--- title: "Gordiychuk Case: New Detail Emerges in Bankruptcy Proceedings" description: "New details have emerged in the bankruptcy and loan case of Andriy Gordiychuk: experts point to a seven-year investigation delay, questionable personal guarantees, and risks for Ukrainian business." date: 2026-09-28T09:02:02.000Z lang: en url: https://xab.info/en/posts/gordiychuk-case-new-detail-bankruptcy tags: [bankruptcy, court, economy, ukraine, law] publisher: "XAB.info" --- # Gordiychuk Case: New Detail Emerges in Bankruptcy Proceedings ![Andriy Gordiychuk case and bankruptcy details](https://xab.info/media/2026/09/28/delo-gordiychuka-novaya-detal-bankrotstvo/delo-gordiychuka-novaya-detal-bankrotstvo-1.webp) ## 🎯 Key Points - The Gordiychuk case threatens the institution of personal suretyship in Ukraine. - Seven years passed from the registration of criminal proceedings to the serving of suspicion. - Gordiychuk did not sign credit agreements and did not hold a controlling stake in borrower companies. - Commercial disputes regarding rapeseed seed deliveries were translated into a criminal plane. How commercial disputes can turn into criminal proceedings, civil guarantors can find themselves among suspects, and law enforcement mechanisms can become a tool of pressure on business – as well as the risks of this approach for Ukrainian entrepreneurs – is discussed in a detailed analytical article by lawyer and ECHR jurist (2015-2019) Markiyan Bem. Cases like that of Andriy Gordiychuk threaten the very institution of personal suretyship in Ukraine: if a guarantor can end up in criminal proceedings not because of their own actions under the contract, but due to the mere fact of trust in the borrower, this legal mechanism loses predictability and safety for business. And immediately a strange question arises: how does it happen that bankers who issued the loan remain unidentified, borrowers remain unidentified, and suddenly it is the contract guarantor who is recognized as responsible for misappropriating funds? ### Chronology of Events and Key Investigation Dates There are cases where the key evidence is not a document or testimony, but time. How much of it has passed, what happened in the pauses, and why the suspicion arose precisely now, rather than earlier or later. Andriy Gordiychuk's case is precisely such a case, and experts suggest analyzing it through this lens. Let us note immediately: the authors of the analysis do not claim anything about the motives of specific officials and do not accuse any institution, but the chronology of events raises many questions. Professional assessment shows that this case had no judicial prospects from day one. That is why it was not investigated on the merits for years, and where movement did occur, it was closed. A telling fact: seven years passed from the moment of registering the criminal proceedings to the serving of the notice of suspicion: a case that lay practically dormant for seven years suddenly came alive in 2026. In 2016-2018, three credit agreements were concluded with the state-owned Ukrgasbank for UAH 184.2 million. The debt was not fully repaid, and Kiev police launched an investigation. In July 2019, the case was closed due to the absence of a criminal offense. Later, more than four years later, in June 2023, the proceedings came alive and the materials were transferred to the Dnipropetrovsk region. Parallel to these events in 2019, LLC "LA TERRA" incurred a debt for the supply of rapeseed seeds. Instead of a commercial court, the farmer turned to the police of the Dnipropetrovsk region, which immediately opened proceedings. ### Contradictory Data In this case, there are a number of significant contradictions between the investigation materials and the logic of commercial relations. In particular, the materials of the Dnipro stage of the consolidated proceedings indicate the absence of any significant changes – essentially, it is the same case that simply changed its address and received a new impetus after public statements. A new wave of attention to the case – public and high-profile – appeared around the same time when the new Prosecutor General's Office head Ruslan Kravchenko mentioned this case on his social media. The post itself was timed to coincide with the serving of the notice of suspicion to the client, Andriy Gordiychuk. A natural question arises as to why the case was transferred specifically to the Dnipropetrovsk region rather than left in Kiev or (considering that the case concerns the misappropriation of state bank funds) immediately transferred to NABU. ### Charges and Risks for Ukrainian Business The second major episode concerns three credit agreements totaling UAH 184.2 million. The investigation believes that about UAH 140 million was not returned and names Andriy Gordiychuk as the organizer of the scheme to misappropriate these funds. At the same time, he did not sign a single agreement, had nothing to do with two of the three borrower companies, and owned a 25% stake in the third borrower company, which did not grant the right to unilaterally dispose of funds. The largest loan in the amount of UAH 79.2 million was transferred in full directly to the equipment seller. Regarding the episode with rapeseed seeds, LLC "LA TERRA" purchased them from the T.G. Shevchenko farm in 2019, paid part of the amount, and a debt of UAH 11 million remained. The enterprise has not been liquidated and still operates. However, instead of a civilized lawsuit in a commercial court, criminal proceedings were opened, under which, seven years later, suspicion was served to a person who was neither a founder nor an owner of the company. ## 🔍 Fact-Check Verification - [Дело Гордийчука: появилась новая деталь в деле о банкротстве](https://www.rbc.ua/ukr/news/strazhi-poryadku-chi-brigadi-k-gospodarski-1789062710.html) - Использован первичный текст статьи адвоката Маркияна Бема и данные RBC.ua о хронологии дела. ## ❓ FAQ ### Q: What is the essence of the investigation's claims against Andriy Gordiychuk? **A:** The investigation considers him the organizer of the scheme to misappropriate state Ukrgasbank funds under three credit agreements and an episode with rapeseed seed debt. ### Q: How much time passed from the opening of proceedings to the serving of suspicion? **A:** Seven years passed from the registration of criminal proceedings to the serving of suspicion. ### Q: What main legal risks does lawyer Markiyan Bem note? **A:** The main risk lies in turning ordinary commercial disputes and the institution of personal suretyship into criminal proceedings, threatening business predictability in Ukraine.