Lawyer Pavel PetrovLawyer Pavel Petrov

RU EN

Criminal-Case Asset Freeze in Russian Bankruptcy

Updated in August 2026

Short answer: bankruptcy does not automatically lift a criminal-case asset freeze

A bankruptcy order, inclusion of an asset in the insolvency estate, or even a bankruptcy auction does not by itself cancel a freeze imposed in criminal proceedings. The parties must identify the authority, purpose and scope of the freeze, the protected victim’s claim, ownership of the asset and the current stage of both proceedings.

Constitutional Court Ruling No. 46-P of 17 December 2025 introduced a temporary coordination mechanism primarily for corporate insolvency. The commercial court determines insolvency-estate and creditor-register issues; the competent authority or court in the criminal case decides whether the freeze may be lifted or modified. The Court stated that its principles may also apply to personal bankruptcy, subject to the facts, but the corporate mechanism should not be copied mechanically.

Identify the restriction first

Enforcement restriction

The measure comes from a bailiff and an enforcement document. The Federal Bailiff Service order and bankruptcy rules for ending enforcement must be checked.

Civil interim measure

A civil or commercial court imposed the restriction pending a claim. The route to discharge it depends on the relevant procedure and order.

Criminal-procedure freeze

The asset is frozen under Articles 115 or 115.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code to secure a judgment, civil claim, fine or potential confiscation. This article addresses that situation.

Why two proceedings must be coordinated

Commercial court

Determines the insolvency estate, creditor claims and ranking, approves sale arrangements and supervises the insolvency practitioner.

Criminal proceedings

Assess the purpose of the freeze, the victim’s or civil claimant’s rights and whether the measure may be lifted, varied or preserved.

In May 2026 the Supreme Court applied this principle to property bought at a bankruptcy auction: the change of owner did not itself discharge a criminal-case freeze. In November 2025 the Supreme Court likewise confirmed that a bank cannot independently cancel such a freeze over account funds and transfer them to an insolvency practitioner.

What Constitutional Court Ruling No. 46-P changed

The Constitutional Court held that uncoordinated insolvency and criminal-procedure rules cannot indefinitely block the insolvency estate or deprive a victim of effective protection. Pending legislation, it created a temporary mechanism primarily for property of an insolvent company frozen to secure a civil claim.

In substance, the victim’s or civil claimant’s claim must receive a defined treatment in the insolvency case before the practitioner seeks discharge of the freeze through the criminal proceedings. The competent court must balance all creditors’ interests, the purpose of the asset and alternative protection for the victim. The operative part of Ruling No. 46-P should therefore be applied to the specific facts, not cited as an automatic release rule.

Practical sequence for a practitioner or creditor

1

Obtain the freeze order

Identify the criminal case, authority or court, duration, purpose and exact assets covered.

2

Verify the asset

Check title, acquisition date, source of funds, mortgages, public registers and possession.

3

Identify the protected claim

Establish the victim or civil claimant, amount and legal basis, and any final criminal judgment.

4

Resolve insolvency issues

Address the creditor register, ranking, insolvency estate, sale terms and procedural standing.

5

Apply under criminal procedure

File a reasoned application with the competent authority or court and attach the insolvency orders and protection plan.

6

Coordinate the sale

Document the treatment of proceeds, any continuing security and the route to challenge a refusal.

Corporate and personal bankruptcy are not identical

IssueCorporate insolvencyPersonal bankruptcy
Main Bankruptcy Law provisionsArticle 126Articles 213.11 and 213.25
Temporary mechanism under No. 46-PDesigned primarily for a bankrupt company’s property frozen to secure a civil claimThe principles may apply, but the route depends on the purpose of the freeze, ownership and the individual’s procedural status
Key riskBlocking the estate and distributions to all creditorsConfusing personal, third-party, jointly owned and excluded property

Due diligence for an auction buyer

  • obtain current land-register records and check court databases, the auction notice and organiser’s documents;
  • do not treat a statement that the asset is sold free of third-party rights as sufficient to discharge a criminal freeze;
  • check whether the freeze was disclosed in the sale terms and what the practitioner has done to remove it;
  • assess the risk that title cannot be registered or the asset cannot be used after payment;
  • choose the correct procedural remedy: an ordinary civil claim may not be able to cancel a criminal-procedure measure.

Documents to review

  • the original and any extension order for the freeze;
  • victim or civil-claimant orders, damage calculation and any criminal judgment;
  • commercial-court orders on the procedure, creditor register and insolvency estate;
  • title records, bank or depositary documents and ownership evidence;
  • sale terms, auction notice, protocol and sale agreement;
  • correspondence with the investigator, prosecutor, court, bank and registration authority.

Common mistakes

  • confusing a criminal freeze with a bailiff restriction;
  • seeking release without explaining how the victim’s claim will remain protected;
  • trying to resolve the entire issue only in the commercial court;
  • selling before checking whether title can be registered;
  • assuming an auction purchase automatically terminates the freeze;
  • copying the corporate procedure mechanically into a personal bankruptcy.

Frequently asked questions

Does bankruptcy automatically lift a criminal-case asset freeze?

No. A separate procedural decision by the authority or court handling the criminal case is required, taking the insolvency decisions into account.

Can the commercial court discharge the criminal freeze?

The commercial court resolves estate, register and sale issues. The criminal-procedure authority or court decides whether the criminal freeze ends.

What if the asset has already been bought at auction?

Collect the auction and insolvency documents, identify the legal basis for the freeze and use the proper remedy in the criminal proceedings. The sale agreement does not cancel the freeze.

Can a bank release frozen funds to the practitioner?

Not on its own initiative. The Supreme Court has confirmed that a bank lacks authority to cancel a freeze imposed in criminal proceedings.

Does Ruling No. 46-P apply to personal bankruptcy?

The Constitutional Court said that its principles may apply, but the result depends on the purpose of the freeze, the asset pool and the parties’ status. There is no universal automatic route.

Official sources

Related materials

Need a procedural route for a frozen asset?

We can review the freeze order, insolvency file and title documents to identify the competent authority and the sequence of steps.

Discuss the documents on Telegram

© All materials published on this website are provided solely for informational and educational purposes and do not constitute a public offer, legal advice or an official interpretation of the law as applied to a specific situation. Use, copying, reproduction or distribution of website materials in any form is prohibited without the copyright holder’s prior written consent. The materials do not incite hatred or hostility, demean any person or group on grounds of sex, race, nationality, language, origin, religion or membership of a social group, and do not promote extremist activity. The author’s views on particular matters may differ from official interpretations issued by public authorities and courts. The website administration is not responsible for decisions made on the basis of published information without first obtaining individual professional advice.