Оңалту жәнебанкроттық рәсіміндегі борышкердің мәмілесін жарамсыз деп танудың арнайы негізі

2026

Full text Open access: Hybrid Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.54649/2077-9860-2026-1-38-44
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

The article examines one of the special grounds for declaring a debtor’s transactions invalid in rehabilitation and bankruptcy proceedings. The purpose of the study is to provide a comprehensive analysis of the ground for declaring a transaction invalid as set out in subparagraph 1 of paragraph 2 of Article 7 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy,” to identify gaps in the current national legislation, and to conduct a comparative analysis with the legal regulation of foreign jurisdictions. The methodological framework of the study is based on the formal-logical method, scientific analysis and synthesis, as well as general and special methods of comparative legal analysis. As a result, a comparative study of the bankruptcy legislation of the Russian Federation, Germany, and the United Kingdom was carried out, and their distinctive features were identified. The norms of the current legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan were analyzed, and the conditions and criteria for declaring a transaction invalid on the specified ground were systematized. The conclusion offers recommendations for clarifying certain concepts in the bankruptcy legislation and improving law enforcement practice in order to ensure uniform judicial practice.