{"id":7745,"date":"2025-04-03T10:19:21","date_gmt":"2025-04-03T07:19:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/2025\/04\/case-no-921-493-21-dated-18-03-2025\/"},"modified":"2025-04-03T10:19:21","modified_gmt":"2025-04-03T07:19:21","slug":"case-no-921-493-21-dated-18-03-2025","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/2025\/04\/case-no-921-493-21-dated-18-03-2025\/","title":{"rendered":"Case No. 921\/493\/21 dated 18\/03\/2025"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Challenging the Court Decision on Approving the Report of the Property Liquidation Manager in the Bankruptcy Case of an Individual.<\/p>\n<p>Main Arguments of the Court:<\/p>\n<p>1. Bankruptcy Manager Shymechko A.Ya. did not fully perform his duties in the debt repayment procedure, specifically:<br \/>\n&#8211; Did not include lease payment for the land plot in the liquidation estate<br \/>\n&#8211; Did not attach an inventory description of property to the report<br \/>\n&#8211; There was a fact of inaction for a prolonged period<\/p>\n<p>2. The Court deviated from previous practice and emphasized that the manager&#8217;s task is not merely to state the absence of property, but to actively search for the debtor&#8217;s assets.<\/p>\n<p>3. The bankruptcy manager&#8217;s report does not meet legal requirements and cannot be approved due to incompleteness and lack of proof of actions taken.<\/p>\n<p>Court Decision: Leave the appellate court&#8217;s resolution unchanged, reject the bankruptcy manager&#8217;s cassation appeal.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/reyestr.court.gov.ua\/Review\/126180684\"><strong>Full text by link<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Subject of Dispute: Challenging the Court Decision on Approving the Report of the Property Liquidation Manager in the Bankruptcy Case of an Individual. Main Arguments of the Court: 1. Bankruptcy Manager Shymechko A.Ya. did not fully perform his duties in the debt repayment procedure, specifically: &#8211; Did not include lease payment for the land plot&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-7745","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\/7745","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=7745"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7745\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7745"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7745"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lexcovery.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7745"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}