By the decision of the Supreme Court, the illegally seized property was returned to the property of the bankrupt company. FC “Investohills Vesta” puts an end to the case of small private enterprise “Galax”.

In 2012, b/c “Galax” – a building located in the center of Mariupol, illegally removed from the property of the bankrupt enterprise “Galax”.

04.08.2020 By the decision of the economic court of Donetsk region/bankruptcy No. 5006 / 27 / 69b / 2012 SPE “Galaks”/ canceled auction results from 11.07.2012, which was illegally sold non-residential real estate with a total area of 3527,3 sq. m., (basic A-4 annex  building A3-1), actual address: Donetsk oblast, Mariupol, Nielsen Architect street, 60. (earlier Engels)

The property was claimed for the benefit of the SPE “Galax” from the illegal owner – LLC “Spetstorgobodnannya”.

15.12.2020 The Eastern Economic Court of Appeal (Kharkiv) rejected the appeals of LLC “Spetstorgobodnannya” and PE “Dimitrius”. The decision of the economic court of the Donetsk region of 04.08.2020 is recognized as legal and left unchanged.

19.05.2021 The Supreme Court, as part of the Cassation Economic Court, recognized the legality of the previous decisions in the case and decided: to leave unchanged the decisions of all previous instances.

 

Earlier, the courts of previous instances, and later, the Supreme Court: established the fact of illegal seizure of property (b/c “Galax”) from the property of the bankrupt enterprise. Significant damage to the bankrupt and its creditors was caused as a result of illegal actions of the previous liquidator, who, without the knowledge of the owner, carried out a gratuitous alienation of property through an auction with gross violations during the procedure.

In the Supreme Court, the authorized liquidator of the bankrupt – FC “Investohills Vesta”, argued the version: deliberate inaction of the former liquidator, who did not take appropriate measures to return the property to the property of the bankrupt enterprise.

The Supreme Court agreed with the plaintiff’s arguments and considered valid the reasons for the inability to timely appeal to the Court with a claim “for invalidation of the auction”, which made it impossible for the bankrupt to satisfy the monetary claims of “Investohills Vesta” and other creditors.