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

Fraudulent Bankruptcy: Commentary on the Judgment of the Court of Cassation, Criminal Section V, No. 36041 of 2024

The issue of fraudulent bankruptcy is highly relevant, not only for its legal implications but also for the economic consequences that arise from it. The judgment No. 36041 of 2024 from the Supreme Court of Cassation provides important clarifications on this delicate subject, analyzing criminal liability in cases of fraudulent operations that lead to a company's bankruptcy. The defendants, A.A. and B.B., were convicted of fraudulent bankruptcy due to operations deemed uneconomical and severely damaging to Prestige Srl.

Fraudulent Operations and Criminal Liability

The Court upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal of Venice, which had partially reformed the first instance judgment regarding accessory penalties, but not concerning the criminal liability of the defendants. In particular, A.A. and B.B. were found responsible for causing the company's bankruptcy through three investment operations, all characterized by a clear lack of economic viability. The Court emphasized that such operations, while not conducted with the intent to bankrupt the company, had the predictable and direct effect of financial distress.

  • Operation 1: Participation agreement with Società Agricola Serramarina for an amount of 1,400,000 Euros.
  • Operation 2: Commitment to pay 2,160,000 Euros for the purchase of a credit.
  • Operation 3: Purchase of 6% of the shares of CTS GMBH for 2,200,000 Euros.

The Principle of Reasonableness and the Evaluation of Conduct

The Court reiterated that fraudulent operations do not require the qualification of conduct in terms of criminal offenses, but only the ascertainment of management abuses.

It is interesting to note how the Cassation highlighted the principle of reasonableness in evaluating the defendants' conduct. In fact, the legitimacy judge did not limit himself to considering the uniqueness of the operations but examined the context in which they were carried out. The Court concluded that the operations, while not directly diverting, created a situation of distress that had been accepted by the administrators. Therefore, the proof of fraud is not limited to the intent to cause harm but extends to the awareness of the risk that such operations might entail.

Conclusions

In conclusion, the judgment No. 36041 of 2024 represents an important precedent for all situations where fraudulent bankruptcy is suspected. It clarifies the need for a careful examination of corporate operations, highlighting how criminal liability can also arise from imprudent conduct that could be potentially harmful to the company. Administrators must therefore be aware that even seemingly legitimate business choices can be criminally relevant if not supported by an adequate assessment of economic viability.