The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on July 26 refused Togliattiazot to satisfy his complaint about …

no picture

On July 26, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation refused Togliattiazot to satisfy his complaint about the decisions of the lower instances of bankruptcy of Tomet LLC. The Armed Forces also refused to recognize Togliattiazot as an appropriate applicant in the bankruptcy case of Tometa. The court once again confirmed the powers of the bankruptcy trustee of Anatoly Selishchev, who proceeded to his duties on March 9, 2021.
Earlier, on March 3, the Arbitration Court of the Samara Region recognized Tomet bankrupt at the request of Uralhim, the minority shareholder of Toaz, appointed by the court the collector of the debt in the amount of 87 billion rubles.

In 2019, the beneficiaries of TOAZ Vladimir and Sergey Makhlai, Swiss Andrew Tsivi, who were hiding abroad, as well as their two accomplices were found guilty of fraud in the implementation of export operations with TOAZ products. At the same time, the court ordered them to pay compensation to the victims of the crime – 77 billion rubles. Directly TOAZ and 10 billion rubles. – “Uralhim.” The joint defendant in the lawsuit was recognized as Tomet as under the control of one of the convicts affiliated with the owners of Togliattiazot, Tomet received the status of the debtor.

Initially, the beneficiaries of Togliattiazot planned to bankrupt Tomet under their control in order to avoid multibillion payments. However, they failed to do this. The courts of all instances recognized Togliattiazot as an improper applicant in the case, since in the criminal case of fraud representatives of TOAZ denied the fact of damage and refused to recognize the enterprise to the victims.
That is why the courts of all instances recognized PJSC Togliattiazot to the improper collector of the debt, but confirmed the powers of Uralhim as a collector of debt in favor of Toaz and creditor LLC Tomet.

Advertisement

To “receive” the Mahlai decision beneficial to the owners of TOAZ through intermediaries, they tried to exert corruption pressure on the courts, including the RF Armed Forces. However, all these attempts failed, the courts failed to bribe. Now the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which supported the fundamental position of the courts and did not make it possible to avoid responsibility for theft, set the point in the case of Tometa.

“ВЧК ОГПУ”