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.
WHEN THE PREMATURE REPAYMENT OF THE GUARANTOR'S CLAIMS IS IN DOUBT
The manager applied to the court for invalidation of the transfer of funds to the creditor (case no. A07-39037/18).
In rejecting the application, the courts of the two instances proceeded from the fact that in this case the funds were transferred to the defendant not by the debtor, but by the debtor's financial manager, who transferred the funds to the bankruptcy creditor, the agency, as a matter of administrative procedure.
These actions of the manager cannot be recognized as a bilateral or unilateral transaction that is subject to dispute, since the funds were transferred to the bankruptcy creditor in fulfillment of his duties to settle accounts with creditors. The funds from the financial manager were received by the bankruptcy creditor not in connection with a civil law transaction concluded between the parties, but in the order of execution of a judicial act on debt collection from the debtor in favor of the bankruptcy creditor as part of the insolvency procedure.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, pointing out that settlements with creditors should be carried out taking into account the order of satisfaction of claims established by bankruptcy law.
As the court noted, in the case in question, payments made by the financial manager could have been preferential in nature, as they led to a preference for one of the creditors over other creditors. The courts did not check the arguments of the manager that the repayment of the creditor-guarantor's claims was made prematurely and does not comply with the requirements of bankruptcy legislation. Despite the fact that the transfer of funds was made by the manager, this does not exclude the possibility of challenging them on the grounds of preference.
Photo: Freepik
In rejecting the application, the courts of the two instances proceeded from the fact that in this case the funds were transferred to the defendant not by the debtor, but by the debtor's financial manager, who transferred the funds to the bankruptcy creditor, the agency, as a matter of administrative procedure.
These actions of the manager cannot be recognized as a bilateral or unilateral transaction that is subject to dispute, since the funds were transferred to the bankruptcy creditor in fulfillment of his duties to settle accounts with creditors. The funds from the financial manager were received by the bankruptcy creditor not in connection with a civil law transaction concluded between the parties, but in the order of execution of a judicial act on debt collection from the debtor in favor of the bankruptcy creditor as part of the insolvency procedure.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration, pointing out that settlements with creditors should be carried out taking into account the order of satisfaction of claims established by bankruptcy law.
As the court noted, in the case in question, payments made by the financial manager could have been preferential in nature, as they led to a preference for one of the creditors over other creditors. The courts did not check the arguments of the manager that the repayment of the creditor-guarantor's claims was made prematurely and does not comply with the requirements of bankruptcy legislation. Despite the fact that the transfer of funds was made by the manager, this does not exclude the possibility of challenging them on the grounds of preference.
Photo: Freepik
24.11.2025
