What sources does Taxxa search?

Taxxa searches a continuously updated collection of more than one million pages from tax authorities, government publications, legislation and case law across the European jurisdictions it covers. Every response cites the underlying material, so a professional can inspect the rule, its jurisdiction and whether it is current before relying on the result.

Can Taxxa work with a team’s own documents?

Yes. Research can combine the public knowledge base with a team’s own PDF, DOCX, CSV and TXT files in one workspace. That makes it possible to compare a client document with the relevant guidance, trace a conclusion to its source and prepare a draft without losing the evidence that supports it.

Who is Taxxa built for?

Accountants, auditors, tax advisors, payroll specialists, bookkeepers and advisory teams working across European jurisdictions. Shared workspaces keep research available to colleagues, and citations make review easier.

Where is customer data stored, and is it used to train models?

Customer data stays in the European Union and is never used to train language models.

Does Taxxa replace professional judgement?

No. Taxxa is a research and drafting workspace. It helps professionals reach an informed starting point faster; the professional still reviews the evidence and makes the final decision. It does not file returns, post bookkeeping entries or give legal advice.

LithuaniaLiteko

Appeal court reopens Luminor claim in individual-enterprise bankruptcy

The Kaunas refusal failed for skipping the delay-renewal question first; the EUR 39,539.77 mortgage claim returns for rehearing, with termination and notary entry not decisive.

By Taxxa AI OyPublished 12 November 2026

Legal & Corporate

Industry: Across industries

Lietuvos apeliacinis teismas set aside the Kauno apygardos teismas refusalTeismai of 22 September 2026 and sent the Luminor Bank AS claim back for a fresh hearingTeismai in the simplified bankruptcy of the J. P. individuali įmonėTeismai. The administrator, Vytautas Glodenis, had asked on 11 September 2026Teismai to add the bank, acting in Lithuania through its Lithuanian branch, to the creditor listTeismai with a mortgage-secured claimTeismai of EUR 39,539.77Teismai. The appeal ruling of 12 November 2026 annuls the refusalTeismai and orders the first-instance court to decide the late-filing question first and only then the meritsTeismai.

The amount claimed breaks down into EUR 39,373.95 to be satisfied in the first stage and EUR 165.82 in the second. It rests on the credit agreement of 10 August 2007 No. BK 07/08/29VY concluded with the enterprise owner as a natural personTeismai. The enterprise went bankrupt under the Kaunas order of 16 March 2026, effective 21 April 2026Teismai, with the owner joined as co-defendant.

The Kaunas court recorded that the 30-day filing periodTeismai had expiredTeismai but refused the request on enforceabilityTeismai, finding, in its view, that the bank had no enforceable claimTeismai: the credit agreement had not been terminatedTeismai, no default had been shownTeismai and no notary executory entry for recovery from the mortgaged property existedTeismai. Only claims whose deadline had arrived and which remained unperformed could be confirmedTeismai, it reasoned.

On the deadline, the appeal panel agreed the filing was lateTeismai but held lateness alone did not decide the caseTeismai. The Article 41(1) period of the Juridinių asmenų nemokumo įstatymas runs from publication of the bankruptcy order on the supervisory-authority websiteE TAR: the effective order reached the Audito, apskaitos, turto vertinimo ir nemokumo valdymo tarnyba on 21 April 2026Teismai, publication follows by the next working day under Article 32(1)(3), here 23 AprilTeismai, so the period expired on 25 May 2026Teismai. The bank applied on 11 September.Teismai But the first-instance court never examined why the delay occurredTeismai and never ruled on renewalTeismai, although that question comes firstTeismai and is decided on the court's own motionTeismai. Renewal for serious reasons follows Article 78(1) of the Civilinio proceso kodeksas. Public posting alone does not prove the creditor actually learned of the bankruptcyTeismai, and the administrator must send creditors a copy of the effective order within three working days under Article 27(3)(1). Here the bank is a creditor of the owner as a natural person rather than of the enterpriseTeismai, and the file says nothing about when or how it learned of the case.

On substance, the rehearing standard is that all of the legal person's obligation deadlines are deemed to have arrived once the bankruptcy order takes effect, under Article 61(1)E TAR, and the same applies to the owner's personal obligations when the debtor is an individuali įmonėTeismai, whose personal creditors may join the enterprise bankruptcyTeismai. Termination and a notary executory entry are therefore not preconditionsTeismai, and no enforcement document needs to have been issued alreadyTeismai. The first-instance court should have examined the material merits, orally if disputed, instead of treating those absences as conclusive.

The refusal is annulled under Articles 337(1)(3) and 338 of the Civilinio proceso kodeksas. The Kaunas court must first set a time for arguments on the delay and renewal, decide that point, and only then assess the claim on its merits.Teismai The EUR 60 fee the bank paid for its separate appeal is returnedTeismai through the Valstybinė mokesčių inspekcija, since a creditor appealing refusal of its own claim pays no such feeTeismai.

Legal basis: Juridinių asmenų nemokumo įstatymas Articles 41, 32(1)(3), 27(3)(1) and 61(1); Civilinio proceso kodeksas Articles 78(1), 83(1)(9), 87, 337(1)(3) and 338.

If you administer an individual-enterprise bankruptcy or act for an owner-side creditor, diary the AVNT-publication 30-day limit and file delay reasons with actual-notice evidence, because expiry alone ends the claim.

Sources