RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
19/02/2026
Thursday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
19 February 
1970 The Cuban leader, Fidel Castro, announced his retirement from the politics
1970 The Cuban leader, Fidel Castro, announced his retirement from the politics
1970 The oldest Korea's bank, Shinhan Bank, was opened
1970 The oldest Korea's bank, Shinhan Bank, was opened
1970 The French mathematician and astronomer Urbain Leverrier presented the first world's weather forecast
1970 The French mathematician and astronomer Urbain Leverrier presented the first world's weather forecast
19 February
1970 The Cuban leader, Fidel Castro, announced his retirement from the politics
1970 The Cuban leader, Fidel Castro, announced his retirement from the politics
1970 The oldest Korea's bank, Shinhan Bank, was opened
1970 The oldest Korea's bank, Shinhan Bank, was opened
1970 The French mathematician and astronomer Urbain Leverrier presented the first world's weather forecast
1970 The French mathematician and astronomer Urbain Leverrier presented the first world's weather forecast
WHEN PAYMENTS TO AN EMPLOYEE BECOME THE SUBJECT OF A DISPUTE
The manager appealed to the court with a demand to invalidate banking transactions involving the transfer of funds from the debtor's account in favor of the employee (case no. A14-21810/23).
The courts of two instances refused to satisfy the application, concluding that there were no legal grounds for invalidating transactions made outside the three-year period of suspicion. The burden of proving the existence of grounds for invalidating disputed payments lies with the bankruptcy trustee.
The performance of work duties by an employee does not in itself indicate awareness of the financial situation of the company. There is no evidence that the transfers led to the loss of the creditors' ability to obtain satisfaction of their claims or caused harm to creditors. Failure to assign responsibility to an employee for improper management of paperwork by the employer is legitimate.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration in part, noting that the courts had not properly assessed the arguments about the gratuitousness of transactions and the lack of counter-provision, and had not taken into account that the employee had received funds long before official employment.
In addition, the issue of the need to receive explanations from the employee on the grounds for receiving funds for the period before employment has not been investigated. The courts did not evaluate the arguments about the debtor's financial crisis and the termination of business activities, and also did not take into account information about the employee's work in organizations associated with the debtor's supervisor. The issue of the employee's affiliation with the debtor has not been investigated and the refusal to include additional evidence of significant importance to the case has not been assessed.
Judicial acts in another bankruptcy case, indicating a connection between the debtor and other companies, have not been taken into account, and the issue of reasonable economic motives for transactions and the reality of business operations has not been investigated. There is no assessment of the specifics of the employee's position and the correspondence of its functions to the operations performed.
Photo: Freepik
The courts of two instances refused to satisfy the application, concluding that there were no legal grounds for invalidating transactions made outside the three-year period of suspicion. The burden of proving the existence of grounds for invalidating disputed payments lies with the bankruptcy trustee.
The performance of work duties by an employee does not in itself indicate awareness of the financial situation of the company. There is no evidence that the transfers led to the loss of the creditors' ability to obtain satisfaction of their claims or caused harm to creditors. Failure to assign responsibility to an employee for improper management of paperwork by the employer is legitimate.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration in part, noting that the courts had not properly assessed the arguments about the gratuitousness of transactions and the lack of counter-provision, and had not taken into account that the employee had received funds long before official employment.
In addition, the issue of the need to receive explanations from the employee on the grounds for receiving funds for the period before employment has not been investigated. The courts did not evaluate the arguments about the debtor's financial crisis and the termination of business activities, and also did not take into account information about the employee's work in organizations associated with the debtor's supervisor. The issue of the employee's affiliation with the debtor has not been investigated and the refusal to include additional evidence of significant importance to the case has not been assessed.
Judicial acts in another bankruptcy case, indicating a connection between the debtor and other companies, have not been taken into account, and the issue of reasonable economic motives for transactions and the reality of business operations has not been investigated. There is no assessment of the specifics of the employee's position and the correspondence of its functions to the operations performed.
Photo: Freepik
17.02.2026
