Search

The court canceled amicable agreement due to the provisions on subsidy liability

... signed the agreement were two creditors holding 96% of the claims, as well as the manager of debtor. The applicant accused them of affiliation, arguing that the true purpose of the concluded agreement was to free the controlling person from potential subsidiary liability. Considering the complaint, the district court found that the amicable agreement had been concluded in violation of the law, since it resolved an issue that did not fall within the competence of creditors (bringing to subsidiary liability). What is more, the inclusion of such a provision into an amicable agreement ...

Sorted by relevance | Sort by date