RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
18/10/2024
Friday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
18 October 
1970 The first ever space flight of a cat (Felicette).
1970 A decree on the equalization of the rights of peasants with other estates was issued in Russia. This concerned the civil service, freedom to choose a permanent residence and the abolition of corporal punishment.
1970 Alaska passed from Russia to the United States.
18 October
1970 The first ever space flight of a cat (Felicette).
1970 A decree on the equalization of the rights of peasants with other estates was issued in Russia. This concerned the civil service, freedom to choose a permanent residence and the abolition of corporal punishment.
1970 Alaska passed from Russia to the United States.
A LARGE DONATION WILL BE CHALLENGED
The debtor's creditor applied to the court to challenge the donation agreement (case no. A32-14208/23).
The courts of two instances refused to satisfy the claim, based on the lack of evidence by the creditor of a set of conditions for invalidating the disputed transaction, since the debtor did not have signs of insolvency at the time of its commission.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, pointing out that the donation agreement is a gratuitous transaction and does not provide for a counter-provision. Therefore, in order to consider this dispute, it is necessary to establish a set of circumstances that allow us to conclude that the disputed transaction was committed in order to harm the property rights of creditors. Since the transaction was made free of charge, there is one of the circumstances for its invalidation.
As the creditor indicated, the value of the property transferred by the debtor under the donation agreement exceeded 100% of the debtor's assets. The debtor's assets at the date of the transaction, without assessing their quality, cannot indicate its solvency, sufficiency of funds to fulfill obligations, and confirm the satisfactory financial condition.
Considering that the value of the disputed transaction exceeds 100% of the debtor's assets, the transaction is large for the debtor. In refusing to satisfy the claims, the courts did not investigate the essential question of whether the procedure for approving a major transaction was followed at its conclusion.
In the case under consideration, taking into account the method of transferring property that is not typical for the debtor, the defendant, accepting the donation, should have shown reasonable care, including checking whether the debtor has overdue obligations, information about which is contained in public sources.
In this case, according to the district court, the administration, as a public authority, exercising due diligence, could establish the fact of filing claims against the debtor in an amount significantly exceeding the value of the transferred property, information about which was posted in publicly available sources on the Internet.
At the same time, the administration is not a charitable organization for which such transactions aimed at gratuitously receiving property from commercial organizations are common.
The courts of two instances refused to satisfy the claim, based on the lack of evidence by the creditor of a set of conditions for invalidating the disputed transaction, since the debtor did not have signs of insolvency at the time of its commission.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, pointing out that the donation agreement is a gratuitous transaction and does not provide for a counter-provision. Therefore, in order to consider this dispute, it is necessary to establish a set of circumstances that allow us to conclude that the disputed transaction was committed in order to harm the property rights of creditors. Since the transaction was made free of charge, there is one of the circumstances for its invalidation.
As the creditor indicated, the value of the property transferred by the debtor under the donation agreement exceeded 100% of the debtor's assets. The debtor's assets at the date of the transaction, without assessing their quality, cannot indicate its solvency, sufficiency of funds to fulfill obligations, and confirm the satisfactory financial condition.
Considering that the value of the disputed transaction exceeds 100% of the debtor's assets, the transaction is large for the debtor. In refusing to satisfy the claims, the courts did not investigate the essential question of whether the procedure for approving a major transaction was followed at its conclusion.
In the case under consideration, taking into account the method of transferring property that is not typical for the debtor, the defendant, accepting the donation, should have shown reasonable care, including checking whether the debtor has overdue obligations, information about which is contained in public sources.
In this case, according to the district court, the administration, as a public authority, exercising due diligence, could establish the fact of filing claims against the debtor in an amount significantly exceeding the value of the transferred property, information about which was posted in publicly available sources on the Internet.
At the same time, the administration is not a charitable organization for which such transactions aimed at gratuitously receiving property from commercial organizations are common.
15.10.2024
