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.
VERIFICATION OF THE VALIDITY OF PAYMENTS BY A LEGAL CONSULTANT IN CONDITIONS OF FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES
The manager appealed to the court with a demand to invalidate the payment made by the debtor in favor of the defendant (case no. A40-227681/22).
The courts of two instances granted the application, guided by the fact that the case materials do not contain evidence confirming both the existence of the agreement on the provision of legal assistance and evidence of the actual provision of legal services by the defendant. The submitted certificate does not confirm the scope of legal services, their composition, or the fact that services are provided. Unverified copies of judicial acts also do not confirm the fact that the defendant provided services to the debtor.
The defendant ignored the court's offer to disclose evidence of receiving funds from the debtor, and did not submit the agreement itself. The actions of the debtor and the defendant in the unjustified withdrawal of funds caused damage to the property rights of the debtor's creditors.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, noting that the courts had not taken into account the defendant's arguments, which were essential for resolving the dispute. The defendant believes that the debtor transferred funds in connection with the agreement on providing legal assistance to the debtor, which excludes the appearance of the contested transaction. The lawyer deliberately shaded the key points of the agreement so as not to violate attorney-client privilege. The fact of the agreement is confirmed not only by the defendant, but also by the debtor, the second party to the agreement. The debtor personally confirmed that he had signed the agreement and did not dispute his signature on it. The debtor's instructions that he has concluded a loan agreement with the defendant have not been confirmed.
The defendant believes that the inability to determine the volume of services from the text of the agreement cannot automatically qualify the transaction as imaginary. Obviously, two parties have concluded a deal, and one party has made a payment on it. The conclusion of the agreement is also confirmed by a certificate from the bar association. When settling with the debtor, the defendant was guided by the recommendations of the bar association.
It is indicated that the courts unreasonably imposed on the defendant the burden of proving the fact and scope of legal services. The composition and scope of the legal services provided are, in principle, not included in the subject of evidence in the present case, taking into account the provisions of the law on advocacy. There is no evidence in the case file that the defendant could or should have known about the debtor's creditors.
Since the deadline for challenging the debtor's transactions has expired, the financial manager missed the deadline for challenging the debtor's transaction on special grounds.
The disputed payment is beyond suspicion and cannot be challenged. The courts of the first and appellate instances did not consider the application for the omission of the limitation period. Violations of the rules of procedural law committed by the courts are significant.
Photo: Freepik
The courts of two instances granted the application, guided by the fact that the case materials do not contain evidence confirming both the existence of the agreement on the provision of legal assistance and evidence of the actual provision of legal services by the defendant. The submitted certificate does not confirm the scope of legal services, their composition, or the fact that services are provided. Unverified copies of judicial acts also do not confirm the fact that the defendant provided services to the debtor.
The defendant ignored the court's offer to disclose evidence of receiving funds from the debtor, and did not submit the agreement itself. The actions of the debtor and the defendant in the unjustified withdrawal of funds caused damage to the property rights of the debtor's creditors.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, noting that the courts had not taken into account the defendant's arguments, which were essential for resolving the dispute. The defendant believes that the debtor transferred funds in connection with the agreement on providing legal assistance to the debtor, which excludes the appearance of the contested transaction. The lawyer deliberately shaded the key points of the agreement so as not to violate attorney-client privilege. The fact of the agreement is confirmed not only by the defendant, but also by the debtor, the second party to the agreement. The debtor personally confirmed that he had signed the agreement and did not dispute his signature on it. The debtor's instructions that he has concluded a loan agreement with the defendant have not been confirmed.
The defendant believes that the inability to determine the volume of services from the text of the agreement cannot automatically qualify the transaction as imaginary. Obviously, two parties have concluded a deal, and one party has made a payment on it. The conclusion of the agreement is also confirmed by a certificate from the bar association. When settling with the debtor, the defendant was guided by the recommendations of the bar association.
It is indicated that the courts unreasonably imposed on the defendant the burden of proving the fact and scope of legal services. The composition and scope of the legal services provided are, in principle, not included in the subject of evidence in the present case, taking into account the provisions of the law on advocacy. There is no evidence in the case file that the defendant could or should have known about the debtor's creditors.
Since the deadline for challenging the debtor's transactions has expired, the financial manager missed the deadline for challenging the debtor's transaction on special grounds.
The disputed payment is beyond suspicion and cannot be challenged. The courts of the first and appellate instances did not consider the application for the omission of the limitation period. Violations of the rules of procedural law committed by the courts are significant.
Photo: Freepik
18.06.2025
