THE EXISTENCE OF A BANKRUPTCY CASE DOES NOT INDICATE THAT THE COUNTERPARTY IS AWARE OF THE INSOLVENCY

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation annulled the judicial acts of lower instances and refused to satisfy the claim for the recovery of interest for the use of other people's money. The manager of the company, in respect of which the bankruptcy proceedings are being conducted, filed an application for the recovery of interest for the use of the customer's material assets, referring to the fact that after the initiation of bankruptcy proceedings, the transaction for transferring money to the contractor was challenged. According to the manager, in this regard, the customer is obliged to pay interest.

During a lengthy trial, three instances decided to satisfy the claim in full, arguing that the contractor was obliged to get acquainted with the information about the invalidity of the transaction no later than the publication of information about the opening of surveillance in relation to the bankrupt company.

However, the Supreme Court did not agree with the arguments of the lower instances. Citing his position on this issue, the Supreme Court noted that, according to paragraph 3 of Article 61 of Federal Law No. 127-FZ dated 26.10.2002 "On Insolvency (Bankruptcy), a transaction made within a month before the initiation of a bankruptcy case can be determined as invalid if the fact of the creditor's bad faith is established.

Also, according to paragraph 9.1 of Resolution No. 63 and paragraph 25 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of December 23, 2021 No. 46, the court examining the dispute independently determines the nature of the disputed legal relationship, regardless of the position of the parties on this issue. The court must proceed from the circumstances established during the proceedings.

In the present case, the contractor was connected with the customer solely by the contract and the provision of services, being a simple creditor. The Customer did not pay the Contractor for the services rendered to him, in connection with which the latter appealed to the court to protect his legal rights and interests. The court ruled in his favor, after which the contractor was not obliged to find out about the opening of bankruptcy proceedings against the customer. Having given these conclusions, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation canceled the acts of higher authorities and refused to satisfy the claim to the manager of the bankrupt company.