The Tenth Arbitration Court of Appeal upheld the ruling recognizing the Principal’s collateral status as a creditor in the bankruptcy case of his debtor. Based on a thorough analysis of the appellant’s arguments, the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” submitted a reasoned review to the appellate court, completely neutralizing the opponent’s position. The Bureau’s lawyers convinced the court that the agreements on the basis of which the collateral status was established are real, and the case materials contain sufficient evidence of the validity of the pledgee’s claims, even taking into account the increased standard of proof. The position of the Principal, built up by the Bureau’s lawyers, was so weighty that the appeal initiated by the appellant against the judicial act to foreclose on the pledge did not become an obstacle to the protection of the rights of the collateral creditor in the framework of the bankruptcy case. As a result of judicial protection, the Principal has the right to expect preferential satisfaction of claims at the expense of the collateral in the amount of more than 20 million rubles. The interests of the Principal were represented by Ksenia Stikhina, senior lawyer of the Tyumen branch of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.
The Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal accepted the Plaintiff’s refusal of the application to invalidate our Principal’s payments in the amount of more than 220 million rubles. Earlier, the Plaintiff, who is a company that repaid the claims of creditors of a bankrupt bank, lost to us in the arbitration court of the first instance. The Plaintiff was challenging payments made by the Principal on accounts opened with the problem bank within six months before the license was revoked. In addition, the plaintiff asked to collect interest for the use of funds. Lawyers of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” proved the solvency of the bank at the time of making the disputed payments and denied the Principal’s knowledge of the deterioration in the financial indicators of the credit institution. It was also proved that the bank did not have any other creditor claims or unfulfilled monetary obligations at the time of payments and does not currently have them, as a result of which the Central Bank’s prohibitions were not violated. As a result, the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” managed to prevent negative property consequences for the Principal for a total amount of more than 220 million rubles. The interests of the Principal were represented by Roman Volkomorov, lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.
The Second Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction left unchanged the judicial acts of lower instances, by which the Plaintiff was denied satisfaction of claims for invalidation of contracts for the purchase and sale of a vehicle currently pledged to the Principal. Despite the fact that the Defendant, who is the Principal’s debtor, did not appear at the court hearing, lawyers of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”, acting on behalf of a third party, proved the groundlessness of the claims, as well as the absence of grounds for canceling the judicial acts of the lower courts. As a result, the court agreed with the stated arguments and refused to satisfy the cassation appeal. The interests of the Principal were represented by Ekaterina Bulygina, senior lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.