THE DISTRICT COURT RECALLED THE POSSIBILITY OF CHALLENGING THE TRANSACTION, DESPITE THE REQUIREMENT IN THE REGISTER

In the framework of the bankruptcy case (No. A11-12287/18), the manager filed an application to challenge the set–off transaction between the debtor and the defendants. The courts of two instances refused to satisfy the claim, referring to the fact that the disputed offset repaid the obligation of the defendants to pay part of the value of real estate under the equity participation agreement, the claim from which was included in the register of the transfer of residential premises.

The courts also pointed out that the defendants were not given preference over other creditors of the debtor by the disputed offset.

The district Court sent the dispute for a new consideration, noting that the issue of the legal effect that occurred for the parties as a result of the set-off, the courts did not include in the subject of the study on the dispute and did not assess the relevant circumstances and arguments of the parties involved.

Within the framework of this dispute, the courts had to take into account the need for judicial verification of the specific arguments of the bankruptcy trustee and other persons participating in the consideration of his application that as a result of the offset, the defendants' claims to the debtor for the payment of a fine were satisfied, which violated the property rights of other creditors.

The court also noted that the presence of a requirement in the register of the transfer of residential premises does not prevent the challenge of the offset, since if it is declared invalid, changes may be made to the register regarding incomplete payment of residential premises.