Annotation

This article analyzes the legal conflict arising from the application of paragraph 5 of part 4 of Article 392 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter — CPC RF), which provides for a ruling or a change in practice by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation (hereinafter — Supreme Court of the RF) as a new ground for reviewing court decisions that have entered into legal force. Using the example of a specific ruling by the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the RF in the case of Larisa Aleksandrovna Dolina, the legal position of the highest judicial instance concerning the challenging of real estate transactions on the grounds of material misrepresentation (Article 178 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter — CC RF)) and the consequences of their invalidity is examined. It is established that the legal approaches formulated by the Supreme Court of the RF regarding the assessment of the bona fide purchaser and the mandatory nature of bilateral restitution create a new judicial circumstance for reviewing final decisions in a wide range of similar disputes. The conducted analysis allows us to assert that ignoring the positions contained in the rulings of the Supreme Court's collegiums hinders the restoration of the rights of bona fide participants in the real estate market and, therefore, requires the development of uniform approaches to review.