Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Thematic Review No. 12
Continuing our analysis of Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Thematic Review No. 12/2026 (approved by Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 07/01/2026 No. 15A/2026) on disputes challenging transactions that resulted in the transfer of ownership of residential premises.
We have previously noted the Supreme Court’s approaches to: (1) assessing the materiality of a mistake in each individual case; (2) proving a person’s state of mind at the time of the transaction and the role of judicial expert examination; and (3) procedural options available to a successor (heir) when seeking review of judicial decisions.
Today we will consider three more points:
- A seller’s mere claim that they signed a contract under external pressure is not sufficient on its own: courts must establish that the buyer likewise lacked the will required for real legal consequences to arise. Performance of the contract (payment, transfer of possession, registration actions) usually weighs against a finding of sham transaction.
- If the disputed claims are transmissible and may potentially affect the composition of an estate, an heir who has accepted the inheritance has the right to initiate review of final judicial decisions based on new or newly discovered circumstances in the manner prescribed by procedural law.
- The registration authority should not substitute itself for a court or a notary by giving a legal assessment of a notarized transaction; however, an objection by a rights holder that actions were taken against their will, as well as an entry in the Unified State Register of Real Estate (EGRN) that registration is prohibited without the owner’s personal participation, are legally significant facts that can give rise to suspension or refusal of registration.
