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 SUPREME COURT WILL DETERMINE WHO WILL PAY FOR THE BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE IN THE ABSENCE OF ASSETS OF 16+
The Supreme Court (SC) of the Russian Federation will have to determine who is responsible for covering the costs of bankruptcy proceedings if the debtor does not have the funds. The key issue concerns the payment of the remuneration of the arbitration manager (AU). Courts have made different decisions in similar situations: some have shifted these costs to the initiator of the procedure, others to the manager himself. The final position should be worked out by the Economic Board (SCES VS).
The reason for the review was a dispute between the Federal Tax Service and the AU in the bankruptcy case of Globula. The tax authority initiated the procedure eight years ago. In 2018, the debtor was declared insolvent. The Federal Tax Service is the only creditor in this case who has submitted claims for 21 million rubles. By the middle of 2021, the organization's bankruptcy estate was replenished in the amount of about 1 million. The money was eventually used to pay the AU's remuneration and cover current expenses. The Fiscal Service has not received anything.
Five years ago, those who control the organization's activities were brought to justice. At the beginning of 2022, the court determined the amount of the subsidy – 21.4 million rubles. 231.6 thousand of this amount were paid to the AU as a reward.
But in the spring of 2022, the tax service notified the court that it would no longer allocate money to finance the process, since the company had no property. The Federal Tax Service petitioned the court to terminate the lawsuit. AU did not agree with this, having achieved an extension of the procedure, which he completed in 2023, having previously sold part of the subsidiary claims at a discount.
After the completion of the case, AU stated his demands for the payment of about 0.5 million in remuneration and court costs to the tax authorities. The first instance refused, stating that he had assumed the risk, knowing since August 2020 that there were not enough assets.
The appeal and cassation decided otherwise: expenses until March 2022 (the date of the Federal Tax Service's refusal of the claim) are subject to reimbursement by the tax authorities as the initiators of the insolvency. The arbitration manager was awarded 238.4 thousand rubles. The Federal Tax Service is now trying to challenge these decisions in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. The hearing is scheduled for November 24.
It is known that article 59 of the relevant law provides for the obligation of the person who initiated the trial to compensate for expenses in a situation where the debtor's assets are insufficient. This includes the payment of a fixed remuneration to the AU. However, the regulatory legal act does not regulate the situation when the initiator refuses financing. In practice, the solution to this problem is delegated to the courts. According to experts, the verdict of the SCEC can become a guideline for many similar bankruptcies.
The opinions of the professional community are divided. Some lawyers believe that the manager is obliged to terminate the case if there is a shortage of funds, otherwise he bears the risk of paying expenses. Others point out that the initiator's refusal of financing does not release him from his obligations to reimburse costs until such a refusal. The issue is also being discussed whether the manager has the right to demand compensation if he has ceded part of the subsidiary claims to a third party.
According to the EFRSB, in the first half of 2025, arbitration managers received 3.5 billion rubles for conducting competitive procedures. The decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the Globula case can significantly affect the distribution of such costs in the future.
Photo: Freepik
The reason for the review was a dispute between the Federal Tax Service and the AU in the bankruptcy case of Globula. The tax authority initiated the procedure eight years ago. In 2018, the debtor was declared insolvent. The Federal Tax Service is the only creditor in this case who has submitted claims for 21 million rubles. By the middle of 2021, the organization's bankruptcy estate was replenished in the amount of about 1 million. The money was eventually used to pay the AU's remuneration and cover current expenses. The Fiscal Service has not received anything.
Five years ago, those who control the organization's activities were brought to justice. At the beginning of 2022, the court determined the amount of the subsidy – 21.4 million rubles. 231.6 thousand of this amount were paid to the AU as a reward.
But in the spring of 2022, the tax service notified the court that it would no longer allocate money to finance the process, since the company had no property. The Federal Tax Service petitioned the court to terminate the lawsuit. AU did not agree with this, having achieved an extension of the procedure, which he completed in 2023, having previously sold part of the subsidiary claims at a discount.
After the completion of the case, AU stated his demands for the payment of about 0.5 million in remuneration and court costs to the tax authorities. The first instance refused, stating that he had assumed the risk, knowing since August 2020 that there were not enough assets.
The appeal and cassation decided otherwise: expenses until March 2022 (the date of the Federal Tax Service's refusal of the claim) are subject to reimbursement by the tax authorities as the initiators of the insolvency. The arbitration manager was awarded 238.4 thousand rubles. The Federal Tax Service is now trying to challenge these decisions in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation. The hearing is scheduled for November 24.
It is known that article 59 of the relevant law provides for the obligation of the person who initiated the trial to compensate for expenses in a situation where the debtor's assets are insufficient. This includes the payment of a fixed remuneration to the AU. However, the regulatory legal act does not regulate the situation when the initiator refuses financing. In practice, the solution to this problem is delegated to the courts. According to experts, the verdict of the SCEC can become a guideline for many similar bankruptcies.
The opinions of the professional community are divided. Some lawyers believe that the manager is obliged to terminate the case if there is a shortage of funds, otherwise he bears the risk of paying expenses. Others point out that the initiator's refusal of financing does not release him from his obligations to reimburse costs until such a refusal. The issue is also being discussed whether the manager has the right to demand compensation if he has ceded part of the subsidiary claims to a third party.
According to the EFRSB, in the first half of 2025, arbitration managers received 3.5 billion rubles for conducting competitive procedures. The decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the Globula case can significantly affect the distribution of such costs in the future.
Photo: Freepik
20.10.2025
