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.
Payments in question: checking the grounds for applying for a subsidy
The manager appealed to the court demanding that the controlling persons be held vicariously liable for the debtor's obligations (case no. A56-95280/20).
The courts of two instances granted the application, since as a result of the company's unprofitable transactions, significant funds and an expensive vehicle were withdrawn from its property base. The submitted documents confirm only a part of the payments, the rest do not have sufficient justification. In particular, under one of the contracts, only a small part of the transferred funds was confirmed with a large total amount of payments.
The document flow between the company and the counterparties was fully controlled by the defendants. The alienation of the car also caused harm to creditors.
The cassation sent the dispute for a new hearing, as the lower courts did not examine the documents confirming the relationship with the customers.
In addition, the arguments that the disputed payments were made in fulfillment of obligations to customers have not been sufficiently verified.
The courts did not take into account the decision of the tax authority confirming the legality of transactions with certain counterparties.
Also: the creation of a formal document flow with affiliated companies has not been established.
The circumstances of the creation of one of the contractor companies and the reasons for the transfer of employees have not been verified. There are no specific references to documents when evaluating evidence.
In addition, the courts have not examined additional documents confirming the fulfillment of obligations with counterparties for a larger amount than indicated in the decision of the court of first instance. The arguments about the need to apply the clarifications of the highest court in similar disputes have not been verified.
The courts of two instances granted the application, since as a result of the company's unprofitable transactions, significant funds and an expensive vehicle were withdrawn from its property base. The submitted documents confirm only a part of the payments, the rest do not have sufficient justification. In particular, under one of the contracts, only a small part of the transferred funds was confirmed with a large total amount of payments.
The document flow between the company and the counterparties was fully controlled by the defendants. The alienation of the car also caused harm to creditors.
The cassation sent the dispute for a new hearing, as the lower courts did not examine the documents confirming the relationship with the customers.
In addition, the arguments that the disputed payments were made in fulfillment of obligations to customers have not been sufficiently verified.
The courts did not take into account the decision of the tax authority confirming the legality of transactions with certain counterparties.
Also: the creation of a formal document flow with affiliated companies has not been established.
The circumstances of the creation of one of the contractor companies and the reasons for the transfer of employees have not been verified. There are no specific references to documents when evaluating evidence.
In addition, the courts have not examined additional documents confirming the fulfillment of obligations with counterparties for a larger amount than indicated in the decision of the court of first instance. The arguments about the need to apply the clarifications of the highest court in similar disputes have not been verified.
21.07.2025
