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.
WHERE IS THE LINE BETWEEN DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT AND REAL OPERATIONS? 16+
The manager applied to the court for recognition of the transfer of funds in favor of the company as an invalid transaction (case no. A22-3453/23).
The court of first instance, refusing to recognize the transfer of funds as invalid transactions, proceeded from the lack of evidence of the imaginary legal relationship under the food supply contract, referred to the universal transfer acts presented in the case file.
Canceling the ruling of the court of first instance, and recognizing the transfer of funds as an invalid transaction, the court of appeal proceeded from the fact that, according to the documents submitted, the defendant transferred food products to the debtor, including perishable ones, the storage of which is provided for by certain conditions.
Evaluating the submitted documents, the Court of Appeal pointed out that the debtor did not have the necessary equipment, while the delivery contract did not provide for the defendant's obligation to store the goods. Travel documents, information about the transport in which the goods were transported, the route, settlements with the carrier, as well as evidence of the debtor's registration of the goods are not included in the case file.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration and pointed out that in the case under consideration, the court of appeal, having actually qualified the transaction as null and void, did not specify how, in terms of competition rules on the invalidity of the transaction, the violations identified go beyond the limits of dispositions.
In addition, having pointed out that the documents presented in the case file cannot unconditionally confirm the reality of the delivery, and having concluded on this basis that in reality the signing of documents and the transfer of funds took place without the intention to create the corresponding legal consequences, the court of appeal did not take appropriate procedural measures to establish the presence (absence) of reality. the legal relations that have arisen between the parties to the transaction for the supply of goods.
In particular, the judicial board believes that the conclusion of the Court of Appeal that formal documents were drawn up by the parties was made without a proper study of the context of legal relations.
Thus, objecting to the recognition of disputed transfers as invalid transactions, the company pointed out that the supply of food products is the main activity for the defendant, as well as the fact that other transactions were carried out between the defendant and the debtor in the main activity that were not disputed by the bankruptcy trustee. According to the defendant, this indicates that during the disputed period the debtor had both commercial and warehouse equipment and a building.
The Company referred to the debtor's financial performance in the period preceding the disputed transactions, according to which the debtor's revenue varied significantly over a certain period. At the same time, the debtor's main activity is the retail sale of beverages in specialty stores.
In turn, the court of first instance, pointing out that there were no grounds for declaring the disputed payments invalid, did not check whether the transaction had signs of invalidity provided for in special provisions. The court of first instance also did not fully investigate the circumstances of the delivery of the goods, and did not take additional measures to establish legally significant circumstances. In particular, we are talking about the conditions of cargo transportation, the purchase of goods by the company from counterparties, if there is an argument that the company is a distributor of a number of manufacturers, whether the delivery of goods is reflected in the accounting statements of the company, whether there is information about its delivery in the purchase book, the company calculated and paid the tax on the specified delivery.
Photo: Freepik
The court of first instance, refusing to recognize the transfer of funds as invalid transactions, proceeded from the lack of evidence of the imaginary legal relationship under the food supply contract, referred to the universal transfer acts presented in the case file.
Canceling the ruling of the court of first instance, and recognizing the transfer of funds as an invalid transaction, the court of appeal proceeded from the fact that, according to the documents submitted, the defendant transferred food products to the debtor, including perishable ones, the storage of which is provided for by certain conditions.
Evaluating the submitted documents, the Court of Appeal pointed out that the debtor did not have the necessary equipment, while the delivery contract did not provide for the defendant's obligation to store the goods. Travel documents, information about the transport in which the goods were transported, the route, settlements with the carrier, as well as evidence of the debtor's registration of the goods are not included in the case file.
The cassation sent the dispute for reconsideration and pointed out that in the case under consideration, the court of appeal, having actually qualified the transaction as null and void, did not specify how, in terms of competition rules on the invalidity of the transaction, the violations identified go beyond the limits of dispositions.
In addition, having pointed out that the documents presented in the case file cannot unconditionally confirm the reality of the delivery, and having concluded on this basis that in reality the signing of documents and the transfer of funds took place without the intention to create the corresponding legal consequences, the court of appeal did not take appropriate procedural measures to establish the presence (absence) of reality. the legal relations that have arisen between the parties to the transaction for the supply of goods.
In particular, the judicial board believes that the conclusion of the Court of Appeal that formal documents were drawn up by the parties was made without a proper study of the context of legal relations.
Thus, objecting to the recognition of disputed transfers as invalid transactions, the company pointed out that the supply of food products is the main activity for the defendant, as well as the fact that other transactions were carried out between the defendant and the debtor in the main activity that were not disputed by the bankruptcy trustee. According to the defendant, this indicates that during the disputed period the debtor had both commercial and warehouse equipment and a building.
The Company referred to the debtor's financial performance in the period preceding the disputed transactions, according to which the debtor's revenue varied significantly over a certain period. At the same time, the debtor's main activity is the retail sale of beverages in specialty stores.
In turn, the court of first instance, pointing out that there were no grounds for declaring the disputed payments invalid, did not check whether the transaction had signs of invalidity provided for in special provisions. The court of first instance also did not fully investigate the circumstances of the delivery of the goods, and did not take additional measures to establish legally significant circumstances. In particular, we are talking about the conditions of cargo transportation, the purchase of goods by the company from counterparties, if there is an argument that the company is a distributor of a number of manufacturers, whether the delivery of goods is reflected in the accounting statements of the company, whether there is information about its delivery in the purchase book, the company calculated and paid the tax on the specified delivery.
Photo: Freepik
05.08.2025
