Supreme Court of Russia terminated an attempt to re-impose secondary liability on the head of debtor

The claim to attract the person controlling debtor to the subsidiary liability was referred to the Economic Board of the Supreme Court of Russia at the request of the manager. The court of first instance terminated the proceedings, but the appeal and the district court sent the case for reconsideration, with which the Supreme Court of Russia did not agree with such a decision. The Economic Board pointed out that it was not possible to re-consider the claim.

The fact is that there were two claims for the debtor's bankruptcy and, as a consequence, for the subsidiary liability of the persons controlling him.

In the first case, the court rejected the claims of the manager, citing the lack of proof of the relationship between the manager's fault and the damage caused.

Subsequently, the proceedings on this bankruptcy were terminated due to the absence of a bankruptcy trustee.

Then one of the creditors made another attempt to initiate an insolvency case. This time, another manager again filed an application for prosecuting the head of debtor, backing up his position with the same arguments.

The court of first instance terminated the proceedings on the application, referring to the identity of the claims.

However, the appeal and the district court unanimously concluded that the second insolvency case was a completely different issue, and in this case, there was no need to talk about identity.

The point in the case was put by the Supreme Court of Russia, which compared the parties to dispute, the subject matter and the grounds in detail, and came to the conclusion that the claims were absolutely identical. As a result, the ruling of the court of first instance remained in force, and the rest of the judicial acts were canceled (decision № 301-ES20-18311 (2) of September 1, 2021 in case No. А43-41965 / 2017).