In civil circulation, there are various forms of transactions. Some of them are legitimate, others are not. In particular, the bondage deal belongs to the latter. What it is? 
Bonded deal: Civil Code of the Russian Federation
In Art. 179 the general concept of such an agreement is formulated. Bonded is a transaction that one party concludes on unfavorable conditions for itself. This can happen in a combination of difficult circumstances, which took the second party to the contract. The enslaving transaction of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is defined as contested. However, for annulment the victim needs to prove two facts. First of all, he needs to provide confirmation that these were indeed enslaving terms of the transaction. In addition, the victim must prove that at the time of the conclusion of the contract he was in a difficult, difficult situation, which the other side took advantage of in its interests.
Exceptions
Many forms of transactions can be challenged. However, the reasons for this are different. Transactions are not enslaved, which are committed by frivolity, under the influence of excitement, with illiteracy, inexperience, lack of awareness, as a result of a dispute over property or money and some others. They are contested under other articles if they fall into categories such as deception, fraud or misrepresentation. 
Recognition of a bonded transaction
An important circumstance is the fact that the injured participant himself proposes to conclude an agreement or accepts the offer of another person, realizing that this will be unprofitable. The following signs of a bonded deal exist:
- A person concludes an agreement in cramped or difficult life circumstances that force him to disregard his own interests.
- A person understands that the terms of the transaction are unprofitable for him, but he goes to them consciously. In this case, there is no deception, the use of physical impact, misrepresentation and other grounds related to other cases.
- Between the points set forth above, a connection is traced in which one proceeds from the other.
- Another person knew about the difficult situation of the injured party, but took advantage of the situation for personal selfish purposes.
Severe circumstances
The enslaving transaction takes place in a relatively short period. This time period is extremely limited. In connection with the difficult situation, a person during this period must find means and ways to solve a specific issue. In other words, an enslaving transaction occurs when the subject, due to time constraints, cannot find another person to conclude an agreement on more favorable terms. This fact proves the absence of the criminal nature of the agreement and coercion by the second participant to sign it. In Art. 179 does not provide a list of circumstances that can be considered constrained or complex. To them in a general sense can be attributed seizure of property insolvency at a particular moment, debt, illness and so on.
"Disadvantage"
The second side - the defendant - considers, as a rule, that it provides the victim with the help he needs at a particular moment, indicating that the latter knew and understood that this was a bonded deal. The claim of the victim, in his opinion, is considered an expression of ingratitude for the help received in a difficult situation. In this regard, the monetary equivalent is used in determining "disadvantage". According to him, along with other circumstances, the enslaving transaction is qualified.Judicial practice uses a monetary indicator illustrating that the property was transferred for a value several times lower than its market price. The statute of limitations during which an enslaving transaction may be challenged is 1 year.
Explanations YOU
The project, published in 2013, explains the criteria by which a bonded deal is determined. Judicial practice does not consider mandatory the simultaneous presence of the disadvantage of concluding an agreement and agreement on the basis of violence and deception. In this case, a substantial difference is enough between the price at which the property was purchased and its market value. YOU gives an example of a bonded deal. It may be considered a loan or credit agreement in which the interest rate is significantly overstated, despite the fact that the creditor is not able to prove the validity of its accrual.
Risk group
An enslaving transaction, as a rule, is committed by those people who have a family misfortune. Wanting to save a loved one who is seriously ill and who needs urgent surgery or expensive medications, people go to sell their property - cars, jewelry, real estate for an amount several times less than their real value. Many citizens today live on a modest salary. The death of a relative is not only grief, but also the cost of burial. People do not always have savings in order to adequately spend close on the last journey.
Lack of funds and pushes to conclude bonded transactions. In some cases, a person is confronted with the fact of the presence of large debts from his relatives. This, in fact, is used by lenders who take away property to pay off obligations. Compelled migrants and refugees also suffer from enslaving deals. When armed conflicts begin on the territory of their homeland, they have to change their place of residence, selling their property for almost nothing and in a short time. There is a high risk of concluding such unprofitable agreements in business circles. For example, when a businessman faces bankruptcy, he accepts competitors' offers to buy his company on unfavorable conditions. 
Agreement between legal entities
A deal concluded between organizations is hard enough to recognize as bonded. A difficult circumstance in such cases is the fact that the company had no other way to solve the problem than to conclude a disadvantageous contract. If it is proved that the organization had other ways out, but it did not use them, the enslaving transaction will not be recognized. This means that it is impossible to dispute or deem it invalid. In the event of a transaction leading to bankruptcy or forced joining a larger company, the injured party, which will be able to prove that the terms of the agreement were enslaving, may demand compensation for the damage suffered. This right is enshrined in Art. 53, p. 3
Civil Code. Sometimes entrepreneurs consciously conclude disadvantageous contracts not because they are in a difficult situation, but because they fear that the economic situation may worsen. However, this option does not apply to bonded deals. Also, this category should not include contracts, at the conclusion of which the business was badly damaged, but this happened due to the miscalculation of the entrepreneur. No one could have imagined that such consequences would occur, and the other side, in turn, could not be considered interested in the possibility of using the current situation for mercenary interests. 
What threatens the invalidity of the contract?
The consequences of a bonded transaction are expressed in the fact that if the disadvantage of the situation is proved, the parties return to their original state. Moreover, each party to the agreement will have to return everything that he received. The deal may also be terminated for the future. Actions that were carried out prior to the dispute will not be considered illegal.In this case, each participant will remain in the position in which he was at the time of the decision by the court. In this case, restitution to the starting position will not occur. Another consequence of a bonded transaction may be a one-way return to its original state. Such restitution applies only to the participant who took advantage of the difficult situation of the second. In this case, the defendant’s funds will be confiscated in favor of the state. 
additional information
Above were given cases where the transaction can not be recognized as enslaving. In addition to these, the list can include contracts that are concluded when a person was in a painful condition and could incorrectly understand or interpret something. In this case, it is more expedient to refer to Art. 177. A marriage contract that is invalidated under Art. 44, p. 2 of the UK, even if after that there will be a disadvantage for one of the spouses.
Some historical facts
An article on the recognition of transactions as enslaving was introduced into domestic law in 1922. At that time, the Civil War ended in Russia. The economic situation in the country was extremely difficult: hunger and devastation reigned, there were a huge number of street children on the streets, crime increased. In the process of forming the new Constitution, a clause was introduced into it that established the conditions under which the transaction would be considered enslaving and subject to termination. The invalidity of the contract was established if it was signed by a person who is in a state of extreme need and under the threat of death from starvation. Subsequent improvement occurred during the thaw period. In 1964, an enslaving transaction was considered a disadvantageous agreement concluded in cramped circumstances. 
Subsequently, the wording changed several times. However, one can trace the pattern in all interpretations. It consists in the presence of the disadvantage of the contract under the influence of complex life factors. It can be assumed that in such situations, everything is quite clear, and the agreement is subject to termination. However, in many cases, such an action may violate the rights and interests of the defendant, despite the fact that his behavior qualifies as unscrupulous. In practice, today it is quite difficult to prove the cabality of the transaction.
