Promises of a Bankrupt Person Regarding the Sale of Real Estate
Even if the assets and rights that enter the bankruptcy table spontaneously formed according to the provision of the law with the issuance of the bankruptcy decision and the opening of bankruptcy belong to the mufli, the mufli’s authority to save on them expires.
Any savings of the bankrupt on the goods and rights contained in the ruler are invalid against the bankruptcy creditors. Supreme Court 10. In the decision of the Criminal Department dated 25.10.1999, it turned out that the checks issued by the bankrupt, who was tried for violation of the Czech law, could not be considered valid on the grounds that he would lose his license to save after the bankruptcy decision and therefore no crime would occur.
This issue is stated in the first paragraph of Article 191 of the Execution and Bankruptcy Law as follows: “All kinds of savings made by the debtor on the assets belonging to the table after the bankruptcy is opened are null and void against creditors.” it is regulated by the decree. According to this provision, in order for the savings transaction to be considered invalid only against the table, it is necessary and sufficient that the savings transaction was made by the bankrupt and its subject matter is the goods or rights contained in the table.
It should be noted that only liquidation transactions are prohibited, not all transactions are prohibited. The legislator, with the idea of protecting bankruptcy creditors, even if the bankrupt person places himself under an obligation by a compulsory transaction, this obligation will be an obligation to fulfill an obligation imposed only on the bankrupt person. Such a transaction will not be of a nature to cause a decrease in the assets of the table.
A muflis can sell a product that enters the table. However, the bankrupt cannot fulfill his obligation arising from the sales contract (the obligation to deliver goods and transfer ownership), that is, he cannot make a savings transaction. This does not mean that the sales contract made by the mufli is invalid. There is a valid sales contract. Only the muflis cannot fulfill the transfer/delivery obligation arising from this. When bankruptcy is abolished, the buyer may request the debtor (former bankrupt) to deliver the goods and transfer the property to him on the basis of this agreement.
IF WE EVALUATE THE SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY;
If the Muflis subjects a real estate registered in the assets statement to a real estate sales promise agreement, there is no obstacle to this. Because it is the savings authority that is restricted, otherwise there is no obstacle for the mufli to make compulsory transactions. Because the interests of creditors, which must be satisfied from the transaction, are affected not by the borrower’s borrowing transactions, but by the performance of the debt arising from these transactions.
The promise of sale does not carry the nature of a saving transaction; it only creates an obligation to enter into a sales contract and request registration for the transfer of ownership.
If the “person whose sales promise was made”, with whom the bankrupt entered into a sales contract, sues for the transfer of the real estate to him based on the right arising from the sales promise, this case will be rejected, since the bankrupt’s savings on the assets in the table will be invalid against the bankruptcy creditors.
If a real estate sales promise contract was made after the bankruptcy was opened but before the bankruptcy was abolished, and a lawsuit was filed after the bankruptcy was abolished for the fulfillment of this contract; Court of Cassation 14. According to the decision of the Legal Department, the sales promise contract can only be valid with the permission of the bankruptcy administration or the defendant debtor, whose bankruptcy was lifted during the bankruptcy, otherwise the case must be dismissed.
You can reach our other article samples and petition samples by clicking here.