Analysis of Judgment Cass. pen., Section V, no. 16115 of 2024: Fraudulent Bankruptcy and General Intent

The Court of Cassation, with judgment no. 16115 of 2024, ruled on a case of fraudulent bankruptcy, addressing crucial issues concerning the subjective element of the crime and the criminal liability of directors of bankrupt companies. The decision reviews the established principles of jurisprudence on the matter and clarifies the legal consequences of unlawful conduct in the context of bankruptcy proceedings.

The Case and the Charges

The appellant, A.A., director of the company VT CARNI Srl, was convicted of fraudulent bankruptcy by misappropriation and document fraud. The Court of Appeal of Milan had upheld the conviction, highlighting how the director had made unjustified payments to family members, shortly before the declaration of bankruptcy. This behaviour fuelled the presumption of intent, without requiring direct proof of insolvency.

The Court of Appeal ruled that the conscious intent to allocate company resources for purposes unrelated to the company's business is sufficient for the commission of the crime of fraudulent bankruptcy.

Legal Aspects of the Judgment

• Subjective Element of the Crime: The Court reiterated that general intent is sufficient to constitute fraudulent bankruptcy, without the need to prove awareness of insolvency.
• Document Fraudulent Bankruptcy: The Judges held that the absence of detailed accounting records prevented the reconstruction of the company's assets, constituting general intent.
• Continuation of Crimes: The possibility of attributing acts of bankruptcy related to different bankruptcy proceedings to a single judgment of continuation was confirmed.

Conclusions

Judgment no. 16115 of 2024 is an important reference for the matter of fraudulent bankruptcy, clarifying how general intent can be inferred even from behaviour that, at first glance, might seem isolated or insignificant. Directors must be aware of the responsibilities associated with managing company resources and the legal consequences of their actions, especially in contexts of economic crisis. This ruling by the Court of Cassation therefore offers food for thought for both legal professionals and entrepreneurs on the need for transparent and responsible management of company activities.