Возможность использования залогодержателем механизма процессуального правопреемства при реализации прав, установленных п. 3 ст. 358.6 ГК РФ

Арбитражный и гражданский процесс. 2021. № 7. С. 30–35.

Volchansky M.

The article is dedicated to the review of whether a pledgee exercising the rights established by Clause 3 of Art. 358.6 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation may enforce procedural succession from the pledgor to himself in case of pledge of rights (claims). The author notes that the judicial practice is not unified with respect to this issue: in some cases, the courts see no grounds to satisfy a pledgee’s claim for succession, while in other cases, on the contrary, the courts consider it necessary to perform procedural substitution of the pledgor with the pledgee. The author agrees that a pledge of rights of claim does not automatically result in claim assignment, i.e., there is no full withdrawal of the pledgor from the relations with the debtor in terms of the pledged claim. However, the author believes that this provision should not entail a conclusion that a pledgee should not count on procedural succession. On the contrary, the pledgee is the only person to be acknowledged as the authorized recipient of the enforcement the pledged claim after the default on the secured debt, due to the need to preserve the security function of the pledge of obligations, while the corresponding rights of the creditor/pledgor should be considered not subject to execution. In the author’s opinion, the facts described above allow acknowledging a pledgee as having an opportunity to use the procedural succession mechanism in the reviewed case.

Keywords: залог, обеспечение исполнения обязательств, процессуальное правопреемство, залог обязательственных прав (требований)