RusBankrot
We know everything about bankruptcy
30/06/2026
Tuesday
THIS DAY IN HISTORY:
30 June 
1970 A resolution "On Overcoming the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" was published the USSR.
1970 A resolution "On Overcoming the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" was published the USSR.
1970 The vacations reappeared in the USSR
1970 The vacations reappeared in the USSR.
1970 Korea declared independence from China.
1970 Korea declared independence from China.
30 June
1970 A resolution "On Overcoming the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" was published the USSR.
1970 A resolution "On Overcoming the Cult of Personality and Its Consequences" was published the USSR.
1970 The vacations reappeared in the USSR
1970 The vacations reappeared in the USSR.
1970 Korea declared independence from China.
1970 Korea declared independence from China.
THE BURDEN OF PROVING THE MARKET PRICE IN MULTIPLE DISCOUNT TRANSACTIONS IN BANKRUPTCY
The manager filed a lawsuit to declare the sale and purchase agreement for real estate invalid (case No. A41-84215/23).
The courts of two instances denied the application, finding that the fact of payment was confirmed by a receipt for an operation corresponding to the total value of the real estate.
The cassation sent the dispute for a new trial, noting that the cadastral value of the alienated property at the time of its alienation was significantly higher.
Thus, the difference between the market value at the time of alienation and the price of the contract for real estate is more than 90%, which indicates the presence of a qualifying feature of the invalidity of the transaction - an unequal counter-performance.
In the case at hand, the debtor's manager has provided evidence of the cadastral value of the transferred property, which is significantly higher than the value of the transferred property. Therefore, the burden of proving the opposite lies with the individual (the party to the disputed contract), who should be able to provide comprehensive evidence indicating that the property was acquired at its actual (market) value.
The courts of two instances denied the application, finding that the fact of payment was confirmed by a receipt for an operation corresponding to the total value of the real estate.
The cassation sent the dispute for a new trial, noting that the cadastral value of the alienated property at the time of its alienation was significantly higher.
Thus, the difference between the market value at the time of alienation and the price of the contract for real estate is more than 90%, which indicates the presence of a qualifying feature of the invalidity of the transaction - an unequal counter-performance.
In the case at hand, the debtor's manager has provided evidence of the cadastral value of the transferred property, which is significantly higher than the value of the transferred property. Therefore, the burden of proving the opposite lies with the individual (the party to the disputed contract), who should be able to provide comprehensive evidence indicating that the property was acquired at its actual (market) value.
26.06.2026
