Analysis of Judgment No. 10479 of 2024: Obligations of the Mandatary and Burden of Proof

The recent ruling No. 10479 of April 17, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides important reflections regarding the obligations of the mandatary in the event of an accounting action. The judgment clarifies that, in the case of a onerous mandate, the mandatary has the burden of proving not only the amount and cause of the expenses but also to provide all useful elements to evaluate his actions. This aspect is crucial for understanding the responsibilities and obligations arising from the mandate contract.

The Regulatory Context

According to Articles 1710-1716 of the Civil Code, the mandate is a contract through which one party (mandatary) undertakes to perform one or more legal acts on behalf of another party (mandante). The judgment in question emphasizes that when the mandatary is brought to court with an accounting action, he must comprehensively demonstrate the correctness of his management. This includes:

  • Proof of the amount and cause of the expenses incurred.
  • Details on the execution methods of the assignment.
  • Evaluation of the results achieved in relation to the pursued objectives.
  • Compliance with the criteria of good administration and conduct.

The Reference Maxim

Accounting action against the mandatary - Burden of proof on the latter. In the case of a onerous mandate, the mandatary summoned with an accounting action must provide proof not only of the amount and cause of the expenses but also of all factual elements regarding the execution methods of the assignment that are useful for evaluating his actions, in relation to the pursued objectives, the results achieved, and the criteria of good administration and conduct prescribed by Articles 1710 - 1716 of the Civil Code.

This maxim highlights the importance of the proof duty of the mandatary and clarifies that it is not sufficient to merely justify the expenses; it is necessary to provide a complete overview of one’s actions. This approach aligns with the general principle of the burden of proof established by Article 2697 of the Civil Code, according to which anyone seeking to assert a right in court must prove the facts constituting that right.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 10479 of 2024 serves as an important reminder for all parties involved in mandate contracts. It clarifies that a mandatary, to protect himself from potential disputes, must be able to provide detailed and transparent documentation regarding his activities. This not only safeguards his interests but also ensures more responsible and professional management, in line with the principles of good administration outlined by the regulations. In an increasingly complex context like the current one, clarity and transparency in contractual relationships prove essential to avoid conflicts and misunderstandings.

Bianucci Law Firm