This is an empty menu. Please make sure your menu has items.
Business Duty Officer

Grounds for bringing the head manager to subsidiary responsibility

Grounds for bringing the head manager to subsidiary responsibility

Recently. the Presidium of the Supreme Court published a review of judicial practice, where the positions of the Supreme Court on civil issues were set out, Arbitration and Criminal Law.

In particular, point 17 of the resolution concerns the issue of bringing the head to subsidiary liability.

When considered by the Board for Economic Disputes to bring to subsidiary liability the head of a bankrupt enterprise and organization, that was performing a control and supervisory function, The Supreme Court reached the following conclusions:

Head of the insolvent (bankrupt) enterprises can be held subsidiary liable, if they haven't fulfilled the obligation to file for bankruptcy of the enterprise within a month.

The obligation to make an application for insolvency arises at the time, when a conscientious and reasonable leader of the company, can objectively determine one of the grounds for bankruptcy of the company, set out in. 1 Art. 9 Federal Law "On Insolvency" (Bankruptcy)

  • satisfaction of creditors' claims leads to the impossibility of the debtor's fulfillment of monetary obligations;
  • the authorized body decided to apply to the arbitration court with the debtor's application;
  • foreclosure on property will significantly complicate or make impossible economic activity;
  • the debtor meets the signs of insolvency and (or) signs of insufficiency of property;
  • arrears in the payment of severance payments, remuneration and other workers due, former employee's payments not repaid for more than three months due to insufficient cash;

However, when determining the possibility of bringing the head of the debtor enterprise to subsidiary liability, the court must take into account, whether the head of the enterprise have a plan to overcome the financial crisis, включающий в себя комплекс мер.

The Supreme Court paid special attention to the need for a legal assessment of the following circumstances:

  • whether the plan of the head of the enterprise was reasonable at the time of its adoption;
  • when negative trends, that continued during the implementation of the plan, brought the company to a state, which indicates that, the plan has exhausted itself.

Thus,, the legal position of the Supreme Court testified to the need for a comprehensive legal assessment of the state of the enterprise and the actions of the manager at the time of the appearance of signs of insolvency.

Increase in the term of installments for the redemption of state or municipal property

In the Law of Moscow No. 66 "On the privatization of the state property of the city of Moscow" amendments were adopted: the duration of installments of the redemption of enterprises has been increased from 5 to 7 Years.

The law is retroactive, which means the extension of the term of redemption of rented real estate for all contracts of sale, in force at the time of the entry into force of the amendments to Act No. 66 into legal force.

This measure was the result of the efforts of the team of the Commissioner for the Protection of the Rights of Entrepreneurs in the city.. Москве. A large number of incoming appeals was an occasion to draw attention to the need to extend the term of redemption of real estate.

Increasing the installment period will be beneficial to both parties: business will be able to reduce the amount of monthly redemption payment, which will significantly reduce the financial burden, a budget c. Moscow will receive income from the sale of real estate for a longer time.

All in all, the measure is aimed at restoring the business climate and supporting small and medium-sized businesses in a crisis situation, caused by the COVID-19 pandemic

Other news

Share this info. Choose a social media!

pro bono consultation