the decision of the Ministry of Internal Affairs on the criminal case initiated on her application was submitted to the court. It was also reported that Filina's husband had already appealed to the court of general jurisdiction, demanding that the mortgage transaction be declared invalid.
Norvik Bank pointed out that the criminal case itself does not yet indicate that the fact of fraud has been proven. By the time of the trial, Filina's transactions with the bank themselves, which served as the basis for the debt, had not been challenged in court. The bank pointed out that it was impossible to introduce a debt restructuring procedure for Filina, since the pensioner does not work anywhere, and a long delay in payment does not allow paying off the debt.
On December 2, 2022, the Moscow Arbitration Court declared Filina bankrupt. But the appeal (the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal), where the woman filed a complaint, did not agree with the first instance. The judge drew attention to paragraph 2 of Article 213.6 of the relevant law, which presupposes the recognition of a claim as unfounded if there is a dispute between the creditor and the debtor about the right.
The court of appeal in February 2023 overturned the decision of the AC GM. The Bank appealed to the Moscow District Court, which in May 2023 upheld the original decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court. According to the district court, the bank was not obliged to provide a judicial act on debt collection in accordance with the general procedure. The verdict of the Arbitration Court of Appeal was overturned by the Arbitration Court of the Moscow District. Filina filed a complaint with the Supreme Court.
The judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, Nadezhda Ksenofontova, considered that the complaint should be discussed by the Economic Board (Judicial Board for Economic Disputes). In December, the case was reviewed. The Judicial Board for Economic Disputes upheld the verdict of the appellate instance.
The judges of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation pointed to paragraph 14 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 45 dated October 13, 2015, explaining the norm of the bankruptcy law in the event of a dispute about the right. Experts point out that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has once again actually called on lower authorities to comply with the process, and not to make their decisions solely on formal grounds.
The basis for the debt to the bank was a loan agreement, under which the woman received 3,699,400 rubles at 24% per annum. The deal was concluded on July 24, 2021, with the condition of repayment of the debt by March 21, 2028. The security under the contract was a Moscow apartment (44.5 square meters), whose value was estimated at 3.7 million.
Filina at the same time referred to the fact that she had become a victim of fraudsters. A copy of the decision of the Ministry of Internal Affairs on the criminal case initiated on her application was submitted to the court. It was also reported that Filina's husband had already appealed to the court of general jurisdiction, demanding that the mortgage transaction be declared invalid.
Norvik Bank pointed out that the criminal case itself does not yet indicate that the fact of fraud has been proven. By the time of the trial, Filina's transactions with the bank themselves, which served as the basis for the debt, had not been challenged in court. The bank pointed out that it was impossible to introduce a debt restructuring procedure for Filina, since the pensioner does not work anywhere, and a long delay in payment does not allow paying off the debt.
On December 2, 2022, the Moscow Arbitration Court declared Filina bankrupt. But the appeal (the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal), where the woman filed a complaint, did not agree with the first instance. The judge drew attention to paragraph 2 of Article 213.6 of the relevant law, which presupposes the recognition of a claim as unfounded if there is a dispute between the creditor and the debtor about the right.
The court of appeal in February 2023 overturned the decision of the AC GM. The Bank appealed to the Moscow District Court, which in May 2023 upheld the original decision of the Moscow Arbitration Court. According to the district court, the bank was not obliged to provide a judicial act on debt collection in accordance with the general procedure. The verdict of the Arbitration Court of Appeal was overturned by the Arbitration Court of the Moscow District. Filina filed a complaint with the Supreme Court.
The judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, Nadezhda Ksenofontova, considered that the complaint should be discussed by the Economic Board (Judicial Board for Economic Disputes). In December, the case was reviewed. The Judicial Board for Economic Disputes upheld the verdict of the appellate instance.
The judges of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation pointed to paragraph 14 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 45 dated October 13, 2015, explaining the norm of the bankruptcy law in the event of a dispute about the right. Experts point out that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has once again actually called on lower authorities to comply with the process, and not to make their decisions solely on formal grounds.
29.12.2023
