Bankruptcy cases can involve not only the debtor’s pledge creditors (creditors whose claims are secured by means of a pledge), but also creditors whose claims are secured by other means of securing the performance of obligations. Said means may include both those means that are explicitly defined in the Russian Civil Code and those that are not. Among the means of proprietary nature (as opposed to means of personal nature, such as suretyship), special mention goes to security deposit, retention money, security transfer of title and finance lease.

Among other things, new Federal Law No. 266-FZ (July 29, 2017) (the "Amendment") supersedes provisions concerning the vicarious liability of "controlling persons" for a bankrupt corporate debtor’s obligations set forth in RF Law No. 127-FZ on Insolvency (October 26, 2002) (the "Insolvency Law").

The Amendment defines a "controlling person" as any individual or entity who, during the three-year period preceding the existence of "signs of insolvency" or court approval of a bankruptcy petition, had the power to direct the debtor’s affairs, including the execution of contracts.

The 2015 reform of the Russian law of obligations (changes to the relevant section of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter – the Civil Code) came into force on June 1, 2015) may have a major impact on bankruptcy proceedings. The implementation of the new legal doctrines has only just begun, yet the first cases to reach the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation have already revealed major issues.

In a previous article, The Eagle and the Bear: Russian Proceedings Recognized Under Chapter 15, we discussed In re Poymanov, in which the Bankruptcy Court (SDNY) recognized a Russian foreign proceeding under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code even though the debtor had only nominal assets in the United States (the “Recognition Order”). The Bankruptcy Court had declined to rule upon recognition whether the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C.

Russia’s bankruptcy law (the Law) has been amended to expand the list of persons who may be held vicariously liable for a bankrupt’s debts and clarify the grounds for such liability.

Definition of controlling person clarified

On 21 December 2017 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation issued clarifications on the liability of controlling parties in the event of bankruptcy.1 These clarifications are important for shareholders and company management, since the changes to the Law on Bank ruptcy and current case law have extended the scope of liability of controlling parties in the event of bankruptcy.

The main cases where controlling parties can be held liable are:

(1) the declaration of bankruptcy of the debtor was not filed in pro per time;

The key to understanding how the transfer of immovable property and service provision works for specialised companies in Russia.

The maintenance activities of Russian specialised companies (SPVs) are not only limited to charter activities. This article looks at the transfer of immovable property to a SPV balance and the transfer of service provision to standby service agents in Russia.

Третейские решения нередко используются для получения неправомерного контроля в делах о банкротстве. Схема установления контроля между аффилированными компаниями, позволяющая неправомерно получить статус первого заявителя в будущем деле о банкротстве и контролировать данный процесс, в общих чертах выглядит следующим образом:

– Между готовящейся к банкротству компанией А и ее аффилированной компанией Б создается сомнительное долговое обязательство на крупную сумму (поставка товаров, оказание услуг, заем и т.д.).

Arbitral awards are often used to obtain an undue control in bankruptcy cases. In simple terms, affiliated companies use the mechanism described below to enable a creditor to unlawfully gain the status of a first applicant in subsequent bankruptcy proceedings, and thus, control the proceedings:

– A dubious obligation to pay a large amount (e.g. for delivery of goods, provision of services or a loan, etc.) is created between Company A, which is being prepared for bankruptcy, and its affiliated Company B.

The status of the creditor whose claims are secured by means of a pledge (hereinafter referred to as a “pledge creditor”) in the bankruptcy proceedings is often named as the privileged one. This status provides not only the “privileges” to such a creditor but also imposes a number of serious restrictions in comparison to the status of a regular bankruptcy creditor.