A bankruptcy creditor who participated in a creditors meeting and deliberately abstained from voting does not subsequently have the right to invoke its invalidity
September 06, 2019

A plaintiff filed a statement of claim for the recovery of the advance under a contract.

In response to the claim, the defendant referred to the fact that he was a victim of fraud, and had filed an appeal to law enforcement agencies claiming extortion.
However, the defendant did not consider the following.

According to paragraph 4 of Art. 69 of the APC of the Russian Federation, a court sentence that has entered into legal force in a criminal case is obligatory for the arbitral tribunal on the question of whether certain actions have taken place and whether a certain person has committed them.

Thus, the defendant's references to the above circumstances were untenable and based on a misinterpretation of the law, since only a court verdict that entered into legal force in a criminal case is obligatory for the arbitral tribunal to decide whether certain actions took place and whether they were committed follows from the provisions of Part 4 of Article 69 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

The defendant's reference to filing an application for initiating a criminal case with the law enforcement agencies does not indicate that the defendant has no civil legal obligation to return the unjust enrichment to the plaintiff, does not constitute evidence of fulfillment of obligations under a specific contract, as the claims are presented by the legal entity.

In addition, the circumstance of submitting an application for initiating a criminal case to the law enforcement agencies cannot be considered reliable evidence of the absence of primary documentation from the defendant.

The arguments of the plaintiff were agreed upon by the court, fulfilling the plaintiff's claim. The interests of the plaintiff were represented by an employee of the Moscow Law Office "ZASCHITA" – A.I. Kolodiy.

Vyacheslav Kolaev