THE DISTRICT COURT HAS DEALT WITH THE PERIOD OF CONTROL FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUBORDINATION

THE DISTRICT COURT HAS DEALT WITH THE PERIOD OF CONTROL FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUBORDINATION

THE DISTRICT COURT HAS DEALT WITH THE PERIOD OF CONTROL FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUBORDINATION
In the framework of the bankruptcy case (No. A56-16071/21), the creditor filed an application for inclusion of the claim in the debtor's register.

The courts of the first and appellate instances included the requirement in the 3rd stage of the register, guided by the fact that the validity of the requirements was confirmed by a judicial act that entered into force.

The cassation referred the dispute for reconsideration and noted the following:

"The mere fact that the controlling (affiliated) person who provided compensation financing is in bankruptcy proceedings and the operations for the issuance of such financing have been challenged in the payer's insolvency case is not a reason for refusing subordination of the restorative claim for the return of compensation financing.

The statement that the rights of the company's creditors have been violated by such financing does not change the legal nature of financing, its compensatory nature in the payer–recipient relationship, which are the subject of research in the framework of the bankruptcy case of the recipient of financing."


Photo: Freepik

15.12.2023