A creditor cannot change the debt restructuring plan without the debtor's consent and creditors' meeting — Commercial Cassation Court of the Supreme Court

The position of the Northwestern Commercial Court of Appeal, set out in the ruling dated 20.01.2026 in case No. 918/174/25, was supported by the Supreme Court. This was reported by the Northwestern Commercial Court of Appeal.

By the ruling of the Commercial Court of Rivne Region dated 13.11.2025, the LLC's application was satisfied. Changes were made to the debt restructuring plan of the individual, approved by the ruling of the Commercial Court of Rivne Region dated 18.06.2025, namely the inclusion in the debtor's debt restructuring plan of the debtor's debt to LLC:

- of the second priority - the amount of UAH 73,400;

- the amount of UAH 4,844.80 as an extraordinary claim;

- the term and procedure for repayment of the above debt were provided, with an extension of the debt restructuring plan execution period by 12 months, with the distribution of the recognized LLC claims amount in equal monthly installments from the date of issuance of the respective ruling.

By the ruling of the Northwestern Commercial Court of Appeal dated 20.01.2026, the above ruling of the local commercial court was canceled and a new decision was made to refuse the LLC representative's application to amend the debtor's debt restructuring plan.

The appellate court's ruling was motivated by the fact that LLC filed a claim for monetary claims against the debtor on 30.09.2025, i.e., after the approval of the debt restructuring plan of the individual by the ruling of the Commercial Court of Rivne Region dated 18.06.2025 and after the debtor began its execution.

The appellate court noted that the debt restructuring procedure for an individual has a special purpose – identification of creditors, formation and approval of the restructuring plan, its execution by the debtor, and subsequent release of the debtor from debts. Submission of creditor claims after the approval of the restructuring plan and further amendments to such a plan without following the procedure established by the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures would nullify the purpose of this procedure.

At the same time, LLC did not comply with the deadline for submitting monetary claims established by part 1 of article 45 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures, nor did it provide justified reasons for their untimely submission, although insolvency proceedings were opened by the ruling dated 27.03.2025.

Moreover, the amendments to the restructuring plan were initiated by a creditor who at the time of approval and confirmation of the plan did not have procedural status as a party to the case, and the proposed changes were not considered by the creditors' meeting in the manner prescribed by paragraph 2 of part five of article 123 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures. The case materials also do not contain the debtor's consent to such changes, whereas according to paragraph 7 of part eight of article 126 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures, the debt restructuring plan can only be approved with the debtor's consent.

In view of the above, the appellate court concluded that the provisions of paragraph 2 of part six of article 126 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures do not grant the court the right to increase the amount of creditor claims that the debtor has already agreed to repay according to the approved restructuring plan without following the legally established procedure for approving such changes.

The Supreme Court noted that the procedure for approving the debtor's debt restructuring plan is enshrined in article 126 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures, which provides for the submission by the restructuring manager of the relevant application within three days from the date of approval by the creditors' meeting of the plan agreed with the debtor.

According to the circumstances established in this case, LLC applied to the court with creditor claims against the debtor beyond the deadline established by part one of article 45 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures. In addition, at the date of filing this application, the local commercial court had already approved the debt restructuring plan of Kalishchuk N.O., which was partially executed by the debtor.

The Supreme Court indicated that the issue arose in this case regarding the procedure for making changes to the court-approved debt restructuring plan.

The cassation court stated that the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures does not prohibit making changes to the restructuring plan; however, the consideration and approval of such changes must be carried out in the manner prescribed for reviewing the draft debt restructuring plan, i.e., by submitting the issue of making changes to the restructuring plan for consideration by the creditors' meeting and agreeing directly with the debtor.

However, in this case, the changes to the debt restructuring plan were not subject to consideration at the creditors' meeting, and the debtor's consent to the changes proposed by LLC to the restructuring plan is absent. In this regard, the Supreme Court agreed with the appellate court's conclusion to refuse the application for making changes to the debtor's debt restructuring plan.

The Supreme Court also noted that a creditor who applied to the court with monetary claims against the debtor after the expiration of the deadline established by part one of article 45 of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures does not lose the right to satisfy their claims, but does not have the decisive vote at the creditors' meeting and committee.

At the same time, the special provisions of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures do not limit the creditors of an individual debtor in choosing their position in the case; however, in case of their passive participation in the proceedings, delay in exercising their powers, or failure to take necessary procedural actions, the risks of such inactivity lie with the creditors and should not harm the lawful interests of the debtor.

Considering the above, the Supreme Court formulated the conclusion that if creditor monetary claims against the debtor are recognized after the court has approved the debt restructuring plan, the creditor or debtor has the right to apply to the court with a reasoned motion to amend the court-approved debt restructuring plan. At the same time, such an application must be preceded by resolving the issue of making changes to the restructuring plan by the creditors' meeting and obtaining the debtor's consent.

The full text of the Supreme Court ruling composed by the panel of judges of the Commercial Cassation Court dated 26.05.2026 in case No. 918/174/25 can be found at this link.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp pages on Facebook and Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.