⚖ Primary sources checked on 25 October 2026 · Corporate bankruptcy in Russia
This guide is for a company’s external legal services provider and a creditor reviewing the debtor’s expenditure. It concerns an ordinary corporate services agreement. Special rules governing professionals engaged in the bankruptcy procedure are outside its scope. An individual seeking to cancel a personal bankruptcy services contract should use the separate cancellation guide.
🔎 Contract, services and payment: three separate checks
Terms
Who is the client and beneficiary? How are assignments, the service period, fees and payment defined? For a Russian advocate, consider the written agreement under Article 25 of the Advocacy Law.
Performance
What activities were carried out on the client’s instructions? Civil Code Articles 779 and 781 connect payment to the agreed services. Losing litigation does not by itself establish that no work was done.
Payment
Is the disputed transfer an advance, a retainer or repayment of an earlier debt? Match its date and purpose to the relevant service period.
Obtain the avoidance application and its exhibits. List each disputed payment separately: a single agreement may generate numerous transfers. An assertion that the lawyers did nothing does not replace an examination of specific assignments.
🧭 Avoidance grounds and statutory exceptions
| Ground | What to examine | What does not decide the dispute alone |
|---|---|---|
| Unequal consideration: Article 61.2(1) | A material difference between the price or terms and comparable transactions. The relevant period is one year before acceptance of the bankruptcy petition, or after acceptance. | Comparing services of different complexity, scope or urgency without adjustments. |
| Harm to creditors: Article 61.2(2) | The intention to cause harm, actual harm and the counterparty’s knowledge, taking statutory presumptions into account. The period is three years before acceptance, or after acceptance. | The client’s bankruptcy alone, or a relationship between the parties without analysis of the statutory elements. |
| Preference: Article 61.3 | Whether the provider received an advantage over other creditors. Paragraph 2 concerns transactions after acceptance and in the preceding month; the six-month period under paragraph 3 has additional conditions. | Genuine services and a market fee do not answer the question of payment priority. |
These periods run from acceptance of the bankruptcy petition; they are not limitation periods for bringing the claim. See the corporate counterparty guide for the broader transaction avoidance framework.
Separately, Article 61.4(3) provides that transactions involving performance of obligations where the debtor received equivalent counter-performance immediately after conclusion of the contract may be challenged only under Article 61.2(2). Examine the actual sequence of performance. A bank transfer labelled “legal services” is insufficient.
📂 Evidence matrix: what was paid for?
| Question | Documents | Connection to establish |
|---|---|---|
| What was commissioned? | Agreement, schedules, assignments and agreed correspondence. | The specific task and the client’s interest. |
| What was done? | Documents prepared, reports, hearing participation records and delivery records. | Assignment → activity → date → supporting evidence. |
| Why this fee? | Scope, hours and rates calculations; comparable service information. | Comparable complexity, urgency, period and team composition. |
| How was it paid? | Invoices, acceptance records, bank statements, reconciliation of advances and completed tasks. | Each payment belongs to a particular obligation without double counting. |
| Whose interests were protected? | Instructions, explanation of the corporate task and evidence connecting employee assistance to the company’s interests. | Why the company incurred the expense and who benefited. |
Support an acceptance certificate with underlying evidence of work. Preserve the original chronology; do not retrospectively fabricate missing assignments. Advocacy Law Article 8 protects information related to an advocate’s legal assistance. Do not simply publish the entire client file. Assess the permissible evidence and method of presenting it with regard to confidentiality and the particular proceedings.
⚖ The Supreme Court on company-funded employee defence
Paragraph 10 of the Supreme Court’s bankruptcy Review for 2022 (approved 26 April 2023) concerns company-funded criminal defence of an employee. Genuine services by an independent advocate were documented; company and employee interests aligned. The Court set aside the lower decisions and dismissed the Article 61.2(2) challenge. Bad-faith multiple inflation of fees was not established.
This is not immunity for all legal expenditure. Compare the ground, performance, independence and corporate interest.
✍ Assemble a response to the application
- List the challenged terms and payments; check amounts and dates.
- Address each pleaded ground separately: which facts are alleged, and which evidence supports or contradicts them?
- Match records to assignments and periods; explain the fee and corporate purpose.
- If relying on Article 61.4, substantiate the applicable exception with calculations and evidence, including ordinary-course status where required.
- Examine the relief sought. Article 61.6 distinguishes consequences by the ground of invalidity; do not assume that returning the payment automatically preserves the creditor’s former position.
Request outline to the provider: “Please match payments [dates and amounts] under agreement [number] to assignments and service periods, provide a fee calculation and permissible supporting records, and explain any advance balance. Please identify legally protected information separately so that the appropriate presentation procedure can be assessed.”
Court response outline: “The challenge concerns [term/payment]. The applicant relies on [provision]. That ground requires assessment of [facts]. Documents [list] establish [circumstance]. The exception under [provision] is supported by [calculation and records]. Please assess each argument and item of evidence.” Adapt this structure to the case; it does not guarantee dismissal.
Frequently asked questions
Can payment be challenged if the work was actually done?
Yes. Genuine work does not exclude a preference challenge or other grounds. Check the pleaded statutory elements and the relevant Article 61.4 exceptions separately.
Does a signed acceptance certificate protect the entire fee?
No. Support it with assignments, activities, delivery records and a price calculation. The court assesses the evidence as a whole.
Is every payment below 1% of assets protected?
No. Article 61.4(2) also requires ordinary-course status and consideration of related transactions. Its protection applies to specified avoidance grounds.
May a company pay for an employee’s advocate?
That expense does not by itself prove harm. Paragraph 10 of the Review concerns genuine services by an independent advocate that also protected the company’s own interests.
Must the entire advocate’s file be handed to a creditor?
There is no general conclusion requiring disclosure of the whole file. Consider professional secrecy, the facts to be proved and the lawful procedure for presenting particular information.
Review the payment and records before filing
Prepare the avoidance application, agreement, payment list and available evidence of performance. Lawyer Pavel Petrov can help assess the pleaded grounds and gaps in the evidence.
Initial consultationPrimary sources
Checked on 25 October 2026. Bankruptcy Law: revision dated 4 August 2026; future changes effective from 27 July 2027 are not applied. The Supreme Court Review was checked for paragraph 10, not in its entirety.