RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
09/11/2024
Saturday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
9 November 
1989 The destruction of the Berlin Wall began.
1911 Parisian Georges Claude patented neon advertising.
1906 The beginning of Stolypin's agrarian reform
9 November
1989 The destruction of the Berlin Wall began.
1911 Parisian Georges Claude patented neon advertising.
1906 The beginning of Stolypin's agrarian reform
IF AWARENESS WAS NOT PROVED WHEN CHALLENGING THE TRANSACTION, IT MUST BE PROVED SEPARATELY
In the framework of the debtor's bankruptcy case (No. A32-55433/17), the manager filed an application to recover interest from the defendant on the previously disputed transaction. The defendant, objecting to the claims of the manager, referred to the fact that he was not aware of the debtor's insolvency at the time of the transaction, such awareness was not established in the framework of the dispute on invalidation of the transaction.
The courts of three instances sided with the manager, considering that the defendant should have learned about the invalidity of the transaction no later than from the moment of publication of information about the introduction of the monitoring procedure against the debtor.
The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation referred the defendant's complaint to the judicial board and stressed that the Bankruptcy Law differently regulates the consequences of invalidity of transactions recognized as such on various grounds provided for in Articles 61.2 and 61.3 of this Law, and is more loyal to creditors whose actions lacked signs of dishonesty in making these transactions.
The transaction was challenged on the basis of clause 2 of Article 61.3 of the Bankruptcy Law. There are no signs of the defendant's awareness of the debtor's insolvency at the time of receipt of payments.
Thus, the applicant insists that at the time of the disputed transaction, he did not have and should not have had information about the signs of the debtor's insolvency. Posting information about the initiation of a debtor's bankruptcy case in open sources does not in itself mean that an ordinary creditor connected with the debtor only by a contractual legal relationship should know about it.
Photo: Freepik
The courts of three instances sided with the manager, considering that the defendant should have learned about the invalidity of the transaction no later than from the moment of publication of information about the introduction of the monitoring procedure against the debtor.
The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation referred the defendant's complaint to the judicial board and stressed that the Bankruptcy Law differently regulates the consequences of invalidity of transactions recognized as such on various grounds provided for in Articles 61.2 and 61.3 of this Law, and is more loyal to creditors whose actions lacked signs of dishonesty in making these transactions.
The transaction was challenged on the basis of clause 2 of Article 61.3 of the Bankruptcy Law. There are no signs of the defendant's awareness of the debtor's insolvency at the time of receipt of payments.
Thus, the applicant insists that at the time of the disputed transaction, he did not have and should not have had information about the signs of the debtor's insolvency. Posting information about the initiation of a debtor's bankruptcy case in open sources does not in itself mean that an ordinary creditor connected with the debtor only by a contractual legal relationship should know about it.
Photo: Freepik
15.08.2023
