ЗАЩИТА ГРАЖДАНСКИХ ПРАВ И ЗАКОННЫХ ИНТЕРЕСОВ СТОРОН В ДЕЛАХ О ПРИЗНАНИИ ПРИВАТИЗАЦИИ НЕДЕЙСТВИТЕЛЬНОЙ

Abstract

This article analyzes the nature of legal relations on the privatization of state or municipal property and concludes that they are of public law nature. Because of this, the author argues that in cases of privatization invalidation initiated by the prosecutor’s claim, the general provisions of the civil law on the time limit for claims should not be applied. Practice on this issue is contradictory and a scientifically substantiated amendment to the legislation is required to ensure its stability. Purpose: to substantiate that if actions of a corrupt nature were committed during privatization, then such situations should be subject to the same rules that apply to the prosecutor’s demands for the seizure of state property resulting from violations of the requirements and prohibitions established by anti-corruption legislation. Methods: through deduction, it is concluded that, since anti-corruption regulations should apply to all forms of corruption, they are also applicable to cases of corruption during privatization. A comparative method is used to compare the positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation regarding the starting point for calculating the time limit for claims filed by state bodies and prosecutors. Results: taking into account the legal position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, it seems correct to fix that the limitation period in cases of privatization invalidation should be calculated from the moment when the prosecutor became aware of the grounds for filing a claim.