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.
CURRENT PAYMENTS IN THE BANKRUPTCY CASE: WHEN AFFILIATION BECOMES A HINDRANCE 16+
The manager applied to the court for the resolution of disagreements with the creditor on the recognition of current claims to be satisfied in the order preceding the allocation of the liquidation quota (case no. A40-318894/19).
In rejecting the application, the courts of the two instances proceeded from the inapplicability of the provisions of the Review of Judicial Practice in Resolving disputes related to the establishment in bankruptcy proceedings of the requirements of the controlling debtor and its affiliated persons to the current requirements. The company's claims are based on a court decision, and accordingly, the reality of the transaction has been confirmed by a judicial act that has entered into force.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, pointing out that the manager argued that the company's claims should not compete with the claims of independent creditors, the affiliation of the parties to the transaction, the conclusion of a contract in a situation of a property crisis of both participants and the initiation of bankruptcy proceedings against these persons.
The manager pointed out the lack of economic feasibility of these business relations and that the management of the companies should have been aware of their inability to meet the demands of their creditors. The manager's arguments, citing the existence of grounds for lowering the priority of the company's current claims, were not evaluated by the courts.
The courts limited themselves to a formal indication of the lack of a legal possibility of lowering the priority of meeting current requirements, avoiding a full assessment of the legal relations of the parties. It was noted that the current claims of other persons against the members of the group of companies, confirmed by judicial acts that have entered into force, have been downgraded or denied. The courts' differing conclusions on the requirements for members of the same group of companies contradict the principle of uniformity of judicial practice.
Photo: Freepik
In rejecting the application, the courts of the two instances proceeded from the inapplicability of the provisions of the Review of Judicial Practice in Resolving disputes related to the establishment in bankruptcy proceedings of the requirements of the controlling debtor and its affiliated persons to the current requirements. The company's claims are based on a court decision, and accordingly, the reality of the transaction has been confirmed by a judicial act that has entered into force.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, pointing out that the manager argued that the company's claims should not compete with the claims of independent creditors, the affiliation of the parties to the transaction, the conclusion of a contract in a situation of a property crisis of both participants and the initiation of bankruptcy proceedings against these persons.
The manager pointed out the lack of economic feasibility of these business relations and that the management of the companies should have been aware of their inability to meet the demands of their creditors. The manager's arguments, citing the existence of grounds for lowering the priority of the company's current claims, were not evaluated by the courts.
The courts limited themselves to a formal indication of the lack of a legal possibility of lowering the priority of meeting current requirements, avoiding a full assessment of the legal relations of the parties. It was noted that the current claims of other persons against the members of the group of companies, confirmed by judicial acts that have entered into force, have been downgraded or denied. The courts' differing conclusions on the requirements for members of the same group of companies contradict the principle of uniformity of judicial practice.
Photo: Freepik
02.10.2025
