Our victories

A receiver in the bankruptcy case of Company Holiday OOO applied to the court to challenge the payments made by the bankrupt for the goods supplied by our client.

The client could have lost RUR 1.5 mln for several reasons.

Let’s look whether the receiver’s claims have been put off and the client’s money have been saved.

Our client delivered parts for several Volkswagen cars to buyer’s ownership under the supply contract in the amount of RUB 770,000. The buyer’s spouse was a guarantor in this transaction.

Because the payment for the goods was not received in due time, the supplier recovered the outstanding amount from both spouses (the buyer and the guarantor).

The writ of execution was held by bailiffs in the process of enforcement for quite a long time, but so far to no avail. Then the client decided to apply to the arbitration court as a creditor to declare the buyer and the guarantor bankrupt.

The state transport company bought a bus from our client under the leasing contract. However, the bus operation did not last long. Before the warranty period expired, the bus burned down right on the route.

The Investigative Committee, jointly with the experts from the EMERCOM of Russia, carried out an investigation into a fire. The cause of the fire was the destruction of a fuel filter.

The insurance company refused to cover damages. So the buyer of the bus applied to the Moscow Arbitration Court with a claim to recover the cost of the bus and losses from our client. How can the dispute be resolved in this situation? Is it possible to protect the seller against the recovery of 2 mln rubles specified in the claims?

A party to the transaction under the public defense contract failed to pay off its debts on time. It did not take long to institute bankruptcy proceedings. The creditors’ claims amounted to millions of rubles.

Two companies to which the debtor had not yet paid the money asked us to support them in court. Our specialists aimed at including RUB 27.5 mln worth of claims (including RUB 3 mln of penalties) for one company and RUB 24 mln worth of claims (including RUB 2 mln of penalties) for another company into the creditors’ list. How to achieve inclusion of large amounts into the creditors’ list when increased attention is given to the relevance of creditors’ claims, which has become standard practice in recent years?

A client, being a dealer of the manufacturer of specialized equipment, sold a universal bulldozer on an installment plan. The buyer was a mining company operating on an industrial scale.

The parties encountered difficulties in fulfilling the sales contract. The buyer had made only two payments out of seven. Finally, all of the payment deadlines were missed and the debt exceeded RUB 5 mln. How can the parties resolve the conflict with the least losses and what outcome is possible for this case?

Rostransnadzor (the Federal Service for Supervision in the Sphere of Transport) stopped a tractor trailer on the road, as its overall dimensions raised concerns for the inspection. The vehicle had been leased by our client to the driver under a lease agreement. However, the driver decided not to inform about this relationship. Instead, he said that he was acting on behalf of the owner of the heavy duty vehicle.

As a result, Rostransnadzor issued a ruling on an administrative offense and a fine of RUB 400,000.

Our client only found out about the sanctions imposed after the money had disappeared from his account. Meanwhile, the deadline for appealing against the ruling had expired. Let’s have a closer look at how the owner of the vehicle could appeal against the decision and whether such an outcome of the case is possible.