RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
16/09/2024
Monday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
16 September 
1970 "Black Wednesday" of the British pound sterling.
1970 The Montreal Treaty for the Protection of the Earth's Ozone Layer was signed.
1970 Mexico declared independence from Spain.
16 September
1970 "Black Wednesday" of the British pound sterling.
1970 The Montreal Treaty for the Protection of the Earth's Ozone Layer was signed.
1970 Mexico declared independence from Spain.
AFFILIATION IS NOT A REASON TO REFUSE A REPLACEMENT IN THE REGISTRY
In the bankruptcy case of a citizen (No. A45-12717/19), the creditor appealed to the court with an application for the procedural succession of the collateral creditor.
The courts of two instances refused procedural succession and excluded the claims of the collateral creditor from the register, guided by the fact that, paying off the debt secured by the pledge to the bank without concluding a cession agreement, the applicant, being an interested person in relation to the debtor, acted with abuse of law in order to exclude the possibility of foreclosure on a residential building and land plot in bankruptcy proceedings, causing harm to the debtor's creditors.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, pointing out that the creditor's application is based on the circumstances of his purchase of a mortgage and the acquisition of the rights of claim against the debtor under the loan agreement secured by the pledge of a residential building and land plot.
Considering that in this case a mortgage purchase and sale agreement was concluded and the necessary marks were affixed to the security, entailing the transfer of rights under the mortgage, the courts mistakenly indicated that the repayment of debts to the bank was made in the order of repayment of obligations by a third party.
The unjustified exclusion of the bank's claims from the register of creditors' claims of the debtor (made without filing a corresponding application by the persons involved in the case, which does not comply with the principle of dispositivity of the arbitration process) violates the rights of the applicant applying for the status of a collateral creditor in the debtor's bankruptcy case.
The courts of two instances refused procedural succession and excluded the claims of the collateral creditor from the register, guided by the fact that, paying off the debt secured by the pledge to the bank without concluding a cession agreement, the applicant, being an interested person in relation to the debtor, acted with abuse of law in order to exclude the possibility of foreclosure on a residential building and land plot in bankruptcy proceedings, causing harm to the debtor's creditors.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, pointing out that the creditor's application is based on the circumstances of his purchase of a mortgage and the acquisition of the rights of claim against the debtor under the loan agreement secured by the pledge of a residential building and land plot.
Considering that in this case a mortgage purchase and sale agreement was concluded and the necessary marks were affixed to the security, entailing the transfer of rights under the mortgage, the courts mistakenly indicated that the repayment of debts to the bank was made in the order of repayment of obligations by a third party.
The unjustified exclusion of the bank's claims from the register of creditors' claims of the debtor (made without filing a corresponding application by the persons involved in the case, which does not comply with the principle of dispositivity of the arbitration process) violates the rights of the applicant applying for the status of a collateral creditor in the debtor's bankruptcy case.
08.08.2024
