RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
19/09/2024
Thursday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
19 September 
1970 Scott Fahlman proposed using emoticons as a way to express emotions on the Internet.
1970 The Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR banned the export of art and historical monuments abroad.
1970 The first beauty contest was held in Belgium.
19 September
1970 Scott Fahlman proposed using emoticons as a way to express emotions on the Internet.
1970 The Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR banned the export of art and historical monuments abroad.
1970 The first beauty contest was held in Belgium.
THE MANAGER IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INACTION OF THE BAILIFFS
The winner of the auction appealed to the court with an application for recovery of damages from the debtor's manager (case no. A51-21000/18). An agreement for the purchase and sale of real estate was concluded between the applicant and the manager based on the results of the auction. Subsequently, the applicant concluded a preliminary contract for the purchase and sale of this property with a third party, subject to the conclusion of the main contract no later than a certain date.
The buyer made a deposit, the parties agreed to return the deposit in double amount if the main contract is not concluded before the specified date. The state registration of the transfer of rights to the applicant was suspended, which is why he suffered losses in the form of a double deposit, believing that this was the fault of the manager, who did not take measures to lift restrictions on the disposal of real estate imposed by bailiffs.
The courts of three instances refused to satisfy the application, guided by the fact that the manager took measures to remove restrictions: he repeatedly sent demands to the bailiffs and filed complaints about their inaction. The courts also took into account the passive behavior of the buyer, who was not deprived of the opportunity to independently remove restrictions after the acquisition of property.
Thus, the courts considered that the manager, who in good faith contributed to the removal of obstacles to the registration of the transfer of rights, could not be charged with the risks of the applicant having any negative consequences due to the inaction of the bailiff.
The buyer made a deposit, the parties agreed to return the deposit in double amount if the main contract is not concluded before the specified date. The state registration of the transfer of rights to the applicant was suspended, which is why he suffered losses in the form of a double deposit, believing that this was the fault of the manager, who did not take measures to lift restrictions on the disposal of real estate imposed by bailiffs.
The courts of three instances refused to satisfy the application, guided by the fact that the manager took measures to remove restrictions: he repeatedly sent demands to the bailiffs and filed complaints about their inaction. The courts also took into account the passive behavior of the buyer, who was not deprived of the opportunity to independently remove restrictions after the acquisition of property.
Thus, the courts considered that the manager, who in good faith contributed to the removal of obstacles to the registration of the transfer of rights, could not be charged with the risks of the applicant having any negative consequences due to the inaction of the bailiff.
17.01.2024
