July 11 Main results of the day

Previously, the Moscow Arbitration Court in a bankruptcy case invalidated payments of a construction company and applied the consequences of invalidity of the transaction in the form of collection of funds in the amount of more than 5 million rubles into the bankruptcy estate of the bankrupt company. When considering the case, the court did not take into account a number of circumstances that were essential to the case.

We could not agree with this decision and appealed the judicial act to a higher authority. A lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” managed to convince the higher court that the construction company conscientiously fulfilled its obligations to the debtor, and the disputed payments are part of the settlement between business entities. The Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal overturned the contested judicial act in full and denied the debtor’s claim against the Principal.

The interests of the Principal in the appellate instance were represented by Sergey Egorov, Senior lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.

The Moscow Arbitration Court received an application to declare the auction of the debtor’s collateral property invalid.

The only participant in the auction and buyer of the property was the Bureau’s Principal.

The debtor and the creditor believed that the auction was invalid due to the fact that the auction took place before the approval of the settlement agreement, and its results were summed up after the termination of the settlement agreement, and the value of the property at the auction was more than 485 million rubles does not correspond to the market price of the property.

In the absence of a direct legislative settlement of the issue of the need to conduct auctions of collateralized property after the resumption of a citizen’s bankruptcy case, in the absence of law enforcement practice, as well as in the absence of analogy of law and analogy of law in resolving such disputes, a lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” proved the legality of the auctions and summing up their results after the termination of the settlement agreement and refuted the arguments of the debtor and creditor about the discrepancy between the value of the collateral property and their market value, and also about the need to carry out measures to implement the collateral again after the bankruptcy case is reopened.

The interests of the Principal in court were represented by Daria Ivanova, Senior lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.