Good day! I will gladly analyze this court decision for you.
1. The subject of the dispute is the recognition of the donation agreement of a residential building and a land plot, concluded between a mother and daughter, as invalid, since the plaintiff believed that the agreement was concluded to avoid foreclosure on the debtor’s (daughter’s) property for her obligations to the plaintiff.
2. The court of cassation did not agree with the conclusions of the courts of previous instances, which refused to satisfy the claim, motivating this by the fact that the plaintiff did not prove the defendants’ intent to conclude a fraudulent transaction. The Supreme Court emphasized that civil law contracts cannot be used to avoid paying debt or enforcing a court decision. The court noted that a debtor who disposes of property after an obligation to repay the debt arises acts in bad faith and abuses rights against the creditor. The court took into account that at the time of the conclusion of the donation agreement, the daughter already had an obligation to the plaintiff, and the alienation of property in favor of the mother took place during this period. The court also noted that the courts of previous instances did not ascertain the value of other property that remained in the debtor’s ownership, and whether it was commensurate with the amount of the debt. Considering these circumstances, the Supreme Court concluded that the donation agreement has signs of fraudulence, since it was aimed at avoiding foreclosure on the debtor’s property.
3. The Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the previous courts in the part of the refusal to satisfy the claims for recognition of the donation agreement as invalid and issued a new decision to satisfy the claim, recognizing the donation agreement as invalid.
