RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
03/05/2024
Friday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
3 May 
2021 World Press Freedom Day
2020 World Press Freedom Day
1957 Collective farms were transformed into the state farms in the USSR.
1957 Collective farms were transformed into the state farms in the USSR.
1841 New Zealand was declared a British colony.
1841 New Zealand was declared a British colony.
3 May
2021 World Press Freedom Day
2020 World Press Freedom Day
1957 Collective farms were transformed into the state farms in the USSR.
1957 Collective farms were transformed into the state farms in the USSR.
1841 New Zealand was declared a British colony.
1841 New Zealand was declared a British colony.
THE COLLATERAL CREDITOR IS ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION
As part of the debtor's bankruptcy case, the creditor filed an application with the court to determine the amount of compensation that he was to be paid as a collateral creditor. The creditor also demanded a portion of the proceeds from the sale of the fund's premises, which was to be distributed among those who had previously been collateral creditors.
Positions of the vessels
The first instance, with which the appeal agreed, did not satisfy the claim for compensation. The rest of the proceedings on the application were suspended.
The courts proceeded from the fact that the claim of the creditor included in the fourth stage of the register, whose pledge was terminated in connection with the transfer of the construction object to the fund, must be satisfied after full repayment of the claims of the construction participants, who are also collateral creditors in relation to the object.
The lower authorities considered that the satisfaction of the claims of the fourth stage, if the value of the property is insufficient to repay the claims of creditors of the third stage, will lead to the preferential satisfaction of such claims, which is unacceptable due to current legislation.
The courts also noted that the creditor does not have enough rights to claim the distribution of part of the proceeds from the sale of premises by the fund.
The position of the Supreme Court
Disagreeing with the position of the lower courts, the creditor appealed to the highest instance.
The Supreme Court overturned judicial acts of lower instances regarding the refusal to satisfy the creditor's claim for compensation. A separate dispute has been sent for new consideration to the first instance (Ruling of the Supreme Court of 29.01.2024 in case No. A65-4184/2020 (No. 306-es21-9477 (4))).
In forming its position, the court stated the following:
• When authorizing the transfer of the debtor's property, rights and obligations to the fund, the courts had to determine the initial compensation to those who had previously been a collateral creditor and to whom the fund had no obligations to provide premises, including to the applicant.
• It is necessary to find out whether a lien on the property has arisen and whether the creditor is entitled to claim compensation due to its termination.
Positions of the vessels
The first instance, with which the appeal agreed, did not satisfy the claim for compensation. The rest of the proceedings on the application were suspended.The courts proceeded from the fact that the claim of the creditor included in the fourth stage of the register, whose pledge was terminated in connection with the transfer of the construction object to the fund, must be satisfied after full repayment of the claims of the construction participants, who are also collateral creditors in relation to the object.
The lower authorities considered that the satisfaction of the claims of the fourth stage, if the value of the property is insufficient to repay the claims of creditors of the third stage, will lead to the preferential satisfaction of such claims, which is unacceptable due to current legislation.
The courts also noted that the creditor does not have enough rights to claim the distribution of part of the proceeds from the sale of premises by the fund.
The position of the Supreme Court
Disagreeing with the position of the lower courts, the creditor appealed to the highest instance.The Supreme Court overturned judicial acts of lower instances regarding the refusal to satisfy the creditor's claim for compensation. A separate dispute has been sent for new consideration to the first instance (Ruling of the Supreme Court of 29.01.2024 in case No. A65-4184/2020 (No. 306-es21-9477 (4))).
In forming its position, the court stated the following:
• When authorizing the transfer of the debtor's property, rights and obligations to the fund, the courts had to determine the initial compensation to those who had previously been a collateral creditor and to whom the fund had no obligations to provide premises, including to the applicant.
• It is necessary to find out whether a lien on the property has arisen and whether the creditor is entitled to claim compensation due to its termination.
02.02.2024
