The Supreme Court upheld our reasoning regarding failure to honour the deadline for inclusion in the creditors’ list
The Creditor purchased a RUB 100 mln debt arising out of facility agreements from the Bank under a claim assignment agreement (cession).
Considering that the loan debt had been secured (by pledge agreements), the Creditor filed a petition with the court as the Bank’s successor to register the secured status of a claim already included in the list.
The courts satisfied the Creditor’s petition presuming that despite the filing of the secured status registration request after the list had been closed, there were no valid reasons for rejecting the petition.
We represented the debtor’s receiver who objected against the Creditor’s petition consistently throughout the litigation. Our complaint was referred to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and ultimately satisfied.
The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has developed a legal stance based on our complaint: delayed creditor’s claims may be included in the creditors’ list only if it was objectively impossible to present them in a timely manner, which is the reason why the creditor failed to do so. Such creditors should not bear the adverse consequences (in the form of downward move in the order of priorities) for failure to take the steps they were unable to take.