The Specialized Tribunal admitted the request of the judicial administrator\/liquidator to engage the liability of the debtor company\u2019s administrators under Article 169 (1)(a) and (d) of Law 85\/2014.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The debtor had entered insolvency under the simplified procedure. The liquidator found that the administrators withdrew significant sums of money from the company without justification and failed to maintain or submit proper accounting documentation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The liquidator sought to hold the administrators jointly liable for the company\u2019s liabilities exceeding 500,000 lei.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The syndic judge may order that part of the company\u2019s liabilities be borne by administrators or other persons who caused insolvency if they used the company\u2019s assets or credit for their own or another\u2019s benefit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Liability may also be engaged when fictitious accounting was kept, accounting documents disappeared, or accounting was not organized in accordance with the law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If the accounting documents are not handed over to the judicial administrator or liquidator, fault and the causal link with prejudice are presumed. This is a relative presumption<\/strong> (rebuttable by proof to the contrary).<\/p>\n\n\n\n The administrators did not hand over accounting documents and failed to justify the cash withdrawals. According to Decision 14\/2022 (RIL \u2013 appeal in the interest of the law)<\/strong>, non-delivery of documents triggers a legal presumption of fault and causality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The presumption was not overturned, since no evidence was produced to prove the company\u2019s insolvency was caused by objective, external factors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The repeated withdrawals of large sums of money, without corresponding accounting justification, supported the inference that the company\u2019s assets were used for personal purposes or for the benefit of other parties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The administrators provided no documents showing the funds were used in the company\u2019s interest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The lack of accounting and the depletion of financial resources through unjustified withdrawals were directly connected to the company\u2019s insolvency. These acts prevented the company from covering its debts and damaged creditors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Facts of the Case The Specialized Tribunal admitted the request of the judicial administrator\/liquidator to engage the liability of the debtor company\u2019s administrators under Article 169 (1)(a) and (d) of Law 85\/2014. The debtor had entered insolvency under the simplified procedure. The liquidator found that the administrators withdrew significant sums of money from the company … <\/p>\n
\n\n\n\nCourt\u2019s Analysis<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
On the Presumption Under Article 169 (1)(d)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
On the Use of Assets for Personal Benefit \u2013 Letter (a)<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
On the Causal Link to Insolvency<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nJudgment of the Specialized Tribunal<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\nPractical Conclusions<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n