Order No. 18116 of 2024: Party-Appointed Technical Consultant and Bankruptcy Trustee

The recent Order No. 18116 of July 2, 2024, by the Court of Cassation sheds important light on the role of the party-appointed technical consultant in the context of bankruptcy proceedings. This ruling, presided over by M. Ferro and reported by G. Dongiacomo, has questioned the categorization of a professional appointed by the bankruptcy trustee, highlighting the differences between the role of a consultant and that of an assistant.

Context of the Ruling

The dispute originated from a civil proceeding in which S. (C. D.) opposed F. (T. V.), raising issues concerning the powers and responsibilities of the bankruptcy trustee. The Court had to determine whether the work performed by the professional could be classified as a professional service contract or if it should fall under the duties of an assistant, as provided for by art. 32, paragraph 2, of the bankruptcy law.

Party-appointed technical consultant - Appointed by the trustee - Role of assistant - Exclusion - Professional service contract - Existence. The work performed by a professional, appointed by the bankruptcy trustee as a party-appointed technical consultant in a civil proceeding, falls outside the scope of the role of an assistant as referred to in art. 32, paragraph 2, of the bankruptcy law and is instead classified as a genuine professional service.

Analysis of the Decision

The Court ruled that the activity of a party-appointed technical consultant cannot be equated with that of an assistant, as the latter operates in a context of support to the trustee's office, with specific limitations and requirements. Conversely, the party-appointed technical consultant carries out an autonomous professional activity, aimed at providing technical and specialized support in a civil proceeding. This distinction is fundamental, as it entails differences in terms of the professional's responsibilities, rights, and obligations.

• The party-appointed technical consultant acts on the trustee's appointment, but their function is professional and independent in nature.
• The assistant, on the other hand, is bound by specific tasks and cannot exercise professional activity autonomously.
• The ruling also clarifies the economic implications of such appointments, with significant consequences on the fees due.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Order No. 18116 of 2024 represents a significant step forward in defining roles within bankruptcy proceedings. The clear distinction between a party-appointed technical consultant and an assistant not only offers greater legal certainty but also ensures greater transparency in professional relationships. Legal practitioners will need to pay particular attention to these differences to avoid confusion and ensure the correct conduct of proceedings. Case law continues to evolve, and it is essential to stay updated on developments in bankruptcy law.