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

Analysis of the Judgment Cass. pen., Section V, No. 15743 of 2023: Fraudulent Bankruptcy and Interpretative Models

The recent ruling of the Court of Cassation, Section V Criminal, No. 15743 of 2023, offers an important opportunity for reflection on the cases of documentary fraudulent bankruptcy and the criteria for evaluating evidence. This article aims to analyze the key points of the decision, examining the distinction between generic intent and specific intent and the importance of reasoning in the assessment of unlawful conduct.

Context of the Ruling

The Court examined the case of A.A., convicted of documentary fraudulent bankruptcy in relation to three companies operating in the tourism sector. The central issue concerned the correct qualification of the defendant's conduct and the correlation between the contested facts and the evidence provided. The appellate ruling had acknowledged the irregular maintenance of accounting records but had not sufficiently motivated regarding specific intent, creating confusion between the different categories of bankruptcy.

The Court of Cassation reiterated the importance of accurate and specific reasoning, highlighting how the confusion between categories of intent can lead to legally unsustainable decisions.

Generic Intent and Specific Intent: Fundamental Differences

The ruling clarifies that documentary fraudulent bankruptcy can manifest either with specific intent, which requires the will to harm creditors, or with generic intent, where the awareness of maintaining accounting records irregularly is sufficient. The Court emphasized that, to configure generic intent, it is necessary to demonstrate the agent's intention to make it difficult to reconstruct the company's assets.

  • **Specific Intent**: Intention to cause harm to creditors.
  • **Generic Intent**: Awareness of the irregularity in maintaining accounting records.

Conclusions and Future Perspectives

The Court of Cassation annulled the contested ruling, referring the case for a new judgment, highlighting the importance of an accurate and specific assessment concerning the defendant's conduct. This case represents an important precedent for the interpretation of regulations related to fraudulent bankruptcy, suggesting that a clear distinction between the cases and adequate reasoning are essential to ensure justice. The ruling, therefore, not only clarifies the legal guidelines in this area but also raises important questions about the responsibility of administrators and the management of accounting records in complex contexts.