THE DISTRICT COURT OUTLINED THE PECULIARITIES OF INVOLVEMENT THE APPRAISER IN BANKRUPTCY

THE DISTRICT COURT OUTLINED THE PECULIARITIES OF INVOLVEMENT THE APPRAISER IN BANKRUPTCY

THE DISTRICT COURT OUTLINED THE PECULIARITIES OF INVOLVEMENT THE APPRAISER IN BANKRUPTCY
The Arbitration Court of the North Caucasian Federal District considered the case on the complaint of one of the creditors. The applicant was not satisfied with the rulings adopted by the lower courts, by which the bankruptcy manager of the debtor was allowed to involve an appraiser to determine the value of the latter's property.

The creditor considered that the manager was able to carry out the assessment himself, and there was no need to spend funds from the bankruptcy estate on it. In addition, the proposed cost of the appraiser's services was also characterized by the applicant as overstated.

However, the courts of the first and appeal instances supported the manager, pointing out the large volume and heterogeneity of the property, a significant amount of movable property and its use for commercial purposes.

The district court recalled that the involvement of additional forces on the part of the anti-crisis manager is possible only in a number of situations.

First of all, the manager must prove that there is enough property in the bankruptcy mass to pay for the services of these persons.

Secondly, the manager must confirm that without the involvement of additional persons, it will become impossible to achieve the goals of the insolvency procedure provided for by law.

In addition, the courts did not take into account that among the debtor's property there was also a pledge, and in this case, when assessing its value, one cannot do without the opinion of the pledge lender.

In addition, the District Court noted that the applicant had not indicated a specific amount of expenses that would have to be incurred in assessing the debtor's property.

As a result of the consideration of the case, the court decisions of the lower instances were cancelled, and the case will be sent for reconsideration (resolution in case No. À32-37211 / 2018 of February 26, 2021).


21.04.2021