RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
06/04/2026
Monday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
6 April 
1985 American William Schroeder became the first person to be discharged from the hospital with an artificial heart
1985 American William Schroeder became the first person to be discharged from the hospital with an artificial heart
1897 The slavery was prohibited in Zanzibar
1897 The slavery was prohibited in Zanzibar
1772 Catherine II abolished the duty on wearing a beard, imposed by Peter I
1772 Catherine II abolished the duty on wearing a beard, imposed by Peter I
6 April
1985 American William Schroeder became the first person to be discharged from the hospital with an artificial heart
1985 American William Schroeder became the first person to be discharged from the hospital with an artificial heart
1897 The slavery was prohibited in Zanzibar
1897 The slavery was prohibited in Zanzibar
1772 Catherine II abolished the duty on wearing a beard, imposed by Peter I
1772 Catherine II abolished the duty on wearing a beard, imposed by Peter I
The Supreme Court refused to forgive the debts of an unemployed debtor
Bankruptcy practices for individuals in Russia continue to tighten. The Economic Collegium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation issued a ruling that changes the approach to assessing the good faith of debtors. The focus was on the nine-year-old case of Denis Polonsky, who was unable to free himself from his financial obligations due to questionable conduct during the proceedings.
Denis Polonsky filed for bankruptcy in December 2015, and ten months later, the court declared him insolvent. The proceedings dragged on for many years and were only completed in February 2025. During this time, creditors managed to recover only a small portion of their funds: out of a total debt of 145.57 million rubles, only 10.14 million (approximately 7.4%) were repaid. Initially, the Moscow Arbitration Court deemed it possible to write off the remaining debts, but one of the creditors appealed this decision, taking the matter all the way to the Supreme Court.
The highest court, which published its decision on March 11, cited a number of factors that, taken together, indicate the individual's bad faith. According to the judges, the bankruptcy mechanism is intended to protect bona fide borrowers in difficult circumstances, not to evade obligations. The debtor is obligated to actively cooperate with the financial manager and seek ways to pay off creditors.
No such attempFurthermore, shortly before filing for bankruptcy, Polonsky issued a surety bond in favor of an affiliated entity. Although lower courts invalidated this transaction, the Supreme Court deemed its very existence an attempt at manipulation. This could have led to the emergence of a "friendly" creditor, infringing on the rights of independent debt collectors. The attempt to negotiate a settlement agreement, which effectively offered one creditor 95% of the debt, was also criticized.
Furthermore, shortly before filing for bankruptcy, Polonsky issued a surety bond in favor of an affiliated entity. Although lower courts invalidated this transaction, the Supreme Court deemed its very existence an attempt at manipulation. This could have led to the emergence of a "friendly" creditor, infringing on the rights of independent debt collectors. The attempt to negotiate a settlement agreement, which effectively offered one creditor 95% of the debt, was also criticized.
Lawyers note that this case demonstrates a shift in judicial priorities. While courts previously considered individual cases in isolation, the Supreme Court now evaluates the entire picture, identifying systemic violations. Statistics confirm the relevance of the problem: in 2025, more than 4,900 individuals filed for bankruptcy without having their debts forgiven.
Experts emphasize that the denial of release from obligations became possible even though potential harm from the issued guarantee was prevented. This imposes additional responsibility on debtors: they will have to independently prove their good faith, especially in terms of disclosing all financial transactions and expenses preceding bankruptcy.
Photo: Freepik
Denis Polonsky filed for bankruptcy in December 2015, and ten months later, the court declared him insolvent. The proceedings dragged on for many years and were only completed in February 2025. During this time, creditors managed to recover only a small portion of their funds: out of a total debt of 145.57 million rubles, only 10.14 million (approximately 7.4%) were repaid. Initially, the Moscow Arbitration Court deemed it possible to write off the remaining debts, but one of the creditors appealed this decision, taking the matter all the way to the Supreme Court.
The highest court, which published its decision on March 11, cited a number of factors that, taken together, indicate the individual's bad faith. According to the judges, the bankruptcy mechanism is intended to protect bona fide borrowers in difficult circumstances, not to evade obligations. The debtor is obligated to actively cooperate with the financial manager and seek ways to pay off creditors.
No such attempFurthermore, shortly before filing for bankruptcy, Polonsky issued a surety bond in favor of an affiliated entity. Although lower courts invalidated this transaction, the Supreme Court deemed its very existence an attempt at manipulation. This could have led to the emergence of a "friendly" creditor, infringing on the rights of independent debt collectors. The attempt to negotiate a settlement agreement, which effectively offered one creditor 95% of the debt, was also criticized.
Furthermore, shortly before filing for bankruptcy, Polonsky issued a surety bond in favor of an affiliated entity. Although lower courts invalidated this transaction, the Supreme Court deemed its very existence an attempt at manipulation. This could have led to the emergence of a "friendly" creditor, infringing on the rights of independent debt collectors. The attempt to negotiate a settlement agreement, which effectively offered one creditor 95% of the debt, was also criticized.
Lawyers note that this case demonstrates a shift in judicial priorities. While courts previously considered individual cases in isolation, the Supreme Court now evaluates the entire picture, identifying systemic violations. Statistics confirm the relevance of the problem: in 2025, more than 4,900 individuals filed for bankruptcy without having their debts forgiven.
Experts emphasize that the denial of release from obligations became possible even though potential harm from the issued guarantee was prevented. This imposes additional responsibility on debtors: they will have to independently prove their good faith, especially in terms of disclosing all financial transactions and expenses preceding bankruptcy.
Photo: Freepik
13.03.2026
