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.
APARTMENTS ARE USUALLY PURCHASED BY CITIZENS AS HOUSING
As part of the bankruptcy case of the developer (No. A56-19282/23), a citizen applied to the court for the inclusion of requirements in the register of residential premises transfer.
The courts of two instances included the requirements in the 4th stage of the register, guided by the fact that the apartments were purchased by the lender not for consumer, but for investment needs.
The cassation sent the dispute for a new appeal, pointing out that it does not follow from the case materials that the court of appeal refused to attach new evidence, but did not examine them and did not evaluate the arguments of the creditor about the purchase of apartments for consumer purposes.
At the same time, the court of appeal did not indicate which evidence available in the case indicates that the applicant purchased apartments for investment purposes (for subsequent resale and profit), despite the fact that the manager did not refer to the presence of such evidence and did not provide relevant arguments.
The fact that the creditor's obligations to pay for the acquired rights of claim to the developer have been terminated by offsetting counter obligations from the loan agreement does not in itself indicate the investment purpose of purchasing apartments, since it does not exclude a situation in which the creditor pursued the goal of satisfying personal needs to improve housing conditions.
The courts of two instances included the requirements in the 4th stage of the register, guided by the fact that the apartments were purchased by the lender not for consumer, but for investment needs.
The cassation sent the dispute for a new appeal, pointing out that it does not follow from the case materials that the court of appeal refused to attach new evidence, but did not examine them and did not evaluate the arguments of the creditor about the purchase of apartments for consumer purposes.
At the same time, the court of appeal did not indicate which evidence available in the case indicates that the applicant purchased apartments for investment purposes (for subsequent resale and profit), despite the fact that the manager did not refer to the presence of such evidence and did not provide relevant arguments.
The fact that the creditor's obligations to pay for the acquired rights of claim to the developer have been terminated by offsetting counter obligations from the loan agreement does not in itself indicate the investment purpose of purchasing apartments, since it does not exclude a situation in which the creditor pursued the goal of satisfying personal needs to improve housing conditions.
29.08.2024
