The Supreme Court untangled a chain of sham transactions: joint liability without double recovery

How to withdraw assets from the bankruptcy estate? Arkady Popov decided to act through his family. First, he gifted two commercial premises to his daughter Elena, who immediately transferred them to her mother, Olga. And she, in turn, sold the properties to a third party. At first glance, the scheme looks like an ordinary chain of transactions. But when all participants were declared bankrupt, it turned out that this was an attempt to hide assets from creditors.

The Supreme Court (case No. А41-102080/2022) examined the details. It overturned the decisions of the appellate and cassation courts, which had allowed the inclusion in the creditors' claims register of an amount corresponding to the value of the real estate. The Supreme Court indicated that all transactions in the chain are sham, and the participants must jointly compensate for the damage to the bankruptcy estate. This approach excludes double recovery: if one of the debtors fulfills the obligation, the others are released from it.

The Court also emphasized that the daughter, having agreed to the use of her name to conceal assets, cannot avoid liability. The mother, as an intermediate owner, is also obliged to compensate for the damage. Joint liability of all links in the chain is the only way to prevent unjust enrichment of the bankruptcy estate.

For lawyers working with bankruptcies, this decision is an important guideline. It shows that attempts to shield assets through relatives are not only useless but can also lead to serious consequences for the entire family.