Inhabilitate for two years a magistrate from Palma for preventing a company in liquidation from appealing
The Court has acquitted him of a crime of wilful prevarication because it considers that there was no intent
The Civil and Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the Balearic Islands (TSJIB) has sentenced a magistrate to two years of disqualification for a crime of judicial prevarication due to gross negligence. According to the ruling, the judge issued two resolutions that prevented a company in insolvency proceedings from filing an appeal, despite the law providing for it.
In this regard, the court considers that the judge acted due to an "inexcusable" error, as she believed her decisions were procedural and, therefore, not appealable. However, the Chamber emphasizes that these resolutions were "manifestly unjust" and cannot be justified by any interpretation of the law. Despite everything, the ruling dismisses that she acted with deceit and acquits her of the crime of wilful prevarication.
The events date back to the period when the convicted magistrate served as a substitute magistrate in the Commercial Court number 1 of Palma, within the framework of the insolvency proceedings of the company Grup 4 Illes Balears SL, which operated the Torre Azul hotel in El Arenal de Llucmajor. According to the judicial ruling, no interpretation of the law allowed denying the possibility of appealing the orders issued in July 2023. In this regard, the court recalls that the regulations include the principle of access to appeals, especially when the resolutions are unfavorable to one of the parties.
“We are faced with the case where the magistrate acted recklessly believing that the resolution she was issuing was correct, when its illegality was flagrant,” states the Chamber, which concludes that she acted with gross negligence. The sentence also acquits the judge of another accusation related to the non-immediate execution of the dismissal of an insolvency administrator. The court considers that, in this case, her action was “defensible”, given the circumstances of the proceedings and the existence of a pending appeal. In addition to disqualification, the magistrate will have to bear half of the procedural costs. The decision, however, is not final and can be appealed before the Supreme Court.
