LAND TRANSACTIONS UNDER THE MICROSCOPE OF THE LAW

LAND TRANSACTIONS UNDER THE MICROSCOPE OF THE LAW

LAND TRANSACTIONS UNDER THE MICROSCOPE OF THE LAW
The manager appealed to the court with a demand to invalidate the agreements on the transfer of land lease rights (case no. A12-7411/24).

In satisfying the application, the courts of two instances established the affiliation of the parties to the transaction, gratuitousness, and concluded that the disputed agreements on the transfer of rights from the debtor to the defendant were null and void by virtue of the direct instructions of the law.

The cassation refused to satisfy the claims, since in the case under consideration, the disputed agreements on behalf of the debtor were signed by the defendant acting on the basis of a power of attorney registered in the registry. The power of attorney has not been revoked.

In another case, the bankruptcy trustee's claim against the debtor and the defendant established that the disputed agreements were concluded with the consent of the debtor and are not disputed by him, and the obligations to transfer funds were fulfilled by the defendant, who is a bona fide buyer. 

Also, in the bankruptcy case of another company, a separate dispute on challenging a chain of transactions was considered. As a result of the review, the agreement between the company and the debtor was declared invalid, and subsequent agreements were refused to be invalidated. At the same time, the court concluded that there were no grounds for qualifying the transactions as a single, imaginary transaction and established that the land plots were at the disposal of the defendant. The above-mentioned evidence indicates that the disputed agreements were concluded with the consent of the debtor and are not disputed by him.

Thus, the court had no grounds for recognizing such agreements as null and void in relation to the provisions on the responsibility of the representative. The financial manager did not indicate or prove any other circumstances beyond the defects of suspicious transactions. In the absence of grounds for applying the rules on bad faith, due to the financial manager's failure to prove any other defects in the disputed transaction beyond the defects of suspicious transactions, the courts did not have grounds to satisfy the financial manager's requirements and invalidate the disputed transaction. 

 

Photo: Freepik

26.09.2025