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 MORATORIUM AS AN ECONOMIC ANESTHETIC
The creditor applied to the court for the inclusion of claims in the debtor's register (case no. A40-163322/23).
Partially satisfying the application, the courts of the two instances were guided by the fact that the case file contains a decision of the district court in another case, according to which the debtor was charged for the loan agreement in favor of the creditor, interest for using the loan, penalties for violating the terms of the loan agreement, court costs for state duty, foreclosure on the collateral belonging to the debtor non-residential premises.
The decision was partially executed, including by transferring part of the debtor's unrealized property to the recoverer. Enforcement proceedings for the enforcement of a decision of a court of general jurisdiction have been initiated twice, which confirms that the deadlines for submitting a writ of execution have not been missed.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration in part, agreeing with the arguments of the complaint of another creditor about the need to review the amount of the penalty. It is stated that when a moratorium was imposed on the accrual of financial sanctions, which was in effect for a certain period, such sanctions should not have been imposed on claims that arose before the moratorium was imposed. In the present case, the creditor has claimed a penalty accrued on the amount of debt existing before the moratorium, including the period of the moratorium.
The arguments of the cassation appeal regarding the absence of arrears on the principal debt and interest for the use of the loan are rejected as contradicting the investigated materials of the enforcement proceedings. However, the court of cassation recognizes the need to verify the correctness of the calculation of the penalty, since the moratorium was not taken into account by any of the previous instances.
At the same time, the court of cassation noted the inaccuracy of the application of the moratorium introduced earlier, since it does not apply to the case in question. At the same time, the court points out that it is necessary to take into account the effect of another moratorium and recalculate the penalty based on the applicable substantive law.
Photo: Freepik
Partially satisfying the application, the courts of the two instances were guided by the fact that the case file contains a decision of the district court in another case, according to which the debtor was charged for the loan agreement in favor of the creditor, interest for using the loan, penalties for violating the terms of the loan agreement, court costs for state duty, foreclosure on the collateral belonging to the debtor non-residential premises.
The decision was partially executed, including by transferring part of the debtor's unrealized property to the recoverer. Enforcement proceedings for the enforcement of a decision of a court of general jurisdiction have been initiated twice, which confirms that the deadlines for submitting a writ of execution have not been missed.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration in part, agreeing with the arguments of the complaint of another creditor about the need to review the amount of the penalty. It is stated that when a moratorium was imposed on the accrual of financial sanctions, which was in effect for a certain period, such sanctions should not have been imposed on claims that arose before the moratorium was imposed. In the present case, the creditor has claimed a penalty accrued on the amount of debt existing before the moratorium, including the period of the moratorium.
The arguments of the cassation appeal regarding the absence of arrears on the principal debt and interest for the use of the loan are rejected as contradicting the investigated materials of the enforcement proceedings. However, the court of cassation recognizes the need to verify the correctness of the calculation of the penalty, since the moratorium was not taken into account by any of the previous instances.
At the same time, the court of cassation noted the inaccuracy of the application of the moratorium introduced earlier, since it does not apply to the case in question. At the same time, the court points out that it is necessary to take into account the effect of another moratorium and recalculate the penalty based on the applicable substantive law.
Photo: Freepik
30.07.2025
