Two years after an individual filed for bankruptcy, his wife sold a suburban land plot near a lake jointly owned by the spouses.
KIAP's lawyers representing the creditor supported the manager’s statement to challenge the transaction made to the detriment of creditors. The trial court dismissed the claim as the buyer was affiliated neither with the debtor nor his spouse. In addition, the court considered that the buyer, as a non-professional participant in civil transactions, should not have known about the bankruptcy of the seller’s spouse. The court also found that the payment was evidenced by the fact that the buyer had taken the money to purchase the plot from his wife and father. The Court of Appeal upheld the judgement of the trial court.
The Court of Cassation considered the arguments of KIAP's lawyers. The fact that the buyer's relatives had money did not mean that they were transferred to the buyer to make the transaction. In addition, the spouse acting as the seller provided a bank statement as proof of spending funds received under the transaction. The bank statement showed various types of write-offs (purchase of groceries, payment for the child’s sports classes, taxi, etc.). However, the case file contained no evidence of money deposited to her bank account after the transaction. These gaps disrupted the transfer-credit-spending chain and caused the court to question the integrity of the unaffiliated parties. As a result, the court remitted the case for a new trial.
The award of the Arbitration Court of the Moscow District is available here.
The project was completed by Daniil Zherdev, Senior Associate, Anna Andreyeva, Associate, and Tamara Fillinykh, Junior Associate.