THE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMED THE RIGHT OF THE MORTGAGED CREDITOR TO REPAY THE MORATORIUM INTEREST

THE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMED THE RIGHT OF THE MORTGAGED CREDITOR TO REPAY THE MORATORIUM INTEREST

THE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMED THE RIGHT OF THE MORTGAGED CREDITOR TO REPAY THE MORATORIUM INTEREST
As part of the bankruptcy case of a citizen (No. A56-51728/20), auctions were held for the sale of the debtor's only housing. The mortgagee applied to the court for the resolution of disagreements between him and the debtor's manager regarding the distribution of proceeds for the repayment of moratorial interest in favor of the mortgaged creditor, as well as penalties.


The courts of three instances supported the position of the manager and referred to the fact that the payment of moratorium interest on the claims of the secured creditor with an outstanding register significantly violates the property interests of the remaining five (non-secured) creditors.

The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation did not share this approach and pointed out that the peculiarity of the case is that the lender had a residential building in the mortgage, which is the only housing for the debtor. Consequently, the funds in immunity are transferred only to the person to whom immunity does not apply - to the secured creditor – according to his secured claims of a lower satisfaction queue – for the payment of moratorium interest and financial sanctions.

The funds remaining after that, by virtue of executive immunity, are excluded from the bankruptcy estate and transferred to the debtor in order to ensure his right to housing (initial payment for the purchase of new housing, rental of residential premises, etc.).

Thus, the Supreme Court confirmed the obvious conclusion that only such a creditor (the mortgagee of a single dwelling) has the right to claim the proceeds from the sale of real estate in part of its claims, the amount of which is not limited by the amount of the principal debt.

It is noteworthy that this position of the Supreme Court is a turn in the judicial practice of the highest judicial instance, since earlier the court refused to transfer the complaint in a case where the courts took the opposite approach.


Photo by Freepik


27.06.2023