RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
05/12/2025
Friday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
5 December 
1936 The Stalinist Constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1936 the Stalinist constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1484 Pope Innocent VII initiated the "witch hunt".
1456 An earthquake that destroyed Naples occurred - 35 thousand people died.
1456 occurred an earthquake that destroyed Naples - 35 thousand people died.
5 December
1936 The Stalinist Constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1936 the Stalinist constitution of the USSR was adopted.
1484 Pope Innocent VII initiated the "witch hunt".
1456 An earthquake that destroyed Naples occurred - 35 thousand people died.
1456 occurred an earthquake that destroyed Naples - 35 thousand people died.
LEGAL ASPECTS OF ASSESSING THE ECONOMIC VALIDITY OF THE DEBTOR'S PAYMENTS IN THE PRE-BANKRUPTCY PERIOD
The manager applied to the court for invalidation of money transfer transactions (case no. A76-9452/23).
In refusing to recognize the disputed transaction as invalid, the courts proceeded from the fact that the interest of the debtor and the defendant had not been proven, the manager had not refuted that at the time of the disputed payments the debtor had no signs of insolvency, since the obligations to the sole creditor to repay the loan came later, the transaction was made to harm creditors and the defendant's awareness of this purpose was not It is proved that the disputed payments were made by the debtor in repayment of a debt owed to a third party, who indicated that the refund should be made to the defendant's account.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, noting the following:
Photo: Freepik
In refusing to recognize the disputed transaction as invalid, the courts proceeded from the fact that the interest of the debtor and the defendant had not been proven, the manager had not refuted that at the time of the disputed payments the debtor had no signs of insolvency, since the obligations to the sole creditor to repay the loan came later, the transaction was made to harm creditors and the defendant's awareness of this purpose was not It is proved that the disputed payments were made by the debtor in repayment of a debt owed to a third party, who indicated that the refund should be made to the defendant's account.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, noting the following:
- The courts should investigate whether asset withdrawal transactions were carried out during the period from the moment of receipt of the loan to the due date of its repayment by the debtor, all the circumstances and consequences of such transactions, and if it is established that during the said period the debtor made transactions for illegal and unjustified asset withdrawal, which, among other things, led to further to the inability to repay the debtor's obligations at the expense of the withdrawn assets, knowing exactly about the existence of such obligations and the timing of their fulfillment, such transactions may be invalidated as committed with the aim of harming the rights and property interests of creditors.
- In addition, concluding that in this case there were legal relations between the companies for the supply of goods, in which one company purchased goods from another, after which, in order to pay for these supplies, the debtor transferred the disputed funds to the defendant's current account as a trustee of the company, In fact, the courts did not fully and properly investigate, establish or evaluate the above-mentioned circumstances, and the named conclusions of the courts are formal and do not correspond to the case materials.
- Based on the above, the courts' conclusion that the disputed funds were transferred by the debtor in favor of the defendant in order to fulfill the debtor's real obligation to a third party, as well as the existence and fulfillment of mutual obligations by the companies, are formal, unfounded, and made prematurely, without investigating and evaluating all the circumstances that are essential to the case, in the absence of all necessary evidence in the case file.
- At the same time, having concluded that there were legal relations between the companies for the supply of goods, which were settled using settlement accounts of individuals, as well as that the debtor had repaid his obligation to a third party through disputed transfers of funds, the courts did not involve the named persons in this dispute, but In fact, they spoke about their rights and obligations within the framework of the relevant legal relations.
Photo: Freepik
29.05.2025
