THE SUPREME COURT OF RUSSIA ALLOWED TERMINATION OF LEASE AGREEMENT OUT OF BANKRUPTCY CASE

THE SUPREME COURT OF RUSSIA ALLOWED TERMINATION OF LEASE AGREEMENT OUT OF BANKRUPTCY CASE

THE SUPREME COURT OF RUSSIA ALLOWED TERMINATION OF LEASE AGREEMENT OUT OF BANKRUPTCY CASE
The Supreme Court of Russia considered a complaint on the court decisions of lower instances, which left the claim for termination of the lease agreement without consideration. The reason for this decision was the need to file an application in the framework of the defendant's insolvency case.

The issue concerned the termination of a forest land plot lease agreement; the Forestry Committee of the Government of the Khabarovsk Territory acted as the lessor.

The agreement was concluded prior to the initiation of the lessee's insolvency proceedings and was successfully executed by the parties. However, later, after the debtor had been declared bankrupt, the lessor filed a separate claim with the court, demanding the termination of the previously concluded agreement. The reason was the failure of the tenant to fulfill his obligations.

Leaving the claim without consideration, the lower courts indicated that the tenant was in the course of bankruptcy proceedings, and all his property, including the right to lease a land plot, was included in the bankruptcy estate.

According to the judges, without this right, the alienation of the debtor's property complex within the framework of the sale of his property will inevitably lead to a decrease in the bankruptcy estate and affect the interests of creditors.

When considering the complaint, the board of the supreme court of Russia indicated that the lease right in this case could not be considered as an asset of the debtor, since its transfer to another person would require the consent of the lessor, and he, in turn, expressed his intention to terminate the concluded agreement.

Consequently, the lenders had no expectation that the lessor would allow a land lease agreement to be entered into. This position leads to the conclusion that there was no reason to consider a violation of the property interests of creditors as the fact of considering the termination of the lease agreement within the framework of a separate dispute (decision in case No. 303-ES20-22258 of May 20, 2021).

21.06.2021