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.
THERE IS AN AFFILIATION, BUT WHERE IS THE PROPERTY CRISIS?
The company applied to the court for the inclusion of claims in the debtor's register (case no. A40-199953/23).
Recognizing the applicant's claims as justified, the courts established that the debtor's debt to the creditor arose in connection with the latter's fulfillment of obligations under the loan agreement for the debtor, where the creditor was the guarantor of the debtor's obligations to the bank; the debt also arose from the debtor's failure to fulfill obligations under the loan agreement, the supply agreement and the contract for the provision of paid services.
The creditor's claims were found to be justified, but the priority of satisfaction was reduced to the one that precedes the allocation of the liquidation quota, based on the circumstances of the affiliation of the debtor and the creditor.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration in terms of determining the priority of the claim, noting the following. The Court pointed out that the mere fact of affiliation was not sufficient to comply with the requirements. The circumstances of the debtor's property crisis have not been established at the time of the provision of financing or the timing of repayment of loans. The issue of the availability of compensatory financing from the creditor when concluding contracts for the supply and provision of services has also not been investigated.
The District Court noted that it was necessary to establish whether financing was provided to the debtor in a situation of property crisis, which allowed him to continue his activities, deviating from the standards of conduct. The creditor could prove that the agreed terms were determined by the specifics of the market for goods, works, and services. These circumstances were not investigated by the lower courts.
Photo: Freepik
Recognizing the applicant's claims as justified, the courts established that the debtor's debt to the creditor arose in connection with the latter's fulfillment of obligations under the loan agreement for the debtor, where the creditor was the guarantor of the debtor's obligations to the bank; the debt also arose from the debtor's failure to fulfill obligations under the loan agreement, the supply agreement and the contract for the provision of paid services.
The creditor's claims were found to be justified, but the priority of satisfaction was reduced to the one that precedes the allocation of the liquidation quota, based on the circumstances of the affiliation of the debtor and the creditor.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration in terms of determining the priority of the claim, noting the following. The Court pointed out that the mere fact of affiliation was not sufficient to comply with the requirements. The circumstances of the debtor's property crisis have not been established at the time of the provision of financing or the timing of repayment of loans. The issue of the availability of compensatory financing from the creditor when concluding contracts for the supply and provision of services has also not been investigated.
The District Court noted that it was necessary to establish whether financing was provided to the debtor in a situation of property crisis, which allowed him to continue his activities, deviating from the standards of conduct. The creditor could prove that the agreed terms were determined by the specifics of the market for goods, works, and services. These circumstances were not investigated by the lower courts.
Photo: Freepik
11.06.2025
