{"id":5667,"date":"2025-02-22T09:45:38","date_gmt":"2025-02-22T07:45:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/02\/case-no-916-3735-24-dated-04-02-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-02-22T09:45:38","modified_gmt":"2025-02-22T07:45:38","slug":"case-no-916-3735-24-dated-04-02-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/02\/case-no-916-3735-24-dated-04-02-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 916\/3735\/24 dated 04\/02\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Recognition of Bankruptcy of Private Enterprise &#8220;Rentservice-MSL&#8221; based on the application by LLC &#8220;Yacht-Marine Club&#8221;.<\/p>\n<p>Main Arguments of the Court:<br \/>\n1. During the period of martial law, there is a temporary prohibition on forced collection of overdue creditor indebtedness from enterprises acquired through privatization.<br \/>\n2. The creditor does not have the right to demand debt repayment from the enterprise purchaser through court proceedings or bankruptcy procedure.<br \/>\n3. Special legislative restrictions take precedence over general grounds for initiating bankruptcy proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>Court Decision: Revoke the resolution of the appellate court and uphold the ruling of the first instance court on refusal to open bankruptcy proceedings.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/125224550\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Recognition of Bankruptcy of Private Enterprise &#8220;Rentservice-MSL&#8221; based on the application by LLC &#8220;Yacht-Marine Club&#8221;. Main Arguments of the Court: 1. During the period of martial law, there is a temporary prohibition on forced collection of overdue creditor indebtedness from enterprises acquired through privatization. 2. The creditor does not have the right&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"pmpro_default_level":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[57,42],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5667","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-court-practice-ukraine","category-eu-legislation-important","pmpro-has-access"],"acf":{"patreon-level":0},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5667","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5667"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5667\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5667"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5667"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5667"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}