Let’s say you ordered services from a company, say, building a house. The house was built, but with many flaws, and you still can’t live in it because of the numerous shortcomings.

“Please fix the defects, then I will pay,” you say. “I would like but I can’t, as I am going bankrupt,” the contractor will answer. “Then I too won’t be paying,” you summarize.

Earlier, if a case went to court, the court would side with the bankrupt contractor.

However, a recent precedent with the engineering company Technopromexport (engaged in the construction of power facilities) showed that things are not so simple, and even if the contractor has financial difficulties, its obligations must be fulfilled, not abandoned.

This is the position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Pavel Kislovsky, Principal Associate of the Dispute Resolution practice at Capital Legal Services, commented on this decision in the new article published on the legal portal Pravo.ru.