“How falsification of documents can save from subsidiary liability in bankruptcy” — Tatiana Tereshchenko for Zakon.ru
I want to draw attention to the Definition of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 10.11.2021 in the case A40-208852/2015 (305-ES19-14439 (3-8).
It is notable for the position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the conditions of bringing to subsidiary responsibility in the context of the following circumstances of the case: The DIA announced the involvement of subsidiary liability of bank managers. The basis was transactions, including loans to technical borrowers, which were made with the participation of the defendants (were initiated or approved by them).
Positions of the courts:
- By the ruling of the court of first instance, two deputy chairmen of the Management Board, two members of the Management Board and three members of the Board of Directors were brought to subsidiary responsibility.
- The Court of Appeal overturned this ruling. As part of the criminal case, it was established that the persons listed as participants and employees controlled the bank only nominally, and in fact the actual beneficiaries controlled the bank's activities. Persons who are formally employees of the bank could not exert any influence on decision-making and conclusion of transactions on behalf of the debtor. Since the change of ownership of the bank and the transfer of control, there have been no meetings of the board of directors and the management board, and extracts from the minutes of the management board and the board of directors, copies of which are presented in the case materials, were made in order to create the appearance of approval of transactions by the debtor's management bodies.
- The district Court overturned the decision of the court of Appeal, agreeing with the conclusions of the court of first instance.