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.
IF THE HEAD OF A COMPANY EXCLUDED FROM THE UNIFIED STATE REGISTER OF LEGAL ENTITIES IS BANKRUPT, THE SUBSIDY WILL BE CONSIDERED IN HIS CASE
The creditor applied to the court for the inclusion of the claim in the register of the debtor-citizen (case no. A41-76337/21).
In substantiation of the claim, the creditor pointed out that the company, the head of which was the debtor, owed him a debt, but was subsequently excluded from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities due to the presence of information about unreliability.
The courts of three instances rejected the creditor's claim, based on the fact that in itself the presence of an outstanding debt in a liquidated legal entity is not an indisputable proof of the guilt of its head in non-payment of the specified debt and cannot indicate his unfair or unreasonable behavior that led to non-payment of this debt. In addition, the company's debt arose from 05/16/2016 to 12/01/2016, therefore, the alleged inaction of the debtor for late fulfillment of obligations was allowed before the entry into force of clause 3.1 of Article 3 of the Law on LLC.
The courts also pointed out that the creditor had the opportunity to control the decisions taken by the tax service, but did not dispute the entry of the exclusion of the company.
The Supreme Court referred the creditor's complaint to the board, noting that the circumstances established by the courts are sufficient to qualify the legal relationship under clause 3.1 of Article 3 of the Law on LLC and to hold the debtor vicariously liable for the obligations of the company.
In substantiation of the claim, the creditor pointed out that the company, the head of which was the debtor, owed him a debt, but was subsequently excluded from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities due to the presence of information about unreliability.
The courts of three instances rejected the creditor's claim, based on the fact that in itself the presence of an outstanding debt in a liquidated legal entity is not an indisputable proof of the guilt of its head in non-payment of the specified debt and cannot indicate his unfair or unreasonable behavior that led to non-payment of this debt. In addition, the company's debt arose from 05/16/2016 to 12/01/2016, therefore, the alleged inaction of the debtor for late fulfillment of obligations was allowed before the entry into force of clause 3.1 of Article 3 of the Law on LLC.
The courts also pointed out that the creditor had the opportunity to control the decisions taken by the tax service, but did not dispute the entry of the exclusion of the company.
The Supreme Court referred the creditor's complaint to the board, noting that the circumstances established by the courts are sufficient to qualify the legal relationship under clause 3.1 of Article 3 of the Law on LLC and to hold the debtor vicariously liable for the obligations of the company.
18.06.2024
