INAPPROPRIATE SPENDING OF FUNDS BY THE STATE BUDGET IS UNACCEPTABLE

The manager appealed to the court with an application to challenge the transfers of funds from the debtor in favor of the defendant (case no. A40-6815/21).

The courts of two instances refused to satisfy the application, guided by the fact that there is no evidence in the dispute materials confirming the misuse of funds in the execution of the supply contract. At the same time, the state defense order (GOZ) under the contract for the manufacture and supply of a complex infotelecommunication equipment node was executed by the debtor in full, which is confirmed by judicial acts that have entered into force in another case.

The cassation, referring the dispute for a new consideration, pointed out that the manager consistently argued that in order to circumvent the mandatory provisions of the law and withdraw funds that have a strictly intended purpose, the debtor sent first to the bank and then to the bailiff service an application for transferring funds not to a special account opened for the purposes of fulfilling the delivery agreement, but to the company's regular checking account.

The manager also pointed out that the debtor's management had created a scheme for withdrawing budgetary funds allocated for the fulfillment of the state defense order to the company's current account, bypassing a special account opened in the bank.

The debtor, in the presence of an open special account and unfulfilled obligations to the executors of the state defense order, received funds to the settlement account on the basis of his own application and allowed the expenditure of funds in violation of the mandatory prohibitions of the law.