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.
ENSURING THE ECONOMIC NEEDS OF THE DEBTOR IS NOT AN ABUSE
The manager appealed to the court with an application to challenge the transaction on the transfer of funds by the debtor to the defendant (case no. A40-16854/22).
The court of first instance granted the application, declaring the transaction invalid on special grounds, recognizing as proven the existence of a sign of insolvency at the time of its commission.
The appeal rejected the argument that the debtor had a sign of insolvency, but declared the transaction invalid on general grounds. The instance pointed out that in the present case, the debtor's systematic transfer of funds to the defendant under the guise of reimbursement of expenses for economic needs is aimed at worsening the debtor's property situation. This also indicates an abuse of the right on the defendant's side.
The cassation refused to satisfy the application, explaining its approach by the fact that the systematic transfer of funds by the debtor to the defendant under the guise of reimbursement of expenses for economic needs, contrary to the conclusions of the court of appeal, does not confirm the existence of the purpose of causing harm and, moreover, does not prove abuse of the right by the parties. At the same time, since the purpose of harming the property interests of the debtor's creditor has not been proven, there is no creditor person whose interests would be harmed by making disputed payments.
The court of first instance granted the application, declaring the transaction invalid on special grounds, recognizing as proven the existence of a sign of insolvency at the time of its commission.
The appeal rejected the argument that the debtor had a sign of insolvency, but declared the transaction invalid on general grounds. The instance pointed out that in the present case, the debtor's systematic transfer of funds to the defendant under the guise of reimbursement of expenses for economic needs is aimed at worsening the debtor's property situation. This also indicates an abuse of the right on the defendant's side.
The cassation refused to satisfy the application, explaining its approach by the fact that the systematic transfer of funds by the debtor to the defendant under the guise of reimbursement of expenses for economic needs, contrary to the conclusions of the court of appeal, does not confirm the existence of the purpose of causing harm and, moreover, does not prove abuse of the right by the parties. At the same time, since the purpose of harming the property interests of the debtor's creditor has not been proven, there is no creditor person whose interests would be harmed by making disputed payments.
17.05.2024
