A luxury Bentley Continental GT, which belonged to a bankrupt Lithuanian company, was supposed to be handed over to the insolvency administrator and used to secure the interests of creditors. However, instead, the car disappeared from Lithuania and was spotted abroad—in France and Monaco.
At first glance, this might seem like just another dispute over company assets. However, according to the lawyers at the AVOCAD law firm, this case highlights a much broader problem: what happens when authorities take a strictly formal view of the situation, while valuable assets may in fact be lost.
Bankruptcy proceedings were initiated against a Vilnius-based company, and an insolvency administrator was appointed. One of the company’s most significant assets—a Bentley Continental GT—was to be transferred to the administrator. The documents indicate that the company owed more than 72,000 euros to the tax administrator—the State Tax Inspectorate (VMI)—so the return of the car was directly related to the protection of creditors’ interests.
However, the car was not handed over to the administrator. On the contrary, it was determined that its whereabouts were linked to foreign countries. The applicant contacted law enforcement, requesting that a pre-trial investigation be initiated and a national and international search for the car be issued; however, the authorities initially refused to do so, assessing the situation as a civil dispute.
“In such situations, it is crucial not to limit oneself to a formal response. If the assets of a bankrupt company are located abroad, and they are not transferred by a person who does not have the right to dispose of them, leaving the creditors’ interests unprotected, proactive measures are necessary,” said Mantas Baigys, an attorney with AVOCAD who represented the client in the case .
In this situation, complaints were being prepared, additional explanations were being provided, evidence was being gathered, and communications with representatives of the shareholder who actually controlled the vehicle were being analyzed. The written explanations noted that the applicant had been collecting data on the vehicle’s location and its control.
The issue of separating the shareholder’s assets from those of the company also became a key point in the case. The lawyers’ position was clear: a company shareholder is not the owner of the company’s assets and cannot treat the company car as personal property. This is especially true when bankruptcy proceedings have been initiated against the company, and all assets must be managed for the purposes of the insolvency process and to safeguard the interests of creditors. “This case serves as a reminder of a very simple rule that is sometimes overlooked in practice—a company’s assets are not the shareholder’s personal property. In bankruptcy proceedings, every such asset becomes important to creditors, so concealing it, delaying its disclosure, or attempting to sell it independently cannot be considered a mere civil dispute,” notes Egidijus Langys, managing partner and attorney at AVOCAD .
Additional information reinforced suspicions that the car had not only not been handed over to the administrator but may also have been intended for sale to third parties. On April 27, 2025, photographs of the car were received, and the surroundings visible in them, as indicated in the documents, showed that the vehicle is not and cannot be in Lithuania.
This situation serves as an example of why time is of the essence in bankruptcy cases. Valuable assets, especially those located abroad, can quickly be transferred, hidden, or become difficult to access. Therefore, mere promises to “return them later” cannot replace the actual transfer of assets. “A lawyer’s job in such cases is not merely to draft a procedural document. One must see the whole picture and ensure that the process moves forward,” says E. Langys.
According to the lawyer, this “Bentley” story is ultimately not about a luxury car. It is about how important it is to protect creditors’ interests when a bankrupt company’s assets disappear abroad and the authorities initially see no reason to take active measures.
A few days ago, the car was brought back to Lithuania—its transport and return were organized at the initiative of the attorneys. This shows that even in complex situations involving international elements, consistent legal work and proactive action can still yield tangible results.