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.
THE DISPUTE OVER THE DEPOSIT FOR THE BANKRUPTCY ESTATE REACHED THE SUPREME COURT
The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation plans to consider an unusual question for bankruptcy practice: whether an arbitration administrator can place the debtor's financial assets in an escrow account. Earlier, the arbitration authorities refused to allow such an operation. They pointed out that there is no direct indication in the insolvency law allowing such a deposit to be opened. But such verdicts did not suit one of the creditors, who decided to challenge them. He argues that in a protracted process, money actually loses value.
The reason for the proceedings was the bankruptcy of the company "Minora Life". It was declared insolvent 9 years ago. But the need to discuss the prospect of a deposit arose only last year.
This happened after businessman Dmitry Vorozhbit became the company's creditor, who bought out the claims from the organization ("SLZ"). The entrepreneur proposed to the arbitration manager to place 76.7 million rubles stored in Uralsib on deposit. KU refused, and the creditor applied to the arbitration of the capital (AC GM).
AS GM, and then two more instances supported the manager. The courts clarified that Article 133 of the relevant law presupposes the maintenance of only one debtor's account, but does not provide for the opening of deposits. An additional argument was that settlements with creditors were temporarily suspended. The reason for this was the subsidiary of Minora Life, which arose in the SU-155 case.
The courts pointed out that the deposit implies a variable interest rate. It is impossible to determine the timing of the distribution of funds in a protracted procedure. This makes opening a deposit risky and difficult to control.
Vorozhbit claims in the complaint that the legislation does not prohibit the use of a deposit as a tool to protect the bankruptcy estate from depreciation. According to his calculations, the deposit rate in the bank reached 18.35%. This means that in 2023-2025, creditors could receive an income of 31 million. Instead, according to the applicant, the funds lost value by more than 13 million. The businessman insists that the choice of ways to preserve assets is the prerogative of creditors, whose opinion the judges did not even find out.
The interests of the entrepreneur are represented by BBL Group. According to Natalia Petrova, a partner of the company, placing the bankruptcy estate on the deposit would make it possible to compensate for inflationary losses. To clarify the legal position, a petition was filed with the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.
Lawyers note that the practice traditionally proceeds from the fact that debtors' money cannot be placed on deposit accounts. This applies to the bankruptcy of both legal entities and individuals. At the same time, the RF Armed Forces had not previously considered such disputes.
Some experts believe that the single account rule excludes any additional instruments. Others point out that Article 133 allows for exceptions. Therefore, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation can give a more flexible interpretation, especially considering the economic feasibility. The issues of control, risks of non-return and lack of detailed regulation remain unresolved.
Experts note that until the legislator determines the rules for temporary investment of the bankruptcy estate, the managers will adhere to the most conservative approach. Now it's up to the Supreme Court, which will determine whether a deposit is acceptable in bankruptcy and where the line between legality and economic rationality lies.
The reason for the proceedings was the bankruptcy of the company "Minora Life". It was declared insolvent 9 years ago. But the need to discuss the prospect of a deposit arose only last year.
This happened after businessman Dmitry Vorozhbit became the company's creditor, who bought out the claims from the organization ("SLZ"). The entrepreneur proposed to the arbitration manager to place 76.7 million rubles stored in Uralsib on deposit. KU refused, and the creditor applied to the arbitration of the capital (AC GM).
AS GM, and then two more instances supported the manager. The courts clarified that Article 133 of the relevant law presupposes the maintenance of only one debtor's account, but does not provide for the opening of deposits. An additional argument was that settlements with creditors were temporarily suspended. The reason for this was the subsidiary of Minora Life, which arose in the SU-155 case.
The courts pointed out that the deposit implies a variable interest rate. It is impossible to determine the timing of the distribution of funds in a protracted procedure. This makes opening a deposit risky and difficult to control.
Vorozhbit claims in the complaint that the legislation does not prohibit the use of a deposit as a tool to protect the bankruptcy estate from depreciation. According to his calculations, the deposit rate in the bank reached 18.35%. This means that in 2023-2025, creditors could receive an income of 31 million. Instead, according to the applicant, the funds lost value by more than 13 million. The businessman insists that the choice of ways to preserve assets is the prerogative of creditors, whose opinion the judges did not even find out.
The interests of the entrepreneur are represented by BBL Group. According to Natalia Petrova, a partner of the company, placing the bankruptcy estate on the deposit would make it possible to compensate for inflationary losses. To clarify the legal position, a petition was filed with the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.
Lawyers note that the practice traditionally proceeds from the fact that debtors' money cannot be placed on deposit accounts. This applies to the bankruptcy of both legal entities and individuals. At the same time, the RF Armed Forces had not previously considered such disputes.
Some experts believe that the single account rule excludes any additional instruments. Others point out that Article 133 allows for exceptions. Therefore, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation can give a more flexible interpretation, especially considering the economic feasibility. The issues of control, risks of non-return and lack of detailed regulation remain unresolved.
Experts note that until the legislator determines the rules for temporary investment of the bankruptcy estate, the managers will adhere to the most conservative approach. Now it's up to the Supreme Court, which will determine whether a deposit is acceptable in bankruptcy and where the line between legality and economic rationality lies.
01.12.2025
