Economic crises that quickly end up in legal care can lead to an “escape” tactic and an attempt at concealment, in order to impede creditors and bring them to the negotiating table to settle for better conditions. Another possible tactic in such cases is an offensive one, i.e., not waiting until creditors understand how dire the situation is, but to alert the debtor at an earlier stage where he is heading, in an attempt to reach a settlement before all creditors learn of the crisis, resulting in creditors squabbling to gain an advantage in liquidating the debtor’s relatively meager assets.
In one case of such a crisis, the client agreed to allow the offensive tactic to be implemented, and this move proved itself by helping him get through the crisis. As part of the tactic, a claim was filed with a motion for exemption from court fees against those who caused the economic collapse, who despite those “collapse leaders” having left the country at a certain stage.
Within the legal action, the debtor also became a creditor, pursuant to the judgment handed down, within the overall collapse, being owed a significant amount. The chances of recovering the debt in the judgment were nonexistent, given the scale of the debts of the “collapse leaders”.
One of the creditors of the “crash leaders” and of the Creditor by the said judgment (the debtor) made a mistake in another proceeding. Once the error was discovered, within the conduct of the legal action against the debtor (a creditor – the client), an offer was made to that creditor to reach a settlement, which was given the effect of a judgment.
Under the settlement, the judgment was assigned to the creditor, which served as an expense for the creditor for tax purposes to an amount that was higher than the claim against the client in debt, and the attorneys of the creditor “found” a way to correct the legal error that they had made.