WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT TRANSITION FROM A SIMPLIFIED BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE TO A GENERAL ONE

The Arbitration Court of the North Caucasian District considered the case on the request of the bankruptcy manager to transfer the debtor from the simplified bankruptcy procedure to the general one. The way of considering this application was thorny: the cassation proceeded in a second round and, nevertheless, the court rejected the claims.

Initially, the tax office filed a claim for declaring the debtor bankrupt under the simplified procedure (such procedures take place in the event of an absent debtor). The claim was satisfied, and the debt was included in the register of creditors’ claims. Then the manager made a statement about the transition to the general bankruptcy procedure.

The arguments of the anti-crisis manager were that the debtor had property, as well as the signs of deliberate bankruptcy.

Within the framework of the simplified procedure, the manager is limited in actions and does not have the opportunity to fully work in such situations.

The courts of the first and appellate instances supported the applicant and decided to go over to the general procedure, but the cassation instance disagreed with their opinion.

In the opinion of the board, the trustee did not prove the reality of the replenishment of the bankruptcy estate with property, given that it was only a receivable, which still was necessary to sue for.

In addition, the bankruptcy manager did not provide a calculation of the ratio of the value of the potentially acquired property and the transition from a simplified insolvency procedure to a general one.

An additional argument was the fact that the potential involvement of persons controlling the debtor to subsidiary liability did not indicate a real replenishment of the bankruptcy estate. It was related to the fact that the manager did not provide evidence that they had property or funds.

The collection of receivables is also subject to the condition of the counterparties submitting the necessary documentation, which again does not provide any guarantees.

Thus, the district court indicated that in order to move from a simplified bankruptcy procedure to a general one, it is necessary to prove the validity of such a measure in more detail by confirming your position with documents (decision in case No. A20-3534 / 2019 of May 6, 2021).