Greetings. As a lawyer with many years of experience, I have analyzed the court decision you provided. Here is a detailed analysis:
1. **Subject of the dispute:** Determining the lawfulness of including the monetary claims of LLC “Amstor” in the register of creditor claims of the debtor (LLC “Amstor Trade”), taking into account the motion regarding the expiration of the statute of limitations.
2. **Arguments of the Court:**
– The Supreme Court emphasized that the commencement of the statute of limitations period is determined by general rules (Art. 261 of the Civil Code of Ukraine) and does not depend on the date of appointment of an arbitration manager or the opening of bankruptcy proceedings.
– The Court stressed that an arbitration manager in the bankruptcy proceedings of another legal entity acts only as a representative of that entity, not as a liquidator; therefore, their “special status” does not provide grounds for interrupting or renewing the statute of limitations.
– The courts of lower instances erroneously linked the commencement of the limitation period to the moment when the liquidator received a bank account statement, instead of assessing when the legal entity itself (LLC “Amstor”) became aware or could have become aware of the violation of its rights.
– The Supreme Court noted that for a legal entity, the statute of limitations begins from the moment of the transaction or the expiration of the deadline for the performance of the obligation, as it has a duty to keep records of its assets and monitor the status of its property rights.
– The Court also pointed out the need to verify the creditor’s awareness of the existence of the debt, as the relevant agreements had already appeared in other bankruptcy cases where LLC “Amstor” was a participant.
– Since the courts of lower instances did not establish all factual circumstances regarding the creditor’s awareness and misapplied the rules of substantive law, the decisions cannot be considered well-grounded.
– The Court pointed out the necessity of adhering to the legal positions set forth in the resolution of the Supreme Court composed of the judicial chamber for the consideration of bankruptcy cases dated March 17, 2020, in case No. 10/5026/995/2012, confirming the consistency of practice regarding the impossibility of changing the procedure for calculating the statute of limitations in bankruptcy cases.
3. **Court decision:** The Supreme Court set aside the ruling of the court of first instance and the resolution of the appellate court in the part regarding the recognition of the claims of LLC “Amstor” and remanded the case for a new trial to the Commercial Court of Kyiv City.
