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.
PAYMENT CHAIN: WHERE DOES THE LEGAL END AND THE CONTROVERSIAL BEGIN?
The creditor applied to the court for invalidation of the transfer of funds by the debtor in favor of the company (case no. A40-151554/19).
In rejecting the application, the courts of two instances proceeded from the creditor's choice of an inappropriate way to protect the violated right, pointing out that the subject of the dispute was not a transaction made by the debtor or at the expense of his property, but the issue of the reasonableness of the distribution of funds by the bankruptcy trustee as part of the bankruptcy procedure of the controlled company. It was also noted that at the time of repayment of creditors' claims, all claims of bankruptcy creditors were confirmed by judicial acts that had entered into force, including the claim of the recipient of funds.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration and pointed out that the dependence of the value of the debtor's share on the value of the legal entity's property determines the impact of the disputed property alienation agreement on the formation of the debtor's bankruptcy estate and the satisfaction of creditors' claims. This, in the opinion of the instance, indicates the possibility of challenging the relevant agreement in the framework of the bankruptcy case of an individual.
Considering the above, the argument of the applicants of cassation complaints is justified that transactions concluded with the participation of the debtor, including through participation in the authorized capital of a legal entity, affect the rights of the debtor's creditors and affect the formation of the bankruptcy estate.
The District Court draws attention to the fact that the establishment of the affiliation of the parties to the disputed transaction significantly affects the resolution of a separate dispute, since it determines the distribution of the burden of proof.
The courts established that the transfer of funds was carried out by the company in the person of the bankruptcy trustee, however, the fact that the affiliation between the beneficiary of the group of companies and the bankruptcy trustee had previously been confirmed was not taken into account.
The Court of cassation cannot agree with the conclusions of the courts, since the courts ignored the applicants' arguments about the source of the money from the counterparties. Additional attention should also be paid to the circumstances established by judicial acts in other cases, which established that the recipient of funds did not have his own funds to redeem claims against the debtor. The recipient of funds received funds for payment under assignment agreements from persons who received these funds from persons controlled by the debtor.
Photo: Freepik
In rejecting the application, the courts of two instances proceeded from the creditor's choice of an inappropriate way to protect the violated right, pointing out that the subject of the dispute was not a transaction made by the debtor or at the expense of his property, but the issue of the reasonableness of the distribution of funds by the bankruptcy trustee as part of the bankruptcy procedure of the controlled company. It was also noted that at the time of repayment of creditors' claims, all claims of bankruptcy creditors were confirmed by judicial acts that had entered into force, including the claim of the recipient of funds.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration and pointed out that the dependence of the value of the debtor's share on the value of the legal entity's property determines the impact of the disputed property alienation agreement on the formation of the debtor's bankruptcy estate and the satisfaction of creditors' claims. This, in the opinion of the instance, indicates the possibility of challenging the relevant agreement in the framework of the bankruptcy case of an individual.
Considering the above, the argument of the applicants of cassation complaints is justified that transactions concluded with the participation of the debtor, including through participation in the authorized capital of a legal entity, affect the rights of the debtor's creditors and affect the formation of the bankruptcy estate.
The District Court draws attention to the fact that the establishment of the affiliation of the parties to the disputed transaction significantly affects the resolution of a separate dispute, since it determines the distribution of the burden of proof.
The courts established that the transfer of funds was carried out by the company in the person of the bankruptcy trustee, however, the fact that the affiliation between the beneficiary of the group of companies and the bankruptcy trustee had previously been confirmed was not taken into account.
The Court of cassation cannot agree with the conclusions of the courts, since the courts ignored the applicants' arguments about the source of the money from the counterparties. Additional attention should also be paid to the circumstances established by judicial acts in other cases, which established that the recipient of funds did not have his own funds to redeem claims against the debtor. The recipient of funds received funds for payment under assignment agreements from persons who received these funds from persons controlled by the debtor.
Photo: Freepik
09.09.2025
