Fraudulent Bankruptcy: Analysis of the Supreme Court Ruling No. 13423/2022
The ruling No. 13423/2022 of the Supreme Court offers an important reflection on the criminal liability of directors in the case of fraudulent documentary bankruptcy. The Court confirmed the conviction of C. R., holding him responsible for the poor maintenance of his company's accounting records, which was declared bankrupt. This decision fits into a legal context where compliance with accounting obligations is crucial to ensure transparency and legality in business activities.
The Case of C. R. and the Lack of Accounting Documents
The Court of Appeal of Brescia initially convicted C. R. for fraudulent documentary bankruptcy, subsequently reducing the accessory penalties. However, the appellant raised several issues, arguing that the Court had not adequately considered the evidence presented, particularly the report of the bankruptcy trustee highlighting the need for further investigations.
- Clear responsibility of directors in maintaining accounting records.
- Importance of accounting documentation for the reconstruction of the company's assets.
- Distinction between fraudulent bankruptcy and simple bankruptcy concerning the subjective element.
The failure to deliver the accounting documentation to the trustee prevents the reconstruction of the assets, constituting the crime of fraudulent bankruptcy.
Elements of Responsibility and Intent
The Court reiterated that to constitute the crime of fraudulent documentary bankruptcy, the presence of generic intent is necessary, meaning the awareness that poor maintenance of accounting could make it impossible to reconstruct the company's events. This aspect is crucial, as it underscores that directors cannot completely delegate accounting management to third parties, such as an accountant, without retaining individual responsibility.
In particular, the Court noted that C. R. had regularly maintained the accounting until 2007, then omitted any updates from 2008, shortly before the company's bankruptcy. This conduct was interpreted as a deliberate intention to obscure the true economic performance of the company.
Conclusions: The Need for Greater Vigilance
The ruling of the Supreme Court No. 13423/2022 represents a clear warning to all company directors, highlighting the importance of proper maintenance of accounting records and transparency in business operations. Criminal liability for fraudulent bankruptcy should not be underestimated, and directors must be aware that delegating to external professionals does not exempt them from their legal obligations.
In a context of increasing attention to legality and social responsibility, it is essential that entrepreneurs adopt solid and transparent governance practices to avoid incurring criminal sanctions and to preserve the trust of their stakeholders.
