SC resolved a dispute over the disposition of a subsidiary’s claim

The Economic Collegium resolved a disagreement between a receiver and a creditor. The latter believed that after choosing the right of claim against a subsidiary defendant, it could claim the money which had entered the bankruptcy estate.
The bankruptcy trustee of Ufaspetsstroy applied to the court to resolve the disagreement that arose between him and Progress-3, whose claims in the amount of 2 million rubles were included in the third turn of the register.

Within the framework of bankruptcy the persons controlling the debtor were brought to subsidiary liability for RUR 37 mln. Later the claimant was replaced and the creditor was issued a writ of execution for the amount of its claims. Then, as part of another case, 6.2 million rubles was recovered in favor of the debtor. Then the company sent a request to the bankruptcy trustee to find out the date of receipt of the money to the debtor’s settlement account and its distribution among other creditors. But the bankruptcy trustee pointed out that the firm had no right to receive the funds and appealed to the court to confirm this (case No. A40-242492/2018).

Three instances recognized the claims of Progress-3 as extinguished. According to paragraph 4 of Article 61.17 of the law “On Bankruptcy”, the claimant can not claim the funds received in the bankruptcy estate, after choosing the method of disposition of subsidiary liability. And since the company was issued a writ of execution, the change of obligation took place. Otherwise, the reverse transfer of the claim without the debtor’s consent may violate the principle of autonomy of will of participants in civil turnover.

In his complaint to the Supreme Court, the applicant insisted that he had not claimed a change in the way of disposing of the right, but had requested that the money received from the debtor, not from the subsidiary defendants, be distributed. The Economic Collegium confirmed that the lower courts had erred, quashed their decisions and remitted the dispute for a new hearing before the ASCM.

Источник: https://pravo.ru/news/252755/?ysclid=lwm460vo7m596595979