DISTRICT COURT FOUND NO VIOLATIONS IN THE INCREASED PRICE OF DEBT REDEMPTION

In early May, the Court of Arbitration of the Urals District considered the case at the request of one of the creditors. The initiator of the process applied to the court for procedural succession under the assignment agreement between him and the previous creditor of the debtor.

Initially, the claim in question arose at the Federal Tax Service, after which it was extinguished by an individual, and a procedural replacement was made.

Then the creditor sold his right of claim to another individual, while the price of the assignment agreement was several times higher than the amount of the debt.

This circumstance troubled the lower courts, which rejected the subsequently submitted application for the procedural succession.

The judges pointed out that the applicant had not disclosed his economic justification for acquiring the right of claim against the debtor at an increased price. At the same time, at the time of consideration of the application, it was already known that the debtor had no property, and the case was at the stage of bringing the persons controlling him to subsidiary liability.

Having rejected the procedural succession, the courts suspected the failed creditor of obstructing the normal course of the bankruptcy case and bad faith.

As for the district court, its board found no such circumstances, having indicated the right of both parties to conclude an assignment agreement and to transfer the right of claim to the debtor.

Moreover, the agreement concluded between the parties was not challenged or invalidated, and there was no evidence of property damage to the rights of other creditors (resolution No. Ф09-8154 / 14 of May 4, 2021).