THE DISTRICT COURT EXPLAINED THE PECULIARITIES OF RECOGNITION OF PAYMENTS AS OPERATIONAL ONES

The Arbitration Court of the Urals District considered the claim of one of the debtor's creditors, who insisted on assigning a number of payments to the fifth priority instead of the fourth. However, the courts of the first two instances did not support the applicant's position and rejected his claim.

The essence of the dispute boiled down to whether the disputed payments were operational for the debtor and his property.

The courts of the first two instances, referring the claims to the fourth priority of current payments, insisted on the fact that obligations arose from resource supply agreements, therefore, the debt arose within the framework of operational legal relations.

However, the district court reminded colleagues that the operational payments include the payments that are aimed at preserving the debtor's property and maintaining it in proper condition until the moment of sale.

At the same time, the disputed debts arose from contracts for the operation of residential buildings, which were serviced by the debtor.

It means that they related to the property that did not belong to the defendant himself and would not be included in the bankruptcy estate.

Such requirements must be satisfied within the framework of the fifth priority of the register of creditors’ claims, concluded the Ural Court of Arbitration (decision No. F09-487 / 21 of March 29, 2021).