The Constitutional Court Confirmed That the Assignment of a Part of a Subsidiary Liability Claim Does Not Reduce the Debtor’s Debt
By Ruling No. 770‑O dated 31 March 2026, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation refused to accept for consideration a complaint filed by an individual debtor challenging subparagraph 2 of paragraph 6 of Article 61.17 of the Bankruptcy Law, thereby confirming the constitutionality of the regulation under which the transfer of a part of a claim for bringing a controlling person to subsidiary liability does not affect the overall amount of the debtor’s obligations.
The complaint arose from a dispute in which a portion of the claim to bring a controlling person to subsidiary liability, equal to the amount of that creditor’s claim, was assigned to one of the creditors. The applicant argued that such a transfer of the claim should result in a reduction of his aggregate debt, since the relevant claim, in his view, effectively “leaves” the bankruptcy estate. He referred to a lack of proportionality of liability and an alleged violation of the balance of interests of the parties.
The Constitutional Court held that the challenged provision does not provide for any reduction in the amount of a controlling person’s liability as a result of the transfer of a part of the claim to an individual creditor. The assignment of a part of the claim to a creditor merely entails a change in the person authorized to enforce it and does not affect the scope of the subsidiary liability established by the court, nor does it alter the nature of the obligation itself.
The Court emphasized that this mechanism is aimed at enhancing the effectiveness of the protection of creditors’ rights and preventing an unjustified weakening of the liability of controlling persons.
