RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
30/01/2026
Friday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
30 January 
1970 Same-sex marriages were legalized in Belgium.
1970 Gay marriages were legalized in Belgium
1970 The Shekel currency was introduced in Israel.
1970 Charles Richter proposed the Richter’s scale for measuring earthquakes magnitude.
1970 Charles Richter proposed the Richter’s scale for measuring earthquakes magnitude
1970 Charles Darwin's book on natural selection was published in Russia.
1970 Charles Darwin's book on natural selection was published in Russia
30 January
1970 Same-sex marriages were legalized in Belgium.
1970 Gay marriages were legalized in Belgium
1970 The Shekel currency was introduced in Israel.
1970 Charles Richter proposed the Richter’s scale for measuring earthquakes magnitude.
1970 Charles Richter proposed the Richter’s scale for measuring earthquakes magnitude
1970 Charles Darwin's book on natural selection was published in Russia.
1970 Charles Darwin's book on natural selection was published in Russia
RESTORATION OF CREDITORS' RIGHTS: HOW TO APPLY THE CONSEQUENCES OF INVALID TRANSACTIONS
The manager appealed to the court with a demand to invalidate the loan and assignment agreements concluded between the debtor and the company, as well as the act of set-off (case no. A39-2215/23).
Partially satisfying the application, the courts of two instances proceeded from the fact that the manager missed the limitation period for challenging some transactions, therefore this part was denied. However, the assignment agreements were declared null and void, since they are in the nature of fake transactions covering the donation of the debtor's liquid property (rights of claim) in favor of the company.
It is established that the debtor and the company are affiliated persons, the transactions were made during the period when the debtor had signs of insolvency. There is no evidence of payment of claims by the company, therefore, the disputed transactions are gratuitous and fake, which led to a decrease in the debtor's bankruptcy estate. As a consequence of the invalidity of the transaction, the courts restored the company's debt to the debtor under the specified assignment agreements.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration in part, pointing out that in the case in question the parties had concluded assignment agreements that actually covered up the donation, that is, a unilateral transaction that did not provide for counter-performance. Consequently, the consequence of the invalidity of these transactions should be unilateral restitution in the form of restoration of the debtor's claim to debtors.
In the opinion of the cassation instance, the court of first instance unlawfully applied restitution in the form of recovery of funds from the defendant, without establishing the fact that it was impossible to return the rights of claim in kind. The issue of whether debtors have repaid debts to the company in whole or in part, whether the disputed claims have been assigned to other persons, and whether there are other obstacles to the parties' return to their original position has not been investigated.
Photo: Freepik
Partially satisfying the application, the courts of two instances proceeded from the fact that the manager missed the limitation period for challenging some transactions, therefore this part was denied. However, the assignment agreements were declared null and void, since they are in the nature of fake transactions covering the donation of the debtor's liquid property (rights of claim) in favor of the company.
It is established that the debtor and the company are affiliated persons, the transactions were made during the period when the debtor had signs of insolvency. There is no evidence of payment of claims by the company, therefore, the disputed transactions are gratuitous and fake, which led to a decrease in the debtor's bankruptcy estate. As a consequence of the invalidity of the transaction, the courts restored the company's debt to the debtor under the specified assignment agreements.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration in part, pointing out that in the case in question the parties had concluded assignment agreements that actually covered up the donation, that is, a unilateral transaction that did not provide for counter-performance. Consequently, the consequence of the invalidity of these transactions should be unilateral restitution in the form of restoration of the debtor's claim to debtors.
In the opinion of the cassation instance, the court of first instance unlawfully applied restitution in the form of recovery of funds from the defendant, without establishing the fact that it was impossible to return the rights of claim in kind. The issue of whether debtors have repaid debts to the company in whole or in part, whether the disputed claims have been assigned to other persons, and whether there are other obstacles to the parties' return to their original position has not been investigated.
Photo: Freepik
29.01.2026
