“District Court Clarifies Criteria for Distinguishing Between Creditor and Corporate Losses” — Tatiana Tereshchenko for PRObankrotstvo
The cassation court pointed out the need for careful analysis of the timing when debtor's obligations to creditors arose when considering subsidiary liability.
Profsnab LLC was declared bankrupt in July 2022. Bankruptcy administrator Olga Sarycheva filed an application to hold Vladimir Tsygankov and Darya Tsygankova liable for the debtor's obligations on a subsidiary basis. The court of first instance granted the claims, while the appellate court modified the decision regarding Darya Tsygankova's liability. The Moscow District Arbitration Court overturned the judicial acts, citing incomplete examination of the case circumstances and incorrect application of legal norms, and remanded the case for new consideration (Case No. A40-86644/2021).
Why This Matters
According to Tatiana Tereshchenko, Attorney and Head of the Analytical Department at Prime Advice Law Offices, the position outlined in the ruling clearly demonstrates the problem of substituting protection mechanisms when no distinction is made between creditor (bankruptcy) and corporate (derivative) claims based on the nature of the protected property interests.