Commentary on Ordinance No. 18760 of 2024: Admission to the Passive and Precedence Credits

The recent intervention of the Court of Cassation, with Ordinance No. 18760 of July 9, 2024, serves as a fundamental reference point for understanding the dynamics related to admissions to the passive in the context of bankruptcy proceedings. The decision addresses the issue of the validity of claims for admission of precedence credits and the crucial role of adhering to the timelines set by bankruptcy law.

The Regulatory Context and the Implications of the Ruling

The Court establishes that, for the purposes of admission to the passive of precedence credits, it is necessary to comply with the procedures provided for in Chapter V of bankruptcy law, particularly Article 111-bis. This implies that no distinction can be made between timely and late admissions. This principle is based on the need to consider the temporal causality of the emergence of the credit, emphasizing that a delay in submitting the claim should not, by itself, undermine the right to credit.

Admission to the passive of precedence credits - Applicability of Chapter V of the Bankruptcy Law to all admissions - Delay in filing the claim - Presumption of guilt - Existence - Reasons. For the purposes of admission to the passive of precedence credits arising during bankruptcy or extraordinary administration, the procedures of Article 111-bis of the Bankruptcy Law must be observed, without relevance between timely and late admissions, a distinction conceptually incompatible with the temporal causality of the reason for the emergence of the credit; therefore, for the purposes of the admissibility of the consequent admission request, Article 101 of the Bankruptcy Law comes into play, which expresses a general principle, implementing the reasonable duration of the procedure and modifiable depending on the balance between the right of action and defense, according to which, if the delay is deemed existent, it is guilty according to an assessment entrusted to the judge of merit, on a case-by-case basis and according to his prudent appreciation, with reasoning that is not subject to review at the legitimacy level.

The Consequences of the Presumption of Guilt

A crucial aspect of the ruling is the presumption of guilt attributed to the creditor who submits the admission request late. According to Article 101 of the Bankruptcy Law, the delay is evaluated on a case-by-case basis, assigning the judge the responsibility to consider whether such a delay is justifiable or not. This evaluation is fundamental, as the judge must justify his decisions in such a way that the legitimacy of his assessment cannot be contested at the level of legitimacy.

  • The delay may result in the exclusion of the credit from the passive.
  • The creditor must demonstrate the reasonableness of their behavior.
  • The judge has broad discretionary powers in evaluating the case.

Conclusions

In summary, Ordinance No. 18760 of 2024 represents an important evolution in bankruptcy jurisprudence, clarifying the procedures for admitting precedence credits to the passive and the consequences of delays in submitting claims. Through its analysis, the Court emphasizes the need for a balance between the creditors' right of action and the protection of the integrity of the bankruptcy procedure. This approach, which considers the merits of the specific case, helps ensure a fairer and more just application of bankruptcy rules, highlighting the importance of proper management of timelines by creditors.

Bianucci Law Firm