Indisputable payment obligations as Bankruptcy characteristics in Bankruptcy proceedings. Whether a dispute over the material breach of a contract makes indisputable obligation in Bankruptcy a disputable one. How does it affect creditors' petition of involuntary bankruptcy?

Abstract

The implementation of legal acts on bankruptcy in the third Armenian Republic (RA) created an entirely new structure. At any stage of settling down bankruptcy relations in modern Armenian reality and legal thought, the system was removing the subjects of law from material output. Maybe this is the reason for unfamiliarity or unreachability among general public and entities in that field: be that a court, another public administration body, or a manager or business-creditor. Ever since the adoption of the first law in Armenia on bankruptcy (RA “Law on Enterprises and Individual Entrepreneurs”), bankruptcy relations have differed from US or Western countries. Those differences are not so much controlled by a simple contrast of legal norms, but by their actual role in economic activities. It can be argued that in the Republic of Armenia the institute of bankruptcy is used as a means of forcing the debtor out of economic activities. In Armenia there are two structures for settling a bankruptcy case that are stated in Article 3 of the law and Article 2 of the RA “Law on Bankruptcy of Banks, Credit Organizations, Investment Companies, Managers of Investment Funds and Insurance Companies”. In the framework of the system indicated by Article 3 of the law, there are two reasons for declaring natural (including individual entrepreneurs) and legal entities bankrupt: 1. the inability to make payments for 60 days or more – illiquidity and 2. The debt of the debtor exceeds assets – insolvency.