Case No. 2-9017/15

SOLUTION

In the name of the Russian Federation

Industrial District Court of Stavropol, consisting of

presiding judge Pshenichnaya Zh.A.

under secretary Karaseva A.D.

with:

representative of the plaintiff Eremina L.N. - lawyer Kovalevskaya E.A., who presented warrant No. dated, certificate No., acting on the basis of power of attorney No. 3 dated November 18, 2015,

representative of the defendant Bashta D.P. - Trofim S.G., acting on the basis of power of attorney No. 2 dated,

Having considered in open court a civil case based on the claim of Eremina L.N. to Bashta D.P. for early termination of the loan agreement, collection of the amount of debt, interest for the use of funds and penalties,

U S T A N O V I L:

Eremina L.N. filed a lawsuit against Bashta D.P. on early termination of the loan agreement, collection of the debt amount, interest for the use of funds and penalties.

In support of the stated requirements Eremina L.N. indicated that the date between her and the defendant Bashta D.P. a loan agreement was concluded, under the terms of which she transferred money to the defendant in the amount of 860,000 rubles, and the defendant undertook to repay the amount of debt before the date. The defendant did not voice the purpose of executing the loan agreement. In Part 2 of the loan agreement it was stated that the parties agreed that this money loan agreement is for a fee. For using the loan amount, the defendant was obliged to pay her interest in the amount of 2.2% of the loan amount per month (30 percent per annum), which in absolute figures amounts to 21,500 rubles per month. The defendant had to pay interest monthly, no later than the 17th day of the month following the reporting period, until the day the entire loan amount was repaid. In confirmation of receipt by the defendant of the specified amount of money, a receipt was issued dated.

According to the certificate on the status of the plaintiff’s contribution from the date of the defendant Bashta D.P. transferred funds as interest under the loan agreement during the following periods of time: from date. by date. - rubles; from date. - rubles; date of. - rubles; date of. - rubles; date of. - ; date of. rubles; rubles date; date of. - rubles. In total, he transferred interest in the amount of rubles. In August, September and October 2015, the defendant did not pay interest. The unpaid amount of interest for the period from date. by date. amounted to rubles. She constantly reminded the defendant about the payment of this money. Starting in August 2015, she could not reach the defendant by phone. The transfer of interest under the loan agreement by the defendant was terminated. Eremina L.N. assumes that the defendant will not return by date and the principal amount of the loan - rubles. She is a disabled person of the second group, and the amount of rubles is very significant for her.

Thus, the court believes that legal costs in the form of payment of state fees to the state are also subject to recovery from the defendant.

Judicial practice on:

Abuse of right

Judicial practice on the application of Art. 10 Civil Code of the Russian Federation

Invalidation of a purchase and sale agreement

Judicial practice on the application of Art. 454, 168, 170, 177, 179 Civil Code of the Russian Federation

Debt under a receipt, under a loan agreement

Judicial practice on the application of Art. 808 Civil Code of the Russian Federation

Reduction of penalties

Judicial practice on the application of Art. 333 Civil Code of the Russian Federation

The reasons for termination of a loan agreement at the bank’s initiative may include both the payer’s debt and other significant changes in circumstances. Banks often include in a loan agreement a provision for unilateral termination of the loan agreement if the borrower violates obligations. In this case, the creditor asks to return the funds borrowed according to the agreement with accrued fines, penalties and interest. What procedure precedes the unilateral termination of a contract and what should a borrower who finds himself in such a situation do?

Termination of the loan agreement

Article 450 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides for termination of a loan agreement in two ways - either by agreement of the parties or in court. Termination of the contract by agreement of the parties is possible:

• upon expiration of the loan agreement and the debt has been repaid;
• upon expiration of the loan agreement if there is debt;
• in case of early termination of the loan agreement.

When the loan debt is repaid, the agreement automatically terminates in accordance with Art. 408 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, since the borrower’s obligations were fulfilled. If the loan debt is not paid at the end of the loan agreement, then it is not considered terminated, since the obligations under it have not been fully fulfilled. And in this case, either the borrower or the bank can terminate such an agreement in court.

Note! Early termination of the loan agreement is possible by the borrower himself on the basis of Art. 408 and 450 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, depending on the method of receiving funds from the lender.

Termination of an agreement in court provides for the satisfaction of the lender's claims against the borrower for the collection of the loan debt in full, taking into account the accrued fine, penalty and interest. But it is worth clarifying that the bank acts only in its own interests, and a borrower who has violated loan obligations can file an objection to this claim and provide the court with his calculations.

After termination of the agreement, the lender has the right to collect from the borrower a penalty for late repayment of the loan for the entire period before the date of termination of the agreement, as well as penalties.

Can the bank terminate the contract early?

Early termination of a loan agreement occurs if the borrower does not fulfill his/her debt obligations or violates another condition specified in the loan agreement. Another significant condition may be a change of place of residence or a change of official place of work, of which the creditor was not notified in a timely manner.

Note! The bank must notify the borrower in writing of the early termination of the agreement and indicate the reasons for such actions, referring to the article in the loan agreement for the requirement for early repayment of the loan debt.

The right to demand early repayment of accounts payable is regulated by the Federal Law “On Consumer Credit (Loan)” No. 353-FZ of December 21, 2013 and Art. 811 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which states that if the borrower violated the terms of the lending agreement for more than 60 days out of 180, the creditor has the right to demand early repayment of accounts payable, taking into account the interest due, and terminate such an agreement ahead of schedule by notifying the debtor in writing. In this case, the debtor is given a period to repay the loan debt, which cannot exceed 10 days from the date of receipt of notification from the creditor. It is important to know that such a notification itself does not constitute unilateral termination of the contract by the bank within the meaning of clause 3 of Art. 450 Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

If the debtor does not fulfill the creditor’s demands within the prescribed period, the latter has the right to go to court for forced collection of the loan debt, taking into account fines, penalties and accrued interest. But measures for the forced collection of penalties and interest cannot be applied to the debtor if he made payments according to the latest payment schedule in compliance with the deadlines specified in the contract.

Thus, the law allows the bank to terminate the loan agreement ahead of schedule, but on the condition that the borrower’s financial situation has not worsened compared to the time when the agreement was concluded, but only for the specified reasons.

The bank terminated the loan agreement: what to do

When the lender terminates the loan agreement unilaterally, the borrower finds himself in a situation in which he is urgently obliged to repay the debt. However, if repayment of the loan is impossible due to a difficult financial situation and the deadlines provided by the creditor have passed, the debtor runs the risk of facing litigation. However, he should not stop interacting with the bank.

You can use the option of a settlement agreement, when both parties find a compromise and bring the agreement into line with the changed circumstances. For example, if a borrower has a loan debt, he should submit a written application to the bank for debt restructuring, which will reduce the debt burden and deal with financial difficulties. If the case goes to court, but the reasons why the bank terminated the agreement unilaterally are insignificant (one-time missed monthly payments, etc.), then the borrower must file a counterclaim on the disproportionate violation of the requirements imposed by the lender.

In court, the borrower must document the existence of circumstances in which he could not repay the loan debt. Usually, if there are significant, logically justified reasons, the court meets the borrower halfway and recognizes the termination of the loan agreement as unfounded.

If controversial situations arise or a violation of rights and legitimate interests occurs when terminating a loan agreement at the initiative of the bank, the borrower should contact a qualified lawyer.

Early collection of credit debt through the courts is a common and well-studied phenomenon. However, uncertainty may arise if the debtor does not repay the debt (or does not repay immediately) even after a court decision. Depending on whether the loan agreement is considered terminated by early collection, penalties will vary significantly: from a refinancing rate of 8.25% to a contract penalty rate of about 65-90% per annum.

According to the first point of view, early collection of a loan entails termination of the loan agreement Therefore, a penalty for untimely repayment of the loan is accrued on the basis of Article 395 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in the amount of the refinancing rate. Proponents of this opinion justify this point of view by the fact that early return is a change in the terms of the contract, while in accordance with Part 3 of Article 453 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, when the contract is changed in court, the obligations are considered changed or terminated from the moment the court decision on amendment or termination of the contract.

This point of view is confirmed in the Decision of the Moscow City Court dated May 16, 2011 in case No. 33-11478, in which the court confirms the legality of the decision of the first instance with the following arguments:

from the moment the decision of the Savyolovsky District Court of Moscow came into force on November 10, 2009, the legal relations of the parties under the loan agreement ceased with the collection of credit debt under it, and the loan agreement ceased to be valid.

A similar decision is set out in the Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Ural District dated February 16, 2011 N F09-408/11-S3 in case N A07-11488/2010:

exercise by the lender of the right provided for in paragraph 2 of Art. 811 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, involves the termination of loan relations between the lender and the borrower.

According to the second point of view, which is particularly supported by I.V. Kerensky and A.A. Kirillov, the moment of termination of the loan agreement is the moment of actual execution of the court decision on early recovery of the loan amount that has entered into legal force.

According to the third position on this issue, which, as a rule, is adhered to by representatives of banks, the loan agreement does not terminate until the full amount of the loan debt determined by a court decision is collected and the contractual penalty for late execution of the said decision. In practice, this leads to an increase in the validity period of the loan agreement and the application of a contractual penalty in the amount of about 65-90% per annum, and not the legal refinancing rate, which is currently equal to 8.15% per annum (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North Caucasus District dated May 25, 2011 in case No. A32-22513/2010).

The second point of view seems to be the most reasonable for the following reasons. According to paragraph 3 of Article 810 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, unless otherwise provided by the loan agreement, the loan amount is considered repaid at the time it is transferred to the lender or the corresponding funds are credited to his bank account. In accordance with the position of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court, set out in paragraph 6 of Information Letter No. 147 dated September 13, 2011,

the court must take into account that the bank, which has received at its disposal the early repaid loan amount, being a professional participant in the financial market, disposes of it by issuing a loan to another borrower. Collecting the interest due from the borrower before the loan repayment date specified in the agreement could lead to the bank receiving double income from providing the same amount of money for use.

According to paragraph 8 of the Information Letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court dated September 13, 2011 No. 147

After the entry into force of a judicial act satisfying the bank’s request for early collection of the loan, the lender retains the opportunity to present additional demands to the borrower related to the debt under the loan agreement (collection of contractual interest, penalties, foreclosure on the collateral, filing claims against guarantors, etc.). etc.), up to the actual execution of the court decision to collect the debt under this agreement.

By virtue of paragraph 49 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 28, 2012 No. 17 “On the consideration by courts of civil cases in disputes regarding the protection of consumer rights”

It should be borne in mind that the consumer’s obligation to pay for the services (goods) provided to him is considered fulfilled from the moment he transfers the amount of money to the bank, credit organization, payment agent, bank payment agent (subagent) or other organization providing in accordance with the current legislation of the Russian Federation payment services to the population, including using electronic funds.

Based on the above arguments, it seems appropriate to legislatively regulate this issue by including clause 3.1 in Article 810 of the Civil Code “Obligation of the borrower to repay the loan amount” with the following content: early collection of credit debt terminates the loan at the moment the borrower transfers the amount of money to the lender.”

Notes:

1. Kerensky I.V. The Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation clarified some aspects of the application of legislation on a loan agreement // SPS ConsultantPlus. 2011.
2. Kirillov A.A. Bankruptcy of a citizen: prospects for the development of a legal institution // Legislation and Economics. 2011. N 3. P. 32 - 38.
3. Sablin M.T. Debt Collection: From Prevention to Enforcement: A Practical Guide to Accounts Receivable Management. M.: Wolters Kluwer, 2011. P. 320.

The two parties can terminate the arrangement after the agreement is signed. However, there is one nuance in the legislation: unless otherwise provided by law (or contract). This applies both to the contract as a whole and to its individual provision. Only if the agreement was terminated by consent of the parties, the principle that is the foundation of the Civil Code of Russia is implemented - the principle of freedom of contract. But when there is a debt from one party to the other, it will not be easy to terminate the agreement. In today's article we will look at how a debt agreement is terminated.

Issues discussed in the material:

When does it become necessary to terminate a contract?

The parties to the transaction must reflect all the terms of cooperation in the contract. If a controversial situation arises, you can always use this document. Unfortunately, a contract cannot cover everything. This means that if a conflict arises, you will have to turn to the law.

To terminate a contract by mutual consent of the participants, it is necessary to draw up a special document. It's called an agreement. Failed to sign an agreement by mutual consent? You will have to go to court to terminate the contract.

The legislature does not impose many requirements on the agreement. It is important that its form does not differ from the form of the concluded contract. For example, when a contract is terminated due to a debt certified by a notary, the agreement must also be registered and certified by a notary (Article 452 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

This document is usually called an “additional agreement.” Once you have signed it, you can consider that past transactions have been completed and the parties have completed their interaction. However, the participant in the transaction has the right to demand the repayment of the debt (which arose before the contract was terminated) or insist on sanctions if the terms of the contract were violated (decision of the Sverdlovsk Region AS dated January 13, 2014 in case No. A60-37327/2013).

Important! An agreement to terminate a contract due to debt is different from a compensation agreement. The difference is the moment when the obligations between the parties cease. When terminating a lease with arrears, the date of its signing is important if this procedure occurs through the signing of an agreement. If a release agreement is drawn up, the transaction is considered terminated from the moment this document is presented. It does not matter when the agreement was signed.

The date of termination of the contract with debt can be indicated by the participating parties in the agreement or contract (decision of the Court of Justice of the Nizhny Novgorod Region in the case of November 25, 2016 No. F43-26344/2016).

Termination of contract or change of conditions

Even if a contract has already been concluded, its terms may need to be changed. Why is this happening?

• Actions under a contract when one of the parties violated the terms or there was a desire to change the terms.
• An unforeseen situation that does not depend on the wishes of the parties. For example, an emergency occurred, laws or market conditions changed.

In some cases, it is necessary to suspend the existing contract. Termination of a contract with debt, as well as its suspension means:

• firstly, it is impossible to formalize new obligations under this agreement;
• secondly, the duration of the contract changes (for example, suspensive conditions are included).

If changes are made, some terms of the contract should be reviewed. However, it does not stop its action.

Termination of a contract with arrears of payment and its amendment have different contents and lead to different consequences. Despite this, these documents have the following in common:

• Termination of a contract with debt, as well as its change at the initiative of one party, is carried out in court.
• Chapter 29 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation regulates both of these types of relationships.
• If it is necessary to change or terminate the contract, it is necessary to draw up an agreement in exactly the same form as the above documents.

The results of termination and modification are different. Thus, if the contract has been changed, the obligations of the parties remain the same, but in an updated form. If the contract is terminated, then the obligations cease.

Termination of a contract with debt does not have retroactive effect. After all, this action relates to the future and its goal is to complete any obligations. During the changes, the terms of the contract are transformed.

You can change or terminate a contract if obligations arise.

Let us assume that a service agreement with a debt has been unilaterally terminated. What does it mean?

First: From this time the contract is considered invalid. Except for circumstances that continue.

From what date does the contract become invalid?

• From the moment of signing the agreement to terminate the contract with the debt (if the problem was resolved without going to court).
• From the day the judicial act came into force, if you applied to the court to resolve the issue.

Second: under the terms of the contract, the party transferred possession of the thing, while the partner had to fulfill the obligations. Once the contract is terminated, the item must be returned. Otherwise, the court will consider that the party has unjustly enriched itself.

Third: penalties and penalties are accrued until the obligation is fulfilled by the party.

As you can see, it is possible to terminate the agreement. In addition, this procedure is used quite often due to changes in the financial field. But in order to properly terminate the contract, you should carefully understand this issue.

Form of agreement to terminate a contract with debt:

How to conclude an agreement to terminate a contract with debt

Example of an agreement to terminate a contract with debt:

One party to the contract may offer the other party an offer - a proposal to terminate cooperation.

The letter must be sent if the party wishing to terminate the agreement intends to go to court. According to paragraph 2 of Art. 452 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, in order for you to go to court, two conditions must be met:

• the party refused to terminate the contract;
• you have not received a response within a month.

Note! The proposal for termination, as well as the draft agreement, should be sent to the legal address of the second party. You can find it in the extract from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities. Or use the address that was agreed upon. If the party does not receive your letter, the addressee will be considered at fault. This is indicated in paragraph 1 of the resolution of the plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated July 30, 2013 No. 61.

To terminate an agreement without going to court, you must accept the offer, that is:

• consent to terminate the relationship;
• signing of the draft agreement;
• silence of the party when it is specified in the contract or provided for by law.

Once the partner signs the agreement, the contract can be considered terminated.

Suppose that for some reason the agreement was terminated, but the participants argue whether it is legal to collect the debt. The contract said nothing about what to do if such a situation arose. What to do in this case? Let's look into this issue further.

Repayment of debt after termination of the contract

In Russia, the law prescribes that after the contract is terminated, the debt will have to be repaid - no matter for what reasons it was terminated.

To make it clearer, let's look at a specific case. A man placed an order for wooden furniture for his company (opening a new office). We drew up a contract, which indicated the period during which the goods should be delivered, the price, and the amount paid in advance. But due to the fact that the manufacturer did not receive the wood in a timely manner, the order was not completed on time.

The person has the right to terminate the contact and demand that the money he paid in advance be returned to him. The second side is against it, because these funds have already been spent on purchasing wood and paying wages to craftsmen.

What to do in such circumstances? We write a statement in which we ask to resolve the conflict situation and send it to the court. The client has the right to demand payment of a penalty and compensation for lost profits, because the furniture was not delivered and the opening of the office was disrupted. Typically, the manufacturer, in order to avoid litigation, returns the amount paid in advance and satisfies all the customer's requirements.

How to collect debt through court?

The law allows that, after termination of an agreement with credit debt, the parties to the transaction themselves discuss the nuances of the decision and compensate for damage on a voluntary basis. Therefore, the signing of a settlement agreement is envisaged. It must be drawn up with a notary so that he can certify the signatures of the participants. Couldn't you resolve the conflict peacefully? We turn to the court.

We file a lawsuit in court, which must indicate:

• Your last name, first name, patronymic (for an individual). Company details (for a legal entity).
• Last name, first name, patronymic of the second party (for an individual). Company details (for a legal entity).
• Telephone, address, email of the parties participating in the trial.
• Basic provisions of the contract.
• Reasons why you want to end the arrangement.
• What requirements do you place on the other party?
• Number and signature.

We attach a receipt that the state duty has been paid. You should also attach a contract, photocopies of passport pages, company registration documents, confirmation that a debt has arisen.

You can get a free legal consultation by calling:

+74997558374 — Moscow
+78123631628 — St. Petersburg

A large role in law enforcement and judicial practice is given to the regulation of legal relations in the field of lending. An important role is played, among other things, by the courts' consideration of cases on the termination of loan agreements. An analysis of the judicial practice of the Russian Armed Forces allows us to speak about the increased dynamics of consideration by courts of this category of cases in recent years.

Termination of a loan agreement is one of the ways to protect rights

As a rule, the purpose of terminating a contract is to maintain a balance of interests of the parties to legal relations - the bank and the borrower, and this action is an exclusive way to protect the right. For termination of a contract, the violation of the obligations of one of the parties, which may occur due to circumstances beyond the control of the parties, or due to refusal to fulfill them, has legal significance. Termination of loan obligations, by virtue of Part 3 of Art. 453 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is considered to have occurred from the moment the court decision to terminate the contract comes into force.

Change of circumstances (material conditions) that existed at the time of concluding the agreement with the bank, and from which the parties proceeded, in accordance with the provisions of Art. 451 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation may be grounds for termination of a loan agreement. In this case, significant circumstances are those that objectively prevent the parties to the contract from fulfilling their obligations.

Since the bank, as a credit institution, at the time of issuing loan funds, fulfills its initial obligations, followed by a counter obligation to repay the loan by the borrower, violations of the terms of the agreement most often occur on the part of the borrowers. That is, dishonest fulfillment of obligations or refusal to fulfill them (return funds - the loan body and interest) are grounds for possible termination of the contract.

Judicial practice in cases related to the termination of loan agreements does not speak in favor of consumers (borrowers). Over the entire long-term period of consideration of legal disputes between borrowers and credit institutions related to the termination of loan agreements due to changes in essential conditions, only a single event was recognized as such - a default that occurred in August 1998. To date, a review of judicial practice shows that all court disputes regarding the termination of loan agreements in which borrowers were plaintiffs, including those where the basis of the legal position were the circumstances of the 1998 default, were not ruled in their favor.

The Court of Appeal in case No. 33-6973/2012 issued a ruling to terminate the loan agreement. During the consideration of the court case, it was established that the plaintiff, who was the borrower under the loan agreement, filed a claim against VTB 24 CJSC to terminate the loan agreement and impose obligations on the bank to stop accruing payments under the agreement. The basis for the above requirements was that, according to the plaintiff, the material difficulties that had arisen for the present period of time prove a change in the essential conditions that existed at the time when the loan agreement was concluded. In this regard, the plaintiff points out the impossibility of fulfilling his obligations under the contract and asks to satisfy the claims.

The court, as follows from the case materials, found that this event (change in the plaintiff’s financial situation) is not an event that can be considered in the context of Art. 454 of the Civil Code of Russia, and is not evidence of a change in the conditions that existed at the time of conclusion of the contract. Based on the results of the judicial review of this case, a ruling was made to leave the plaintiff’s claims unsatisfied.

Method of protection against unfair fulfillment of obligations

Often, borrowers, having not assessed their strengths and capabilities in solvency, having received loan funds, are not able to pay the obligations under the loan agreement. The consequence of failure to fulfill contractual obligations is the legal possibility of banks to resort to termination of the loan agreement with the application of sanctions provided for in the agreement for a civil violation (collection of penalties or fines). In this case, courts often do not consider the circumstances that caused the violation of the terms of the contract, but take into account only the fact of the debtor’s failure to fulfill its obligations to pay funds. Accordingly, the decision in such cases, as judicial practice on loans shows, is not made in favor of the borrower. Banks almost always receive satisfaction on claims.

Here is one of the typical court decisions in a dispute about the collection of credit debt and termination of the loan agreement, in which the court found that JSC AKB Express-Volga filed a lawsuit against the defendant (borrower) for termination of the loan agreement and debt collection. In support of the claim, the plaintiff indicated that the borrower, having received credit funds that were transferred to his account at the branch of JSC JSCB Express-Volga, evaded fulfillment of contractual obligations for a long time, and therefore, in the plaintiff’s opinion, the latter arose the right to demand early repayment of the loan and termination of the contract. In substantiating his legal position at the court hearing, the defendant stated that he stopped paying the loan due to the loss of his job.

As a result, the court, having examined the case materials, made a decision according to which the following was recovered from the defendant (borrower):

• the amount of the main obligation under the contract;
• reimbursement of bank expenses;
• penalties for violation of contractual obligations;
• overdue interest

And the loan agreement concluded between the bank and the borrower was terminated.

Termination of obligations unilaterally

Termination of the agreement does not mean that the obligation relationship between the bank and the borrower is terminated. The borrower retains the obligation to repay the loan amount, interest on it, as well as penalties for violation of contractual relations. If a court decision is made on this, the borrower bears obligations until the full execution of this decision. As described in the explanations of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation on this issue, if, in accordance with Art. Art. 310, paragraph 3 of Art. 450 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the bank has every reason to believe that the borrower will not repay the amount under the credit line, then the bank has the right to terminate the fulfillment of its obligations unilaterally while maintaining all legal grounds for receiving counter obligations. Moreover, the penalty and interest on the loan to the bank must be paid for the entire period until the entire loan amount is repaid. And from clause 8 of Information Letter No. 147 of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, it is clear that if the contract is terminated in court, the obligation relationship is terminated only for a future period. (by the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation in paragraph 1 of Information Letter dated December 21, 2005 N 104 “Review of the practice of application by arbitration courts of the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation...... Article 453 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). This legal position is set out in (Resolution of the FAS of the East Siberian District dated 04/06/2011 in case No. A33-5284/2010, as well as Resolution of the FAS of the North Caucasus District dated 02.10.2009 in case No. A53-16893/2008). This example of a bank’s method of protecting its rights is a consequence of the borrower’s failure to fulfill its obligations.

Important to remember: Based on practice in criminal cases, malicious (deliberate) evasion of repayment of accounts payable may entail criminal prosecution of the guilty person.

As the experience of judicial practice shows, a powerful financial and legal system, of which credit organizations and banks are part, will be your ally in achieving the goals you pursue by concluding loan agreements only if the parties maintain a balance in contractual legal relations. But often reality and circumstances dictate the conditions for the development of situations in which you have to defend your interests in court. In this case, legal experts and lawyers will become your allies and assistants.