Service
A contract may be declared invalid if it was concluded as a sham or to disguise another transaction, without the required consent, in excess of authority, as a result of fraud or in breach of the law.
We are most often instructed by:
The information on this website is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute a public offer.
Timing and fees are indicative and are confirmed when the engagement is agreed.
A transaction is invalid on the grounds established by law, either by virtue of being declared invalid by a court (a voidable transaction) or irrespective of such a declaration (a void transaction). The type of invalidity determines who is entitled to bring a claim and the remedy available in court.
The outcome of the service is the work performed within the scope agreed with the client.
The position is built on the documents and the circumstances of the case; the following points are relevant.
On the basis of the materials, the strengths and weaknesses of the position, the risks and the possible courses of action are identified.
For the chosen option, a plan is drawn up: the sequence of steps, timing and scope of work.
Appeals against court rulings
Challenge
The lower courts granted the claims of the insolvency administrator and the creditors to hold the director of a bankrupt company personally liable for its debts.
What was done
The case was taken to the Supreme Court. The good faith of each management decision was proved, and the Supreme Court set aside the rulings of the lower courts.
Challenging Transactions
Challenge
Shortly before its insolvency, the debtor diverted its assets through a chain of formally independent transactions, each of which looked like an ordinary business operation.
What was done
The full chain was reconstructed, and the interconnection of the transactions and the invalidity of each link were proved. The assets were returned to the bankruptcy estate in full.
Recovery of Damages
Challenge
The former director caused losses to the company, expecting that it would not be possible to gather evidence: numerous transactions, a branching structure and blurred chains of cause and effect.
What was done
A systematic analysis was carried out: the chronology of decisions was reconstructed, the link between the transactions and the damage was identified, and bad faith was proved. The damages were recovered in full; the court granted the claims without any reduction.
Defence against challenges
Challenge
There were attempts, by challenging transactions, to bring the client's property – acquired, paid for and in commercial use – into the bankruptcy estate of an insolvent counterparty.
What was done
The legal position was built on the independent nature of the client's ownership. The court dismissed all the claims challenging the transactions, and the assets were retained in full without concessions or settlement agreements.
Challenging resolutions
Challenge
The majority participant systematically blocked the distribution of profits by voting at the general meeting. The company was generating income, but the minority participant did not receive its share of the profits.
What was done
The general meeting resolutions were challenged. A mechanism compelling the distribution of profits was implemented through the courts.
The grounds for invalidity are examined. A defendant's objection that the claimant's claim is based on a void transaction is considered by the court on its merits, regardless of whether the limitation period for having the transaction declared invalid has expired.
In the case of a voidable transaction, where there are grounds, a counterclaim to have it declared invalid is prepared.
The claimant's arguments, the performance of the contract and the conduct of the parties after its conclusion are examined. It is checked whether the claimant expressed an intention to keep the contract in force and whether its conduct gave grounds to rely on the validity of the contract.
On that basis, a response with supporting evidence is prepared.
It is checked whether the client is among the persons entitled by law to challenge it and whether the client has a legally protected interest in having the void transaction declared invalid.
An hourly rate, a fixed fee or a combined model is used; in some cases part of the fee depends on the outcome achieved. The fee is determined by the time actually spent, the complexity of the matter and the overall timeframe of the project, and is agreed before work begins.
Describe your matter and the circumstances in which it arose. The consultation establishes the possible structure of the work and the scope of legal support required.
