THE SUPREME COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION MAY RECONSIDER ITS POSITION ON THE ONLY HOUSING IN BANKRUPTCY

The circumstances of the case are as follows: the debtor owned 2 real estate objects, one of which was pledged by the bank, which is why it was sold. And the debtor was left with only a house with a plot of land as the only housing.

At the same time, the debtor presented the specified property to his father on the eve of bankruptcy, and the transaction was challenged, and the property was returned to the bankruptcy estate. Then the house and the plot were put up for auction by the manager, and according to the results of the public offer, a purchase and sale agreement was concluded.

The debtor unsuccessfully tried to challenge the result of the auction, and then applied to the court for the exclusion of the property from the bankruptcy estate due to the presence of executive immunity.

The application was granted by the court of first instance, but this approach was not shared by the higher courts, which overturned the ruling, refusing to satisfy the application and noting the following:

According to the appellate and cassation courts, in this dispute it is not necessary to talk about the protection of real estate by executive immunity for the purposes of excluding it from the bankruptcy estate, because:

- at the time of the introduction of the bankruptcy procedure, the house was not the only dwelling;

- the fact of abuse on the part of the debtor is established, since the deed of donation of the house in favor of the father was challenged by the judicial act that entered into force;

- the debtor held a passive position throughout the entire period of consideration of the dispute and submitted an application for the exclusion of the property from the bankruptcy estate only after the auction.

Having disagreed with the judicial acts, the debtor, together with his father, filed a complaint with the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which was submitted for consideration at the judicial session of the collegium.

As arguments, the cassators cited facts to refute the arguments regarding the passive position in the bankruptcy case, as well as an indication of the fact that the presence of real estate status of the only housing, of course, protects it with executive immunity.

It should be noted that the circumstances of the present dispute are such that it is not excluded that the debtor and his father have been living in a house for a long time, which is really the only housing for them. Even if there is abuse on the part of the debtor, expressed in the alienation of disputed real estate in favor of the father in a gratuitous transaction.

In addition, given the statistics, we should expect the complaint to be satisfied (the meeting is scheduled for October 24), but it is impossible to predict in advance the conclusions that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation will make in the final determination. However, without any doubt, the highest court will present an interesting legal position regarding the only housing.