Annotation

This study focuses on the relationships that arise in bankruptcy proceedings in connection with the exercise of supervisory functions by the arbitration court. The objective of the study is to substantiate the supervisory function of the arbitration court in substantive bankruptcy proceedings. Methods of comparative law, interpretation and synthesis, and the functional method are used. Substantive bankruptcy proceedings and bankruptcy court proceedings are distinguished, and the role of the arbitration court in them is established. This article examines the relationship between creditor and judicial review. It concludes that in substantive bankruptcy proceedings, decisive decisions are made by the creditor community at a creditor meeting (committee), while the arbitration court oversees the legality of the actions of the creditor community and the insolvency practitioner, approving certain decisions. The arbitration court primarily issues judicial decisions regarding the progress of the proceedings. In non-contentious bankruptcy proceedings, the court exercises judicial functions, including: in resolving isolated disputes that are actionable in nature for disputes over rights, but do not constitute the substance of the case and can be separated from the proceedings. The conclusion is substantiated that creditor control can be overridden by the court only in the event of illegality and bad faith actions by creditor community bodies. The research results can be used to improve legislation and law enforcement practices.