For the admissibility of the action

[mahbubamim077]

What we therefore want to know is whether the civil action is prescribed by the expiration of the three-year period, provided for in articles 156 and 157 of decree-law no. 2,627, of September 26, 1940. The venerable judgment decided that it was not, in terms that it is worth reproducing:

“As for the limitation period, the provision to be applied to the present case is that of art. 157, sole paragraph, last paragraph, of the Corporations Law:

“A civil liability action against founders, directors, inspectors or liquidators sms gateway taiwan for negligent or intentional acts or acts that violate the law or the statutes shall be time-barred in three years. However, when the act or fact constitutes a crime, the time-bar for the civil action shall be the same as that for the criminal action.”

“Now, what the plaintiff imputes to the defendants is the false statement about the economic conditions of the company, made by them through incorrect balance sheets and affirmative opinions of their accuracy, as a result of which undue dividends, commissions, bonuses and taxes were paid. The fact itself, objectively considered, constitutes the crime defined by the Penal Code in art. 177, § 1, items I and VI. Therefore, the action based on this fact only prescribes within a period of eight years, since the maximum penalty for this crime does not exceed four years of imprisonment. For the admissibility of the action, it is not important to inquire into the moral element of the crime, since civil liability is independent of criminal liability (Civil Code, art. 1,525; Penal Procedural Code, arts. 64, 66 and 67). The existence or not of the fact attributed to the defendants and its characterizing circumstances already constitute the merit of the controversy.”