The applicants believe that the Moscow Arbitration Court ignored the evidence and incorrectly applied the Central Bank's standards to the bank whose regulator had selected the license. Lawyers filed an appropriate complaint with the Arbitration Court of Appeal.

According to the lawyer of the plaintiff Anton Aleksandrov, the Bank of Russia introduced the temporary management of Yugra without taking into account the bank's requirements and requirements. For example, the management of the organization drew up a reserve of 13.4 billion rubles and prepared in July a financial report for the court, according to which the capital held at the level of 33.5 billion rubles and did not decrease. In addition, the liquidity ratios of the credit institution exceeded the established norms. And this report was signed by the interim administration, but the court left the arguments of the bank's leaders unheeded.

"At the same time, representatives of the Central Bank of Russia recognized that when issuing an order to introduce an interim administration, the regulator was guided by the estimated assumption that the bank violated Ugra's mandatory standards," said Alexandrov.

The interim administration in the person of the Deposit Insurance Agency (DIA) was allegedly introduced to prevent the bankruptcy of the bank, although it is impossible to consider the case without checking the legality of the "financial recovery plan," the lawyer said.. In fact, the Central Bank had no legal or factual grounds for transferring Yugra to temporary management.

In turn, ex-chairman of the board of "Yugra" Dmitry Shilyaev said that his main task is to fight for the interests of depositors and creditors of the bank.