RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
05/12/2025
Friday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
5 December 
1936 The Stalinist Constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1936 the Stalinist constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1484 Pope Innocent VII initiated the "witch hunt".
1456 An earthquake that destroyed Naples occurred - 35 thousand people died.
1456 occurred an earthquake that destroyed Naples - 35 thousand people died.
5 December
1936 The Stalinist Constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1936 the Stalinist constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1484 Pope Innocent VII initiated the "witch hunt".
1456 An earthquake that destroyed Naples occurred - 35 thousand people died.
1456 occurred an earthquake that destroyed Naples - 35 thousand people died.
A citizen can insist on his right to go bankrupt
The citizen applied to the court to declare himself bankrupt (case no. A63-18241/23).
The courts of two instances concluded that there were no grounds for the introduction of bankruptcy proceedings for a citizen, pointing out the lack of evidence of the citizen's insolvency.
The cassation sent the case for a new hearing. According to the court, when considering the case, the citizen argued that his debt to creditors exceeded the maximum allowable level established by law for individuals. In particular, the applicant argued about the amount of the debt. The applicant's arguments were investigated improperly by the judicial authorities.
Having concluded that the citizen's personal property was sufficient to repay the debts owed to his creditors, the courts did not give a legal assessment to his arguments that the calculation of the volume of his property could not take into account the only housing that the courts had taken into account as property that could satisfy creditors' claims outside the bankruptcy procedure.
In addition, when considering the validity of an application for declaring a debtor bankrupt at the request of a citizen, the issues of the availability and sufficiency of property to repay creditors' claims are not included in the subject of research and evaluation by the courts, and therefore conclusions about the availability of property sufficient to repay creditors' claims could not be used to substantiate judicial acts recognizing claims. the debtor's claims are unjustified and his refusal to introduce his own bankruptcy procedure.
Since the initial application for declaring a citizen insolvent (bankrupt) was filed by his creditor and the bankruptcy case was terminated due to the voluntary satisfaction of creditors' claims, the debtor's new application is considered to have been filed for the first time.
As the court noted, the provisions of the law aimed at the inadmissibility of unfair initiation of repeated bankruptcies against one person in this case did not prevent a citizen from applying to the court to declare himself insolvent (bankrupt), since the right to apply to the court for his own bankruptcy was implemented for the first time.
The cassation also noted that the judicial authorities had not established the circumstances of the unfair behavior of the person who filed for insolvency (bankruptcy).
Photo: Freepik
The courts of two instances concluded that there were no grounds for the introduction of bankruptcy proceedings for a citizen, pointing out the lack of evidence of the citizen's insolvency.
The cassation sent the case for a new hearing. According to the court, when considering the case, the citizen argued that his debt to creditors exceeded the maximum allowable level established by law for individuals. In particular, the applicant argued about the amount of the debt. The applicant's arguments were investigated improperly by the judicial authorities.
Having concluded that the citizen's personal property was sufficient to repay the debts owed to his creditors, the courts did not give a legal assessment to his arguments that the calculation of the volume of his property could not take into account the only housing that the courts had taken into account as property that could satisfy creditors' claims outside the bankruptcy procedure.
In addition, when considering the validity of an application for declaring a debtor bankrupt at the request of a citizen, the issues of the availability and sufficiency of property to repay creditors' claims are not included in the subject of research and evaluation by the courts, and therefore conclusions about the availability of property sufficient to repay creditors' claims could not be used to substantiate judicial acts recognizing claims. the debtor's claims are unjustified and his refusal to introduce his own bankruptcy procedure.
Since the initial application for declaring a citizen insolvent (bankrupt) was filed by his creditor and the bankruptcy case was terminated due to the voluntary satisfaction of creditors' claims, the debtor's new application is considered to have been filed for the first time.
As the court noted, the provisions of the law aimed at the inadmissibility of unfair initiation of repeated bankruptcies against one person in this case did not prevent a citizen from applying to the court to declare himself insolvent (bankrupt), since the right to apply to the court for his own bankruptcy was implemented for the first time.
The cassation also noted that the judicial authorities had not established the circumstances of the unfair behavior of the person who filed for insolvency (bankruptcy).
Photo: Freepik
22.07.2025
