October 16 Main results of the day
By a resolution of the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal, the borrower’s complaint against the decision of the court of the first instance was left without satisfaction. Earlier, the borrower filed a claim against the Bank – client of “De jure” on the recognition of a transaction to issue a loan invalid and the application of the consequences of invalidity. According to the Plaintiff, the transaction was of an imaginary nature, contained enslaving conditions and did not go through the corporate approval procedure. In resolving the dispute, the court upheld the position of the representative of the Bank that these circumstances are mutually exclusive. In addition, admissible or relevant evidence were not presented for any of them. The court also applied the legal principle of estoppel. The interests of the Bank were represented by Sergey Bibikov, lawyer of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure”.
The Arbitration Court of the Moscow District upheld the judicial acts of the first and second instance on inclusion in the register of claims of the Bank – the Principal of “De jure” in the amount of 246 million rubles under a guarantee agreement.
The complainant, the bankruptcy Trustee of the debtor, tried to prove that there were grounds for reviewing the decision made earlier by the court of General jurisdiction. In particular, it was noted that the term of the contract of guarantee had expired and this issue was not the subject of consideration by the court of General jurisdiction. The courts did not agree with the arguments of the bankruptcy Trustee, pointing to the incorrectly chosen method of protecting the right. The Debtor had to appeal the decision of the court of General jurisdiction in the manner prescribed by civil procedure law, and only in case of cancellation of the decision to try to review the judicial act in the framework of the bankruptcy case. The court of cassation upheld the arguments of the Bank and lower courts and left the judicial acts of the two instances unchanged. The Bank’s interests were represented by Andrey Khokhlov, lawyer of MCBA “Bureau of Lawyers “De Jure”.
Еще события