RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
05/02/2026
Thursday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
5 February 
1979 Iran became an Islamic state
1979 Iran became an Islamic state
1952 The first traffic light for pedestrians appeared in New York
1952 The first traffic light for pedestrians appeared in New York
1928 Vitamin D was artificially synthesized
1928 Vitamin D was artificially synthesized
5 February
1979 Iran became an Islamic state
1979 Iran became an Islamic state
1952 The first traffic light for pedestrians appeared in New York
1952 The first traffic light for pedestrians appeared in New York
1928 Vitamin D was artificially synthesized
1928 Vitamin D was artificially synthesized
ALIENATION OF EQUIPMENT AS A BASIS FOR SUBSIDIZATION
The manager appealed to the court with a demand to hold the controlling persons vicariously liable for the debtor's obligations, as well as to recover damages from these persons (case no. A32-10424/20).
In rejecting the application, the court of first instance proceeded from the lack of evidence that one of the defendants had committed illegal transactions. In addition, the transaction imputed to the other defendant was completed before he took office, which excludes the causal relationship between his activities as director and the consequences of the transaction. The Court of First Instance also noted that the purchase and sale agreement was not invalidated either on civil or special grounds.
The appeal partially satisfied the application, guided by the fact that the size of the debtor's claims register is a significant amount, of which most of the principal debt arose from the illegal placement of equipment.
The cassation sent the dispute for a new appeal hearing in part, pointing out that in part the recognition of proven grounds for bringing defendant-2 to subsidiary liability, the court of appeal indicated that the latter had not disclosed evidence reflecting the real economic situation of the company, its actual financial turnover, had not taken sufficient measures established by law to repay debt, as well as actions to liquidate the company. At the same time, the court did not evaluate all the arguments and evidence presented by defendant-2.
Thus, the defendant, objecting to the claim, indicated that during the period of his activity as Director General, the debtor had no additional obligations.
The result of the defendant's activity as CEO was the decision of the new debtor participant to liquidate the debtor. During the period of activity of the director, the defendant did not have the opportunity to repay the debt owed to the creditor due to the debtor's lack of own funds. In addition, the manager did not apply to the defendant to request the debtor's documents. The manager did not declare the application of the presumptions established by law. The above indicates the illegality of the defendant's concealment of the debtor's actual economic condition.
The defendant stated that he had no doubts about the performance of the contract. According to the date of objective bankruptcy set by the Court of Appeal, the actions of the defendant, who later became director, could not in any case have caused the debtor's bankruptcy. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the defendant's behavior, taking into account whether there has been a significant deterioration in the debtor's financial situation or not.
Photo: Freepik
In rejecting the application, the court of first instance proceeded from the lack of evidence that one of the defendants had committed illegal transactions. In addition, the transaction imputed to the other defendant was completed before he took office, which excludes the causal relationship between his activities as director and the consequences of the transaction. The Court of First Instance also noted that the purchase and sale agreement was not invalidated either on civil or special grounds.
The appeal partially satisfied the application, guided by the fact that the size of the debtor's claims register is a significant amount, of which most of the principal debt arose from the illegal placement of equipment.
The cassation sent the dispute for a new appeal hearing in part, pointing out that in part the recognition of proven grounds for bringing defendant-2 to subsidiary liability, the court of appeal indicated that the latter had not disclosed evidence reflecting the real economic situation of the company, its actual financial turnover, had not taken sufficient measures established by law to repay debt, as well as actions to liquidate the company. At the same time, the court did not evaluate all the arguments and evidence presented by defendant-2.
Thus, the defendant, objecting to the claim, indicated that during the period of his activity as Director General, the debtor had no additional obligations.
The result of the defendant's activity as CEO was the decision of the new debtor participant to liquidate the debtor. During the period of activity of the director, the defendant did not have the opportunity to repay the debt owed to the creditor due to the debtor's lack of own funds. In addition, the manager did not apply to the defendant to request the debtor's documents. The manager did not declare the application of the presumptions established by law. The above indicates the illegality of the defendant's concealment of the debtor's actual economic condition.
The defendant stated that he had no doubts about the performance of the contract. According to the date of objective bankruptcy set by the Court of Appeal, the actions of the defendant, who later became director, could not in any case have caused the debtor's bankruptcy. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate the defendant's behavior, taking into account whether there has been a significant deterioration in the debtor's financial situation or not.
Photo: Freepik
03.02.2026
