Set-Off in Russian Bankruptcy: Restrictions and Risks

Short answerMatching monetary claims alone do not make a set-off safe in Russian bankruptcy. Timing, claim status and creditor priority must be checked. A set-off that bypasses statutory priority after proceedings begin is restricted, while a pre-filing set-off may be avoided as a preference.

Civil Code conditions

Claims must be mutual, homogeneous and mature for set-off.

Priority prevails

Set-off must not provide individual recovery outside the collective process.

Pre-filing risk

A set-off made before the petition can still be reviewed as a preference.

Four-level review

Level	Required finding	Warning sign
Mutuality	Each party is debtor and creditor of the other	A claim belongs to a third party
Homogeneity	The result mirrors mutual performance	Money is matched against delivery of an asset
Maturity	The active claim is due or lawfully accelerated	Declaration predates Civil Code conditions
Bankruptcy	Register and current-payment priority remain intact	One creditor receives more than in the process

Civil Code Article 410 permits unilateral set-off, but Bankruptcy Law protects collective and proportionate creditor recovery. A set-off valid outside insolvency may therefore be restricted or avoided in bankruptcy.

An accounting entry is not decisive. Courts examine delivery of the declaration, the origin and maturity of both claims, the real asset effect and the position of other creditors.

Workflow

Build the timeline

Map contracts, performance, defaults, the declaration, petition acceptance and procedure dates.

Classify both claims

Separate register and current claims, principal, interest and sanctions.

Compare with priority

Measure actual recovery against the statutory distribution outcome.

Review avoidance periods

Assess preference indicators, knowledge and ordinary-course evidence.

Documents

contracts creating both claims;
acts, deliveries, reconciliations and payments;
set-off declaration or agreement and delivery proof;
claim calculations at the set-off date;
EFRSB notices and bankruptcy orders;
creditor and payment-priority evidence.

📅 Challenging set-off: dates and evidence

Added on 25 October 2026. For a preference challenge, the reference date is the court’s acceptance of the bankruptcy petition, not publication, filing or the bankruptcy declaration. The transaction-review period and the deadline for bringing the challenge are separate issues.

Article 61.3 period	Check	Illustrative dates
After petition acceptance or within one month before it, paragraph 2	A preference under paragraph 1; the date alone does not establish invalidity	If acceptance was on 15 September 2026, set-off on 20 August falls within the one-month period
Within six months before acceptance, paragraph 3	Additional grounds: securing an earlier obligation, changing priority, or knowledge of insolvency or insufficient assets; an interested party faces a rebuttable knowledge presumption	Set-off on 1 July with the same acceptance date is outside one month but within six months

These examples only locate dates. The legally effective moment of set-off, the claims and applicable exceptions need separate analysis. A calendar month cannot always be replaced with “30 days”, and not every set-off within six months is automatically invalid.

Preparing a position in the dispute

Attach the petition-acceptance order, set-off document and delivery evidence.
Calculate each claim separately: basis, origin, maturity, balance and bankruptcy status.
Explain the alleged advantage and substantiate other creditors’ position. A responding party should provide documents and a calculation, rather than rely solely on good faith.
For paragraph 3, identify evidence of the additional conditions, such as affiliation, default correspondence or changes in security or priority, explaining each document’s relevance.
Address avoidance consequences and how the restored claim is pursued under Article 61.6 separately.

Correct arithmetic does not establish legal validity. If the company owes its counterparty RUB 1,200,000 and the counterparty owes it RUB 800,000, the proposed net balance is RUB 400,000: 1,200,000 − 800,000 = 400,000. This verifies the calculation, not the validity of discharging debts in bankruptcy. Following avoidance, review the restored obligations and court order instead of simply setting them off again.

How can a written position begin?

Illustrative outline: “The applicant relies on Article 61.3 paragraph […]. The petition was accepted on […]. The set-off document is dated […] and was delivered on […]. The claims arose on […], supported by […]. The alleged preference is supported/rebutted by calculation […] and documents […]. As to consequences, please take account of […]”. Fill in the facts, attach calculations and adapt the relief sought to your procedural status.

Legal check for this addition: Article 61.3 and Article 61.6 of Federal Law No. 127-FZ, edition dated 4 August 2026. Future amendments effective on 27 July 2027 have not been applied.

FAQ

Can claims be set off during observation?

Only where special bankruptcy restrictions and creditor priority are not breached.

Is a reconciliation act enough?

Usually no; it does not replace a clearly delivered set-off declaration or agreement.

Can current claims be set off?

Current-payment priority and the actual effect must be reviewed separately.

What follows avoidance?

Both obligations are restored subject to Bankruptcy Law Article 61.6.

Official sources

See also contractual balancing and its distinction from set-off: determining a balance differs from transferring money. The guide discusses the Supreme Court ruling of 27 March 2026.

Need to assess set-off validity and avoidance risk?

Initial consultation

Set-Off in Russian Bankruptcy: Restrictions, Risks and Evidence