January 12 Main results of the day

The Principal was released from the debt in the amount of more than 64 million rubles according to the judicial act that entered into force. The Tenth Arbitration Court of Appeal upheld the ruling of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region on the refusal to issue a writ of execution to recover more than 64 million rubles from the Principal. Earlier, the Principal’s creditor filed an application for the issuance of a writ of execution for the enforcement of a settlement agreement beyond the three-year limitation period and petitioned for its restoration under the pretext of its partial execution by the debtor. However, the courts of both instances agreed with the position of the Bureau’s lawyers that the deadlines for the enforcement of the terms of the settlement agreement providing for a specific payment date do not depend on the circumstances related to the actions of the debtor, and the risks of untimely application for the issuance of a writ of execution in this case are assigned to the creditor. The interests of the Principal were represented by Yakov Prisyazhnyuk, Head of the practice of resolving economic disputes of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.

The Ostankinsky District Court of Moscow satisfied the Claimant’s application for the issuance of a duplicate writ of execution in the 2019 case in the amount of more than 10 million rubles. In this case, the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” managed to convince the court that the writ of execution was lost by the bailiff service, and this testifies to the validity of the reasons for issuing a duplicate writ of execution. The interests of the Principal were represented by Ekaterina Bulygina, senior lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.

The Arbitration Court of the Moscow District canceled the judicial acts of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region and the Tenth Arbitration Court of Appeal, which included in the register of claims of the debtor’s creditors the claims of a creditor competing with the Principal in the amount of more than 187 million rubles. The special complexity of the case was the presence of other contradictory judicial acts that established the circumstances of the case, in particular, the financial ability of the creditor to provide the debtor with a cash loan in such a large amount. The Court of Cassation agreed with the arguments of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure” regarding the lack of evidence of the claims, the inconsistency of the conclusions of the lower courts with the available case materials, as a result of which it sent the dispute for a new consideration to the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region. In a new review, the court of first instance will need to give a full and comprehensive assessment of the arguments of the Bureau, which are refuting the reality of the creditor’s claims, which will further significantly increase the percentage of satisfied claims of the Principal. The interests of the Principal were represented by Ksenia Stikhina, senior lawyer of the Bureau of Lawyers “De jure”.