The Supreme Court explained when a penalty cannot be charged twice in bankruptcy cases

The Supreme Court expressed a new legal position on the liability of arbitration managers in bankruptcy proceedings. This is case No. 925/1240/21 (925/268/25), in which the court clarified whether it is possible to simultaneously collect a penalty under different provisions of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures for the same period of delay.

What was the dispute

The case was initiated regarding the collection of funds. The main issue was whether it is permissible to simultaneously charge a penalty under Articles 87 and 88 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures for one period of delay.

The court also had to determine whether the costs of paying the court fee could be considered real losses and subject to compensation.

What position did the Supreme Court take?

The courts of previous instances assumed that separate penalties should be applied for failure to transfer the right of claim and untimely signing of the act of acquisition of property.

However, the Supreme Court came to a different conclusion.

The panel of judges noted that if one and the same inaction causes a long-term state of violation of several obligations, the simultaneous collection of two types of penalties for the same period is unlawful.

The court also emphasized the need to apply the principle of prohibition of double punishment for one offense.

Court fees are not damages

The Supreme Court separately clarified the issue of court costs.

The resolution states that the costs of paying the court fee cannot be qualified as real damages, and therefore are not subject to compensation in this manner.

The new legal position of the Supreme Court is important for the formation of a unified judicial practice in disputes related to the liability of arbitration managers and the conduct of bankruptcy procedures.