Does the bankruptcy trustee's refusal to act on behalf of the debtor deprive the debtor of the legal opportunity to file a lawsuit against the trustee and thus challenge his transaction?

The above-mentioned issue was discussed in the RA Constitutional Court on the application of the debtor in the bankruptcy case "Ramzes" LLC.
The application was based on the fact that the bankrupt company was not able to make is possible to have examined in the courts of general jurisdiction and bankruptcy court following: the property alienation transaction arranged by the trustee and its claims to invalidate the state registration of the right based on it.

The Court of General Jurisdiction, in particular, citing the provisions of Article 4 (2) of the RA Law on Bankruptcy (hereinafter referred to as the Law), returned the lawsuit on the grounds that it was subject to bankruptcy court.
The claims in the bankruptcy court were also not examined.
However, the Constitutional Court has not ruled out that the bankruptcy trustee may in practice fall short of the powers vested in him resulting in material damage to the debtor and creditors.
As a possible action against the debtor and creditors 'property interests by the trustee, the Constitutional Court, in particular, noted that it might be the trustee’s transactions that reduced the total value of the debtor's assets that did not contribute to the debtor's solvency and sufficient payment of creditors' debts. at a low price, especially when the difference between the transaction price and the market value is significant).
According to the Constitutional Court, in such cases, the participants in the bankruptcy proceedings, including the debtor, have the right to sue for their interests, and the disputed provision of the law cannot be an obstacle to the exercise of his right to a fair trial.
Thus, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Armenia has ruled that the provisions of Article 47 (2) of the Bankruptcy Law of the Republic of Armenia comply with the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia but with an interpretation that does not impede the debtor's right to judicial protection and the exercise of the right to a fair trial..