1. The subject of the dispute is the creditor’s appeal against court decisions recognizing the monetary claims of another creditor against the debtor in the case of insolvency of an individual based on a loan agreement.
2. The court of cassation noted that in bankruptcy cases, a creditor is subject to a higher standard of proof to ensure that the commercial court verifies the grounds for the monetary claims, their nature, establishes the amount and time of occurrence of these monetary claims, and the courts of previous instances did not properly verify the evidence provided by the creditor, in particular, did not clarify the circumstances regarding the originals of written evidence and did not assess the applicant’s arguments about the fictitious nature of the claims. The court also pointed out that the appellate court did not take into account that the collection of evidence in commercial cases is not the duty of the court, and the requisition of evidence by the court is possible only in cases provided for by the Commercial Procedure Code of Ukraine, and if there is a corresponding ruling. In addition, the court of appeal did not provide a legal assessment of all the applicant’s arguments set out in the appeal, which indicates an incomplete appellate review of the case. The court indicated that in the event of motivated doubts of other creditors regarding the reality of the debt, the justification of monetary claims against the debtor by the loan agreement and/or debt receipt alone in the case of insolvency of an individual may be insufficient.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decision of the appellate commercial court and remanded the case for a new trial to the court of appeal.
