THE COURT SET OUT THE RIGHT TO PROCEDURAL SUCCESSION OF INSIGNIFICANT DEBT

The District Court considered the complaint of an individual who acquired a debt in the amount of 105 rubles 42 kopecks from one of the debtor's creditors under a contract of assignment of the right to claim. The lower courts rejected the application, considering that there was no economic feasibility in the transaction for the applicant, but the district court did not support this opinion.

Initially, there was a controversial debt to the tax inspectorate, but later it was paid off by an individual (assignor under an assignment agreement). After a while, the debt was again assigned to the applicant on a cassation appeal.

For the purposes of procedural succession, the man presented an assignment agreement, as well as a receipt, according to which the debt was redeemed.

Despite this, the court of the first instance and then the court of appeal rejected the claim, citing the lack of proof of the economic feasibility of acquiring the debt.

At the time of consideration of the bankruptcy petition, the bankruptcy case was at the stage of bringing the persons controlling the debtor to subsidiary liability. At the same time, it had already been established that the debtor himself had no property. In addition, the courts doubted the conscientiousness of the assignee, considering that having entered the case, he could pose all sorts of obstacles, and rejected the claims.

However, the district court did not support this position. The three judges indicated that within the framework of an insolvency case, the law allows the procedural succession. At the same time, the applicant presented evidence of its commission (agreement and receipt of settlement with the assignor).

When it comes to the economic unreasonableness, asserted by the lower instances, no evidence of this was presented.

As a result, the decisions of the lower courts were canceled, and the procedural succession was completed (decision in case No. A76-9269 / 2014 of May 4, 2021).