Литовцева Юлия, руководитель группы практики
разрешения споров и медиации «Пепеляев Групп»,
кандидат юридических наук
For the attention of company managers and financial, tax, legal and litigation departments.
Pepeliaev Group advises of the publication, on 13 February 2013, of Resolution No. 11 of the Plenum of the Russian Supreme Arbitration Court (SAC) dated 25 January 2013 “On paying value added tax when the property of an insolvent debtor is disposed of”. This resolves, to the benefit of creditors and buyers of bankrupt companies’ property, issues relating to the procedure and regime for paying VAT.
Постановление Девятого арбитражного апелляционного суда от 19.06.2012
Участники спора
Конкурсный управляющий
ЗАО «Цифровая электроника» ЗАО «Цифровая электроника» (Должник)
ОАО «СИТРОНИКС» (сторона оспариваемой сделки с Должником, Кредитор)
Фабула дела
Resolution of the Ninth Commercial (‘Arbitration’) Court of Appeal
dated 19 June 2012
Parties in dispute
Receiver of Digital Electronics CJSC
Digital Electronics CJSC (the “Debtor”)
SITRONICS OJSC (a party to the challenged transaction with the Debtor, the “Creditor”)
Narrative
The issue of the fee for an insolvency practitioner affects every single person involved in insolvency (bankruptcy) proceedings. It is known that the receiver’s fee is generally paid out of the debtor’s assets. Accordingly, the higher the fee, the fewer the assets that remain to satisfy creditors’ claims, restore the debtor to solvency and distribute the liquidation surplus among the members.
Specifics of enforcing the consequences of the invalidity of a transaction whereby a pledgeholder leaves pledged property in its ownership.
(ruling No. VAS-14907/11 dated 20 March 2012)
By the above ruling, the Supreme Arbitration Court (SAC) has actually reinforced the specifics of enforcing the consequences of a transaction transferring a debtor’s pledged property being invalid if it is not possible to restore the parties to their initial position.
Background
Until recently Russian legislation was not familiar with the concept of close-out netting. Although there was no prohibition for market participants to enter into netting agreements, Russian courts would not enforce such agreements in case of bankruptcy. This led to the use of complex structures to avoid the negative consequences of the application of Russian law and was a strong argument in favor of using foreign entities and application of foreign law to derivative transactions.
On 9 August 2011, the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of the Russian Federation published a draft law aimed at increasing the effectiveness of protecting first and second priority creditor rights (the "Draft Law").
Specifically, the Draft Law:
Intoduction
With the credit crunch impacting the Russian banking sector and Russian banks facing their gravest crisis since 1998 (as evidenced by Bank Globex freezing deposits), it is in our view timely to revisit the regulations affecting the insolvency of Russian credit organisations.
The business community is going to see an increase in default claims due to the mounting credit crisis. Many companies will not survive in such an environment and a wave of insolvencies is likely to ensue. The prospect of this has forced the State Duma to focus on developing a robust response. New bills, which would transform the Russian insolvency landscape, are currently under consideration.