The article examines the legal nature of claims arising from subsidiary liability for bringing a legal entity to bankruptcy, joint and several liability of a company director for failure to file for insolvency in a timely manner under the threat of insolvency, and liability for damages caused to an insolvent bank in claims brought by the Deposit Guarantee Fund of Ukraine. To denote these categories of claims collectively, the article proposes the concept of “corporate tort-based debts”. The purpose of the article is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the legal nature of corporate tort-based debts and to determine their impact on the assessment of the debtor’s good faith when deciding whether a natural person may be discharged from such obligations. The article argues that corporate tort-based debts do not fall within the exceptions to discharge provided for in Article 134(2) of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedures and that, therefore, their legal nature alone does not preclude the debtor’s discharge from such obligations. The author proposes a comprehensive approach to assessing the debtor’s good faith, taking into account the nature and grounds of the corporate tort-based debt, the existence of a criminal-law qualification of the relevant conduct, and compliance with the principle of proportionality when deciding on the discharge of a natural person from such debts. The article concludes that the debtor’s good faith, rather than the formal classification of a claim as a particular type of pecuniary liability, should serve as the decisive criterion for resolving the issue of debt discharge.

Journal articles

1. Butyrska I, ‘Bankrutstvo fizychnykh osib: problemy teorii ta praktyky’ [2021] 1 Ekonomika ta pravo 89–95 https://doi.org/10.15407/econlaw.2021.01.089 (in Ukrainian).

2. Pohrebniak V, ‘Vymohy kredytoriv, vid vykonannia yakykh borzhnyk – fizychna osoba ne zvilniaietsia pislia zavershennia sudovykh protsedur u spravi pro neplatospromozhnist’ [2025] 3 Nove ukrainske pravo 92–101 https://doi.org/10.51989/NUL.2025.3.12 (in Ukrainian).

3. Tashian R, ‘Dobrosovisnist yak zahalna zasada tsyvilnoho zakonodavstva’ [2025] 4 Juris Europensis Scientia 21–25 https://doi.org/10.32782/chern.v4.2025.5 (in Ukrainian).

4. Valihura K, ‘Pryntsyp dobrosovisnosti yak katehoriia tsyvilnoho prava’ [2020] 4 Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo i pravo 11–16 https://doi.org/10.32849/2663-5313/2020.4.02 (in Ukrainian).

Conference papers

5. Zhornokui V, ‘Katehorii “rozumnist” i “dobrosovisnist” u konteksti prytiahnennia do vidpovidalnosti chleniv orhaniv aktsionernoho tovarystva za yoho borhy’, in Problemy tsyvilnoho prava ta protsesu: tezy dop. uchasnykiv nauk.-prakt. konf., prysviach. svitlii pamiati O. A. Pushkina, Kharkiv, 24 trav. 2019 r. (KhNUVS 2019) 139–143 (in Ukrainian).

Theses

6. Shynkarova Ye, ‘Zoboviazannia, nerozryvno poviazani z osoboiu borzhnyka abo kredytora, za tsyvilnym zakonodavstvom Ukrainy’ (PhD dissertation, 2021) (in Ukrainian). Websites

7. Danilov A, Dobrosovisnist borzhnyka u protsedurakh neplatospromozhnosti fizychnykh osib: bahatorivneva model ta metodolohiia zastosuvannia pravovykh naslidkiv (Rukopys, podanyi do redaktsii zhurnalu “Slovo Natsionalnoi shkoly suddiv Ukrainy”) (accessed 25.06.2026) (in Ukrainian).

8. Danilov A, Pravo na platospromozhnist yurydychnoi osoby yak samostiinyi obiekt pravovoi okhorony u bankrutstvi (Rukopys statti, podanoi do druku v zhurnali “Ekonomika ta pravo”) (accessed 25.06.2026) (in Ukrainian).