The state Duma after the break, returns to the consideration of the bill on the transfer of the arbitration Manager functions for the primary check of validity of requirements of creditors under the bankruptcy and tomorrow the deputies will consider the document in the second reading. In the year since the first reading, the procedure of extrajudicial inclusion of requirements in the register has changed significantly: now it will be submerged in the Uniform Federal register of data on bankruptcy.Tomorrow the state Duma will consider on second reading the draft law on extrajudicial procedure to enable creditors to the registry. The document was submitted to the Supreme court (SC) to the end of 2018, and last may it passed the first reading and long remained motionless. The need for change, the developers explained that the judges spend a lot of time on the execution of the current procedure for the inclusion of creditors in the register only on the basis of a judicial act.Since a significant portion of the requirements (by some estimates, more than 80%) is unquestioned, the bill proposes to shift the initial verification of the validity requirements for arbitration managers (AU). This “filter” is already working in the framework of the bankruptcy of developers and banks. The procedure itself on the idea of the armed forces should look like this: the creditor sends to the debtor and AU a written statement about inclusion of its requirements in the register, the Manager sends a copy to persons who have the right to object to creditor’s claims. After this, the AU, recognizing the demand justified, submits it to the registry: disagree with that participants in bankruptcy cases may go to court.The second reading of the main idea remains the same, but the deputies substantially reworked and detailed procedural aspects. The most significant amendment — the “immersion” of the whole process in the Uniform Federal register of data on bankruptcy (ERCB). Through him, the creditors may file their appeal, and other parties to submit objections. Access made to the system information provided to the court and to the persons entitled to objections.Among other stories — the possibility of a statement of objections and those creditors who are unable for objective reasons to present their own demands, but reasonable “probability sufficient to their production in the future” (for example, tax inspection, leading inspection). Also introduces a restriction of the right to vote at the creditors ‘ meeting — this right arises, according to the amendments, only after 30 days from the date of publication of information about the requirements in ERCB.The arbitration managing Director Maxim Dotsenko calls the idea of transfer functions “conceptually correct”, but notes that on the AU imposed a greater amount of technical work associated with the establishment of the requirements of creditorV. As an option, according to him, it would be possible to introduce an analog of the registration fee, which would offset costs for the claim Manager. According to the head of projects in legal group “Yakovlev and partners” Andrey embankment, the proposed procedure is a balanced, “but is forcing lenders to keep a finger on the pulse”. It is especially relevant call provisions to lock for 30 days the voting rights of creditors — it closes the risks of illegal inclusion in the case of creditors for the sake of obtaining the right to vote. However, do not agree with the President “Bankruptcy club” Oleg Zaitsev: “in Vain is the emergence of voting rights from the lender for a month, it would be better to give this right to the creditors’ meeting immediately, and when appealed claims, the court could suspend him.”The panellists and other concerns: according to Andrew the embankment, after making the changes, the bankruptcy procedure may be delayed. Also, according to him, among the lenders might be a lot of unhappy solutions of AU, from-for what “the courts simply will get the load in the form of a stream of complaints”. Oleg Zaitsev believes that the adoption of the amendments will lead to the disappearance from public access information of claims of creditors and results of consideration: “It will dramatically reduce the transparency of the procedure and make it more difficult, for example, search for a receivable bailiffs and arbitration Manager”.Evgenia Kryuchkova, the arbitral panel
