Search

THE SUPREME COURT OF RUSSIA CLARIFIED THE SPECIFICS OF RECOVERY OF DAMAGES IN CASE OF PLEDGE

... instances upheld the applicant and the claim to recover damages from the pledgor in the form of the difference in the value of the pledged items was satisfied, but the district court overturned these orders, having rejected the claim of the applicant. The pledgee tried to challenge the issued judicial act in the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which concluded that damages would be collected from the pledger. The arguments of the judges of the first instance and the appellate instance boiled down to the fact that the pledgor had actually violated the ...

THE SUPREME COURT WILL LOOK INTO THE REMUNERATION OF THE MANAGER WHEN SELLING THE COLLATERAL

... instances partially satisfied the application, setting a percentage of the remuneration in the amount of 4.5% of the amount of satisfied claims of the collateral creditor. The debtor's creditor did not agree with this approach and filed a complaint with the Supreme Court, pointing out that the services for the sale of the collateral were provided not by the manager, but by the organizer of the auction, who received a significant reward. In such circumstances, the manager is not entitled to claim the maximum ...

THE DEBTOR'S TAX OBLIGATIONS ARE PAID BY SELLING THE COLLATERAL AFTER THE CREDITOR RECEIVES THE BENEFIT

... benefit from its status in the bankruptcy case. In support of its position, the court cited the following arguments (Ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 06/13/2024 No. 304-ES22-29762): The bank's claims as a collateral creditor are included ... ... to the collateral creditor. • If the bank's unfair behavior is not proven, as well as the loss of the economic meaning of the pledge, property taxes and penalties are repaid from the proceeds of the pledged property in accordance with paragraph 6 of Article ...

SEPARATE CONDITIONS ARE REQUIRED FOR THE JUDICIAL PROCEDURE OF FORECLOSURE ON THE SUBJECT OF COLLATERAL

... foreclose on the subject of the pledge by transferring it to the plaintiff. In support of the claim, the plaintiff pointed out that a loan agreement was concluded between the parties to secure the fulfillment of obligations, under which the defendant pledged real estate. The courts of three instances satisfied the claim, referring to the fact that the debt under the loan agreement was not repaid by the defendant. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation sent the dispute for a new consideration and noted that only an out-of-court procedure for foreclosing on the collateral was agreed between the parties. At the same time, the parties did not comply with the notarial ...

Sorted by relevance | Sort by date