THE COURT REFUSED TO RECOVER DAMAGES FROM THE AU DUE TO THE FUTILITY OF CHALLENGING THE TRANSACTION

In substantiation of the claim, the creditor pointed out that, following the results of the bankruptcy procedure of the citizen, the donation of the apartment to the latter was not challenged, which excluded the possibility of replenishing the bankruptcy estate due to its implementation, which is seen as the fault of the defendant who missed the statute of limitations for challenging the transaction.

The courts of three instances, following the results of a new review, refused to satisfy the claim (the ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation refused to transfer the case to the collegium), stating the following:

The courts found that the disputed real estate was the only housing of the debtor, and the creditor did not prove the prospects of replenishing the bankruptcy estate in case of challenging the donation transaction.

In addition, the courts noted that the creditor also did not prove the manager's awareness of the disputed transaction, since initially the documents, including the gift agreement, were transferred to another manager – the defendant's father, who transferred them to the defendant later.

Photo by Freepik