In the Vitebsk region, restrictions on leaving the country for heads of debtor companies have begun to be applied
Since the amendments to the legislation came into force, the economic court of the Vitebsk region has issued seven rulings on the application of enforcement measures for executive documents. Five of them concern the temporary restriction of the right to leave Belarus for citizens, individual entrepreneurs, and managers, including the chief accountant of legal entities that are debtors.
One debtor had their right to drive vehicles restricted by the court. Another citizen will have to forget about traveling abroad and driving vehicles until their debts are fully paid off.
Although there are not many precedents (the economic court has issued only three rulings on the temporary restriction of the right of officials of debtor organizations to travel abroad), the norm has started working and will contribute to the actual recovery of debts from unscrupulous debtors. However, creditors will have to make efforts for this, as such a restriction is an exceptional measure.
In mid-May of this year, amendments to the legislation on enforcement proceedings came into force. One of the main innovations was that the departure abroad can now be restricted not only for individual debtors and individual entrepreneurs but also for founders and officials of organizations that are debtors. And creditors have begun to actively use this opportunity.
Officials of a debtor organization whose right to travel abroad may be restricted include the head, chief accountant, members of the collegial executive body of the organization, as well as persons authorized to manage the company in accordance with the constituent documents, agreements, and legislation.
As reported by Olga Kibisova, Head of the Statistics and Judicial Practice Analysis Department of the Vitebsk Regional Economic Court, since the beginning of the year, the court has received 92 applications for interim measures to secure enforcement proceedings, which is more than double the figure for the entire 2016.
In 92.4% of cases, applicants approached the court specifically after May 16, when amendments to the Law "On Enforcement Proceedings" came into force.
In 78% of applications, the applicants requested to temporarily restrict the debtor's right to travel abroad, in 12% of cases they insisted on restricting their right to drive vehicles, and in another 10% of applications, the need to apply several measures was mentioned.
REGULATION IN ACTION
The Economic Court granted interim measures on average in only every 12th application, which is less than 10% of the total number received, including cases where several measures were applied to one request.
Since the temporary restriction of rights directly concerns an individual, the court made decisions only in exceptional cases, based on an analysis of all available information on the case, taking into account the totality of circumstances, emphasized Olga Kibisova.
Orders for temporary restriction of the right to travel outside the Republic of Belarus until full fulfillment of obligations were issued against both individuals and managers, as well as chief accountants of legal entities-debtors.
YOU CAN'T STOP A DEBTOR WITHOUT EFFORT
The court refused to grant interim measures in 49 applications (54%). Analysis of judicial practice shows that applicants often approach the court without prior familiarization with the enforcement proceedings materials, do not provide serious evidence that the debtor is maliciously evading the execution of a court order, and also do not justify the reasons that necessitated approaching the court, noted Olga Kibisova.
In a number of cases, there was no evidence that the bailiff had taken measures to ensure the enforcement of the enforcement document. In addition, a temporary restriction on leaving the country cannot be applied to a foreign citizen who is an official of a legal entity debtor, which is what the claimants insisted on.
Another approximately 33% of submissions were returned to the applicants. As a rule, in these cases, complete data on the claimant, the debtor, and the person whose right to travel abroad is requested to be restricted were missing.
The applicants also did not provide information on the measures taken in the enforcement proceedings, the reasons for the insufficiency of these measures, how the debtor hinders their adoption, or in what exactly the evasion of the bailiff's requirements is expressed.