We previously returned the debtor’s real estate to the bankruptcy estate to provide funds to pay off creditors’ claims, and now, with the help of the cassation court, we have remanded the dispute regarding the refusal to include our claims for a new trial.

vYes, the sequence of actions can be exactly that. Otherwise, by the time the debtor is included in the register of creditors’ claims, there may be a situation where he does not have property at the expense of which it is possible to repay obligations.

The Arbitration Court of the Moscow District granted our complaint and annulled the judicial acts of the first and appellate instances, which refused to include our Principal’s claims in the register of creditors’ claims of the debtor, including on the grounds of missing the limitation period.

At the same time, the Court of Cassation postponed the court session in order to form a legal position that would be taken into account by the courts when considering similar legal situations.

Roman Volkomorov, a lawyer at the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”, convinced the court of cassation that the limitation period for filing a creditor’s claim, which is by its nature a civil claim for recovery of damage caused by a crime, cannot begin its course earlier than the initiation of a criminal case in which a civil claim is filed.

As a result, the dispute was returned to the first instance, which will allow our Principal to exercise the right to include their claims in the debtor’s register of creditors and receive proportionate repayment.