All
| TITLE | 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】 Supreme Court Decision 2022Da294084 Decided September 12, 2024 【Lawsuit for Avoidance】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] The status of a seller under the bankruptcy procedure for a purchaser of sale which retains the ownership of a movable property (held: a person who has the right to foreclose outside bankruptcy) [2] Whether the repayment or substitute payment of a debtor made to a person who has the right to foreclose outside bankruptcy may be subject to avoidance (negative in principle) [3] Where a purchaser of sale which retains the ownership of a movable property disposed of the subject matter based on the authority for disposition granted by the seller before he or she is declared bankrupt, whether the seller may allege the right to foreclose outside bankruptcy with regard to a claim for the money from the sale of the property that the purchaser has in relation to a third person under the bankruptcy procedure for the purchaser (negative in principle) [4] In a case where: Stock Company A concluded a contract for the supply of goods with Stock Company B, including the following matters: “Stock Company A, which supplies goods, should give a franchise to Stock Company B; Stock Company B should deposit the money from goods sold by Stock Company B in a joint account for Stock Company A and Stock Company B; of them, the money for goods supplied by Stock Company A should be paid preferentially to Stock Company A, and the ownership of goods supplied should be transferred to Stock Company B when Stock Company B pays for the whole price of the goods,” and, independently from the above contract, Stock Company A lent money to Stock Company B, and when Stock Company B was declared bankrupt after transferring a claim for the money from the sale of goods to its clients to repay debts corresponding to the money from the sale of goods and borrowed money, a trustee in bankruptcy of Stock Company B filed a lawsuit for avoidance against the above act of transferring the claim, the case holding that Stock Company A’s act of transferring a claim for the money arising out of the sale of goods, etc. that Stock Company B purchased from Stock Company A to clients to Stock Company A before the adjudication of bankruptcy corresponds to fraudulent transfer and thus is subject to avoidance as referred to in Article 391 Subparag. 1 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act [5] Whether the so-called fraudulent transfer is also included in “an act performed by the debtor with knowledge that such act is detrimental to bankruptcy creditors,” an act subject to avoidance stipulated in Article 391 Subparag. 1 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, (affirmative) and the burden of proof as to whether a beneficiary did not know that such act is detrimental to bankruptcy creditors at the time of an act that is subject to avoidance (held: beneficiary) | |
