<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=239215506642626&ev=PageView&noscript=1" />

Protected the former head of the company from liability under security contracts worth 2 billion rubles

Client:the shareholder is the owner of TRK shkiperskiy Mall (Saint-Petersburg).

Problem: as a result of bankruptcy of a legal entity, the building owner of the complex and the land under it - Firma “Sib”, the majority of unscrupulous lender companies attempted to attract a former Director of the company liable under the guarantee agreements in the amount of 2 billion rubles.

Problem: as a result of unfair actions of MDM-Bank as the lender and at the same time the majority of the participant “Firma Sib” with a controlling stake of more than 50 percent of the votes, the amount of accounts receivable of the debtor when originally taken a loan of 400 million rubles for 7 years became liabilities in the amount of 2 billion rubles. Not considering himself guilty of bankruptcy of LLC “Firma Sib” and at the same time wanting to capture liquid asset in the form laid down for building credit TRK shkiperskiy Mall, MDM-Bank in the framework of bankruptcy procedure of the debtor has initiated litigation against the former General Director of the debtor, including on the basis of the presence of the prisoners specified by the Director of contracts of surety for the full amount of the company's debt, because 2 billion.

Our work in the project: Sparta Consulting work for the protection of the client from the requirement of 2 billion rubles is being conducted, and in all directions. The first confrontation took place in a “pocket” arbitration court of the Bank, the judges of which were affiliated with the plaintiff. To win a case in arbitration for obvious reasons, failed. However, by law, the execution of the decision of the arbitration court is made by the receiving state (independent) court writ. The Bank appealed to the Supreme court for the issuance of this document. In this process our specialists managed to prove that the proceedings in the arbitration court was held with gross violations of procedural law. Thus, the state court denied the Bank in issuing a writ of execution to the client on 2 billion roubles. Client protection in other areas is ongoing.

The result: the company's lawyers defended the client's interests 2 billion rubles and not allowed unscrupulous creditor to obtain a writ of execution on the client by the specified amount.