THE COURT DID NOT APPRECIATE INACTION OF COLLEAGUES AND CANCELLED COURT RULINGS

The district court considered the complaint of a citizen whose bankruptcy proceedings were terminated by the court. The reason was the expiration of the procedural period for the appointment of a financial manager.

Initially, there was a manager, but his powers were terminated ahead of schedule. After that, the court of the first instance first made an attempt to choose a new manager from the same SRO by sending a corresponding request. However, the self-regulatory organization responded that none of its members agreed to take up the proposed position.

Then the court raised the issue of the existence of another SRO at a regular meeting, and the debtor proposed to choose his own. But in response to a court request for a candidacy proposal, the organization indicated that there were no managers wishing to conduct bankruptcy.

After the judge made a decision to terminate the bankruptcy proceedings of the debtor, the appellate instance upheld this position.

As for the district court, it allowed disagreed with such enforcement. The Board considered that in case of an individual's bankruptcy, the court, as a representative of the state, must ensure that the citizen brings the insolvency procedure to its logical conclusion. In this case, the judge of the first instance should have shown more initiative and sent requests to several SROs, not limited to the organizations proposed by the parties.

This error has to be corrected in the court of the first instance when the case is reconsidered (decision in case No. А40-88647 / 2019 of February 10, 2021).