RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
05/12/2025
Friday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
5 December 
1936 The Stalinist Constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1936 the Stalinist constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1484 Pope Innocent VII initiated the "witch hunt".
1456 An earthquake that destroyed Naples occurred - 35 thousand people died.
1456 occurred an earthquake that destroyed Naples - 35 thousand people died.
5 December
1936 The Stalinist Constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1936 the Stalinist constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1484 Pope Innocent VII initiated the "witch hunt".
1456 An earthquake that destroyed Naples occurred - 35 thousand people died.
1456 occurred an earthquake that destroyed Naples - 35 thousand people died.
BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE AGAINST THIRD PARTIES: BALANCE OF INTERESTS IN A DISPUTE OVER THE INVALIDITY OF A TRANSACTION
The manager applied to the court for invalidation of the vehicle purchase and sale agreement between the debtor and the citizen (case no. A19-17830/21).
The courts of two instances, having established the circumstances of the absence of a counter-provision equivalent to the value of the asset alienated to an affiliated person in the presence of unfulfilled obligations to other creditors, concluded that the transaction was invalid. Applying the consequences of the invalidity of the transaction in the form of the defendant's obligation to transfer the disputed car to the debtor's bankruptcy estate, the courts proceeded from the presence in the case file of evidence of the defendant's registration of the car as of the date of the judicial act.
The cassation sent the dispute for a new appeal hearing, pointing out the following:
A third party who was not involved in the case refers to the fact that the court of first instance did not resolve the issue of ownership of the car, which belongs to a third party as a result of the entry into force of the ruling of the district court of the city in another case on the approval of a settlement agreement and the transfer of property (car) due to the payment of debt, which, in the opinion of the applicant's provisional value, according to the act of acceptance and transfer of the car. Also, the court did not take into account that the third party did not voluntarily reissue the car, but all this time fought for this right in the courts.
The applicant believes that the court of Appeal committed a violation of the rules of procedural law, expressed in the absence of an assessment of the argument on the prejudice of the court's ruling in another case, in the refusal by the court of appeal to a third party to participate in the court session by using a web conference system.
At the same time, it does not follow from the decision of the Court of Appeal that any assessment has been given to the evidence presented by the applicant in the case file (attached to the request to involve him as a third party).
In addition, the district court considers it unreasonable for the Court of Appeal to indicate the possibility of applying to the court for a change in the manner of execution of a judicial act if there are legitimate grounds for that, since the applicant, who claimed a violation of his rights by the ruling of the court of first instance, was not involved in the case.
Photo: Freepik
The courts of two instances, having established the circumstances of the absence of a counter-provision equivalent to the value of the asset alienated to an affiliated person in the presence of unfulfilled obligations to other creditors, concluded that the transaction was invalid. Applying the consequences of the invalidity of the transaction in the form of the defendant's obligation to transfer the disputed car to the debtor's bankruptcy estate, the courts proceeded from the presence in the case file of evidence of the defendant's registration of the car as of the date of the judicial act.
The cassation sent the dispute for a new appeal hearing, pointing out the following:
A third party who was not involved in the case refers to the fact that the court of first instance did not resolve the issue of ownership of the car, which belongs to a third party as a result of the entry into force of the ruling of the district court of the city in another case on the approval of a settlement agreement and the transfer of property (car) due to the payment of debt, which, in the opinion of the applicant's provisional value, according to the act of acceptance and transfer of the car. Also, the court did not take into account that the third party did not voluntarily reissue the car, but all this time fought for this right in the courts.
The applicant believes that the court of Appeal committed a violation of the rules of procedural law, expressed in the absence of an assessment of the argument on the prejudice of the court's ruling in another case, in the refusal by the court of appeal to a third party to participate in the court session by using a web conference system.
At the same time, it does not follow from the decision of the Court of Appeal that any assessment has been given to the evidence presented by the applicant in the case file (attached to the request to involve him as a third party).
In addition, the district court considers it unreasonable for the Court of Appeal to indicate the possibility of applying to the court for a change in the manner of execution of a judicial act if there are legitimate grounds for that, since the applicant, who claimed a violation of his rights by the ruling of the court of first instance, was not involved in the case.
Photo: Freepik
07.10.2025
