RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
27/04/2024
Saturday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
27 April 
1970 The opening of the subway in Yekaterinburg
1970 The opening of the subway in Yekaterinburg
1970 The population was evacuated from Pripyat after the Chernobyl accident - all 40 thousand inhabitants were evacuated in 3 hours
1970 The population was evacuated from Pripyat after the Chernobyl accident - all 40 thousand inhabitants were evacuated in 3 hours
1970 The beginning of the civil war in Afghanistan, which continues up to this day
1970 The beginning of the civil war in Afghanistan, which continues up to this day
27 April
1970 The opening of the subway in Yekaterinburg
1970 The opening of the subway in Yekaterinburg
1970 The population was evacuated from Pripyat after the Chernobyl accident - all 40 thousand inhabitants were evacuated in 3 hours
1970 The population was evacuated from Pripyat after the Chernobyl accident - all 40 thousand inhabitants were evacuated in 3 hours
1970 The beginning of the civil war in Afghanistan, which continues up to this day
1970 The beginning of the civil war in Afghanistan, which continues up to this day
AFFILIATION DOES NOT ALWAYS ENTAIL SUBORDINATION
The entrepreneur appealed to the court with an application for declaring the company bankrupt (case No. A51-9724/23), justifying his application by the presence of a judicial act that has entered into force to recover debts from the company in favor of the entrepreneur under the contract for the provision of consulting services.
The court of first instance, satisfying the application, proceeded from the existence of conditions for recognizing the creditor's application as justified, introducing a monitoring procedure against the debtor and approving by the interim administrator a person whose candidacy meets the general requirements for arbitration managers.
The appeal subordinated the claim, pointing out that the debtor and the creditor are affiliated persons (labor relations).
The Court of Cassation upheld the ruling of the first instance, noting that the court of Appeal proceeded only from the existence of an interest (actual affiliation) of the creditor and the debtor, without taking into account all the actual circumstances of the relationship that developed between them as subjects of economic activity, and the absence of such financing in a situation of a property crisis of the company.
In the case under consideration, the relationship between the company and the entrepreneur was of a civil nature (provision of services), in terms of economic content and expediency corresponded to the usual business activities of the debtor, were real, and the existence of debt was confirmed by a judicial act that entered into force.
There are no grounds to believe that the entrepreneur, by providing technical advice to the debtor, as well as by his subsequent behavior, pursued the goal of providing compensatory financing to the company, at the expense of which the debtor will be able to continue to carry out business activities, and the actions of the creditor were carried out as part of the implementation of a publicly undisclosed plan to exit the actually insolvent company from the economic crisis, which could not be implemented, there is no.
The court of first instance, satisfying the application, proceeded from the existence of conditions for recognizing the creditor's application as justified, introducing a monitoring procedure against the debtor and approving by the interim administrator a person whose candidacy meets the general requirements for arbitration managers.
The appeal subordinated the claim, pointing out that the debtor and the creditor are affiliated persons (labor relations).
The Court of Cassation upheld the ruling of the first instance, noting that the court of Appeal proceeded only from the existence of an interest (actual affiliation) of the creditor and the debtor, without taking into account all the actual circumstances of the relationship that developed between them as subjects of economic activity, and the absence of such financing in a situation of a property crisis of the company.
In the case under consideration, the relationship between the company and the entrepreneur was of a civil nature (provision of services), in terms of economic content and expediency corresponded to the usual business activities of the debtor, were real, and the existence of debt was confirmed by a judicial act that entered into force.
There are no grounds to believe that the entrepreneur, by providing technical advice to the debtor, as well as by his subsequent behavior, pursued the goal of providing compensatory financing to the company, at the expense of which the debtor will be able to continue to carry out business activities, and the actions of the creditor were carried out as part of the implementation of a publicly undisclosed plan to exit the actually insolvent company from the economic crisis, which could not be implemented, there is no.
25.03.2024
