• via Alberto da Giussano, 26, 20145 Milano
  • +39 02 4003 1253
  • info@studiolegalebianucci.it
  • Criminal Lawyer, Family Lawyer, Divorce Lawyer

Fraudulent Bankruptcy: Analysis of the Judgment of the Court of Cassation, Criminal Section V, No. 36856 of 2024

The recent ruling of the Court of Cassation, Section V, No. 36856 of 2024, provides a clear interpretation regarding fraudulent bankruptcy, with particular attention to the conduct of distraction and dissipation of company assets. The central issue concerns the responsibility of the directors of bankrupt companies and the ways in which they can be found guilty of bankruptcy offenses.

The Context of the Judgment

The Court of Cassation examined the case of A.A. and B.B., accused of fraudulent bankruptcy in relation to the management of "Faber Beach Srl". The defendants argued that the contested operations did not constitute a distraction of assets, as the payments made via bank transfer were directed to the satisfaction of pre-existing debts. However, the Court reiterated that the crime of fraudulent bankruptcy by distraction exists when there is a removal of assets from the corporate patrimony without an adequate counterpart.

According to established case law, the crime of fraudulent bankruptcy by distraction encompasses any operation aimed at detaching from the corporate patrimony assets without introducing the counterpart.

Legal Principles Cited

The Court referenced numerous judicial precedents that clarify the distinction between fraudulent bankruptcy by distraction and dissipation. In the first instance, the act of impoverishment is aimed at removing assets from the corporate patrimony, while in the second, it involves a distorted use of the assets themselves. It was emphasized that the conduct of distraction does not necessarily require that the company be in a state of insolvency at the time of the act.

  • The distraction of assets must result from operations with no benefit to the corporate patrimony.
  • Dissipation implies imprudent and incongruous choices in relation to business needs.
  • The operations must be evaluated not only in their formal aspect but also in their economic substance.

Conclusions and Final Reflections

Judgment No. 36856 of 2024 represents an important reminder of the responsibility of directors and compliance with bankruptcy regulations. It highlights how conduct that may initially seem legitimate can actually conceal fraudulent intentions. The Court has mandated a reassessment of accessory penalties, emphasizing the need for a fair and proportionate judgment based on the severity of the observed conduct.