The experts agreed with the findings of the Court. According to one of them, the Supreme Court once again supported the interests of the customer, continuing the tendency to recognize the balancing of counterclaims as lawful. Another noted that the position of the Armed Forces is aimed at maintaining a balance of interests of the debtor and all its creditors, which is prescribed by the Bankruptcy Law.
According to the lawyer, partner of Tenzor Consulting Group Anton Makeychuk, the Supreme Court once again spoke out on the settlement of counter obligations in contractual relations. “Thus, the Court again defended the interests of the customer, continuing the tendency to recognize the balancing of counterclaims as lawful. Earlier, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation clarified that a reduction in the contract price due to improper fulfillment of the main obligation is not a set-off within the meaning of Article 410 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Therefore, such balancing actions cannot be challenged in the bankruptcy case, ”he said.
The lawyer believes that the court’s ruling essentially supplements the already established position by indicating that in the case of a settlement there is no preference on the part of the customer, since the cost of work is reduced by the actions of the contractor, who improperly fulfilled his obligations to perform the work: “ The customer only stated the fact of the settlement, in connection with which the settlement cannot be challenged according to the rules of Section 61.3 of the Bankruptcy Law. ”
Anton Makeychuk called this legal position justified and fair. “Since the requirements regarding the“ body ”of debt are balanced (in terms of poor quality of work and compensatory elimination of deficiencies), the balance of interests of the parties is not upset, since in this case it can really be said that the customer had no obligation to fully pay for the work performed due to their failures in proper form, ”he summed up.