Abuse in the Distribution of Property of a Liquidated Corporation: Judicial and Legal Aspect

Given the rapid development of corporate legislation, it is necessary to determine the boundaries of acceptable behavior when carrying out the procedure for distributing discovered property of a liquidated legal entity. The relevance of the topic is supported by both the increase in the number of applications for the appointment of the procedure received by commercial courts, especially during the economic downturn, and the increase in the number of abuses aimed at taking possession of the property of the corporation. There are gaps in the legal regulation of certain issues of the procedure: the circle of persons, the right to submit an application, the conditions of appointment, and control over the procedure. Stakeholders find opportunities to circumvent the law, leading to new types of abuse. In the absence of detailed legislative regulation, review of practice and clarifications of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, courts have to form judicial practice based on the circumstances of specific cases, which leads to contradictions in judicial practice. The stated problem is considered from the standpoint of its corporate component, while the author departs from the traditional circle of subjects of corporate law and examines abuses that can be committed by both participants and management, creditors and even an arbitrazh receiver. The paper lists the main types of abuse of rights, the definition of abuse of rights is proposed. The study is based on a comprehensive analysis of judicial practice related to the consideration of cases by commercial courts on applications for the appointment of a procedure.

1. Adamovich G. Problemy primeneniya instituta zloupotrebleniya pravom v korporativnyh otnosheniyah // Hozyajstvo i pravo. – 2005. – № 5. – S. 58 – 65.

2. Andreev V.K., Efimov A.V., Kondrat'ev V.A. Prava i obyazannosti nepublichnogo obshchestva i ego uchastnikov: teoriya i sudebnaya praktika / Otv. red. V.K. Andreev. – M.: RGUP, 2020. – 336 s.

3. Bogdanova E.E. Dobrosovestnost' uchastnikov dogovornyh otnoshenij i problemy zashchity ih sub"ektivnyh grazhdanskih prav: Avtoreferat dis. na soisk. uch. st. d-ra yurid. nauk: 12.00.03 / M., 2010. – 63 s.

4. Gololobov D.V. Akcionernoe obshchestvo protiv akcionera: protivodejstvie korporativnomu shantazhu. – M.: YUsticinform. 2004. – 320 s.

5. Dobrovol'skij V.I. Primenenie korporativnogo prava: prakticheskoe rukovodstvo dlya korporativnogo yurista. – M.: Volters Kluver, 2008. – 576 s.

6. Lyanguzova E.M. Korporativnye zloupotrebleniya pravom: sudebno-pravovoj aspekt // Arbitrazhnyj i grazhdanskij process. – 2019. – №12. – S. 13 – 18.

7. Sviridenko O.M. Osparivanie sdelok vo vred kreditoram vne procedury bankrotstva (vnekonkursnoe osparivanie) // Aktual'nye problemy rossijskogo prava. – 2020. – T. 15. – № 2. – S. 105 – 112.

8. Sedova ZH.I., Zajceva N.V. Princip estoppel' i otkaz ot prava v kommercheskom oborote Rossijskoj Federacii. – M: Statut, 2014. – 159 s.

9. Smit A. Issledovanie o prirode i prichinah bogatstva narodov. – M.: Eksmo, 2016. – 1056 s.

10. Problemy razvitiya i perspektivy predprinimatel'skogo prava v sovremennyh ekonomicheskih usloviyah / Otv. red. S.S. Zankovskij. – M.: Prospekt, 2020. – 656 s.

11. Dine J., Koutsias M. Company Low. London: Palgrave Macmillian. 2014. – P. 21.

12. V. Laptev, V. Fedin. Legal Awareness in a Digital Society. Russian Law Journal. – 2020. – Vol 8. – No 1. – P. 138 – 157. DOI 10.17589/2309-8678-2020-8-1-138-157.