It might seem that the 90s have long been forgotten, along with the public takeovers of banks, factories and real estate.
Now, more than twenty years later, the laws have changed, the process of declaring a company bankrupt is more strictly regulated, and the arbitration process and auctions are now public. However, remnants of those troubled times still persist.
The story of bankruptcy is interesting, with the Bolotny family playing a major role in using old and questionable schemes.
Mikhail Bolotny, who had a criminal record, and his son utilized the support of dubious lawyers in the capital to gain income from selling real estate owned by the debtor, as well as controlling property previously acquired from them. There were hopes of the court resolving these complexities and putting the cunning businessmen in their place, but doubts about the fairness of the upcoming trial remain.
Attractive assets
Mikhail Bolotny and his son initiated bankruptcy proceedings against Stroyinnovation JSC. The organization took a loan from Uralsib Bank in 2008, with a plot on Rublevo-Uspenskoye Highway provided as collateral. In 2011, the entity refinanced the loan at Rosinterbank, securing demarcated plots as collateral. The transferred property was insured. Meanwhile, ready-made cottages and plots were sold by Stroyinnovatsiya, with the proceeds going to repay the loan, which the bank used to extinguish the mortgage.
In 2016, Rosinterbank transferred claims on a loan to one of the holding’s key companies, leading to a transaction being declared invalid. As a result, the joint-stock company owed 100 million rubles. Interestingly, by the time the court made the decision, the company's assets, including built cottages and land, were worth around 350 million rubles. Bankruptcy wasn't even being considered.
However, the Bolotnye got involved, acting through their Gubernia LLC. This enterprise is officially involved in the production of sperm from farm animals and the cultivation of fruits and vegetables, but it seems that this is only on paper. In reality, Gubernia focuses on acquiring receivables and bankruptcy procedures, as indicated by a decision of the OFAS in the Kirov region.
Bolotny, it seems, was not bothered by the old-fashioned methods of work. And the success they had in the trials was thanks to Moscow lawyers who became skilled at such matters.
Judicial Conveyor
The main aim of the Bolotnys was to get documents that would make Stroyinnovatsiya’s land and real estate transactions invalid, and return the property to the debtor. The next step probably involved buying back the property from the buyers. It's worth noting that the “Gubernia” not only received rights to real estate and land, but also the village's social infrastructure. As for the acquired rights, they can be utilized through auctions at a reduced cost to controlled companies.
The Bolotnys had no doubts about which side justice would be on in the cases they were involved in. So, from December 2018 to January 2019, Guberniya initiated twelve proceedings solely to challenge transactions for the sale of plots and houses of citizens unrelated to the debtor. On average, each property costs about 50 million rubles. In total, during this period, over four dozen proceedings were initiated regarding the sale of Stroyinnovatsiya’s property. The main argument used by shrewd businessmen was the lack of information from the bankruptcy trustee about the company’s current accounts in Rosinterbank. Based on this, Bolotny, as the leading creditor, concluded that the debtor transferred the property to third parties free of charge. The court deemed copies of documents confirming the loan as invalid. Bank representatives were not invited to the meetings. Surprisingly, the system operated like a pipeline, without any issues.
Themis with closed eyes
The court demanded higher standards of proof in bankruptcy proceedings and required cottage and plot owners to provide evidence of settlements under loan agreements and prove their solvency. The court did not take into account arguments about the loan going through the refinancing process and encumbrance being imposed on the properties. For some unknown reason, the court also refused to consider cash receipts for mortgage payments provided by buyers, claiming that the price under the disputed contracts was undervalued. The Tenth Arbitration Court also disregarded the complaints of the property owners.
Naturally, the party feeling harmed in this situation has questions about the unusual approach to case consideration. The main one being why the court shows such favoritism towards the plaintiff. These questions are directed to the court's chairwoman, Inna Vorobieva.
The final decision of the courts states that the citizens who bought houses and plots from Stroyinnovatsiya were aware of the alleged pre-bankruptcy state of the company, and they acquired the property free of charge, supposedly to reduce the debtor's solvency. The court also concluded that different citizens acted in their own interest, allowing the abuse of their civil rights, and therefore imposed hefty penalties on them. However, the district court completely refuted these conclusions, acknowledging that the claims about the Rosinterbank loan not being issued to the debtor were incorrect.
Hope for Justice
Proceedings continue, and the story of the bankruptcy of “Stroyinnovatsii” does not end. A lawsuit was filed with the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region to invalidate the auction, as a result of which Gubernia received the right to claim against the debtor company. According to the position of the court, this dispute affects the interests and rights of citizens, transactions with which were disputed in the bankruptcy case. Buyers were attracted to participate in the process, and, as noted in the materials, they showed an active civic stand. Also there is an indication of the unscrupulous behavior of the “Gubernia”.
It is noteworthy that when the court considered the case in a different composition, as a result of the process, it was concluded that there was a violation of the rules for conducting auctions, provided for by the current legislation. The contract, which allowed the Bolotnys to acquire the right to claim, was declared null and void. This is reflected in the Decision of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow Region dated November 22, 2021 in case No. А41-55681/21.
