RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
03/03/2026
Tuesday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
3 March 
1933 Hitler proclaimed the formation of the Third Reich.
1933 Hitler proclaimed the formation of the Third Reich
1878 The principality of Great Bulgaria was formed as part of the Ottoman Empire.
1878 The Principality of Great Bulgaria was formed as part of the Ottoman Empire
1613 16-year-old Mikhail Fedorovich was elected to reign and became the first tsar in the Romanov dynasty.
1613 16-year-old Mikhail Fedorovich was elected to rule and became the first Tsar of the Romanov dynasty
3 March
1933 Hitler proclaimed the formation of the Third Reich.
1933 Hitler proclaimed the formation of the Third Reich
1878 The principality of Great Bulgaria was formed as part of the Ottoman Empire.
1878 The Principality of Great Bulgaria was formed as part of the Ottoman Empire
1613 16-year-old Mikhail Fedorovich was elected to reign and became the first tsar in the Romanov dynasty.
1613 16-year-old Mikhail Fedorovich was elected to rule and became the first Tsar of the Romanov dynasty
EXCLUSION OF A SINGLE DWELLING FROM THE COMPETITIVE MASS: LUXURY CRITERIA AND THE COMPOSITION OF THE DEBTOR'S FAMILY
The debtor applied to the court for the exclusion of a residential building and a land plot from the bankruptcy estate (case no. A51-8617/21).
The courts of two instances satisfied the application, having analyzed the documents submitted in the case file, and came to the conclusion that the disputed apartment building, taking into account the size of the living space and the number of family members living with the debtor (5 people) It does not belong to the category of "luxury housing" and, according to its objective characteristics, is reasonably sufficient to meet the constitutionally significant need for housing as an essential means of life support.; He pointed out that, taking into account the degree of deterioration of the house, the real sale price of the disputed property in bankruptcy proceedings may be significantly lower than established by a forensic examination, which will lead to the debtor's inability to purchase residential premises – an apartment with an area sufficient for all family members, and will not entail significant repayment of creditors' claims and significant effective replenishment of the bankruptcy the masses.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, pointing out that the manager, in the context of disagreements with the debtor regarding the provision approved by creditors on the sale of property with the purchase of replacement housing, should have initiated a dispute in the court of first instance to resolve such differences regarding the provision.
Applications for the exclusion of property from the bankruptcy estate, for challenging the decision of the creditors' meeting and for the resolution of disagreements regarding the provision on the sale of property with the purchase of replacement housing are subject to resolution by the court of first instance in a joint dispute.
According to the cassation, the courts should have assessed the arguments of the persons involved in the case, including arguments about the signs of luxury of the disputed property and exceeding the level sufficient to meet a reasonable need for housing, the argument about the artificial creation of executive immunity, taking into account the presence of other residential premises owned by the debtor's family members.
Photo: Freepik
The courts of two instances satisfied the application, having analyzed the documents submitted in the case file, and came to the conclusion that the disputed apartment building, taking into account the size of the living space and the number of family members living with the debtor (5 people) It does not belong to the category of "luxury housing" and, according to its objective characteristics, is reasonably sufficient to meet the constitutionally significant need for housing as an essential means of life support.; He pointed out that, taking into account the degree of deterioration of the house, the real sale price of the disputed property in bankruptcy proceedings may be significantly lower than established by a forensic examination, which will lead to the debtor's inability to purchase residential premises – an apartment with an area sufficient for all family members, and will not entail significant repayment of creditors' claims and significant effective replenishment of the bankruptcy the masses.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, pointing out that the manager, in the context of disagreements with the debtor regarding the provision approved by creditors on the sale of property with the purchase of replacement housing, should have initiated a dispute in the court of first instance to resolve such differences regarding the provision.
Applications for the exclusion of property from the bankruptcy estate, for challenging the decision of the creditors' meeting and for the resolution of disagreements regarding the provision on the sale of property with the purchase of replacement housing are subject to resolution by the court of first instance in a joint dispute.
According to the cassation, the courts should have assessed the arguments of the persons involved in the case, including arguments about the signs of luxury of the disputed property and exceeding the level sufficient to meet a reasonable need for housing, the argument about the artificial creation of executive immunity, taking into account the presence of other residential premises owned by the debtor's family members.
Photo: Freepik
26.02.2026
