CASSAZIONE - FRIDAY 'January 28, 2011
valid title under the name and the mere symbol does not exclude the crime of false material
"when the bond is signed on behalf of a legal person, just to be expression in the name of it, without having to ye say the identity of those who subscribes to the declared name as a representative. Under these conditions, the promissory notes which bear the signature name of the company and the letter drawer - albeit unreadable - the one who undertakes it, giving his legal representative, is perfectly aligned with the requirement in Article . RD 8 December 14 1933 n. 1669”
Cassazione, sez. I, 28 gennaio 2011, n. 3103
Motivi della decisione
Con sentenza in data 7 aprile 2009 la Corte d'Appello di Perugia, confermando la decisione assunta dal locale Tribunale - sezione distaccata di Città di Castello in esito al giudizio abbreviato, ha riconosciuto (...) responsabile del delitto di falsità materiale in cambiale continuata; ha quindi tenuto ferma la sua condanna alla pena di legge e al risarcimento dei danni in favore della parte civile.
In fatico era accaduto che il (...) allo scopo di procurare liquidità, avesse firmato quattro cambiali apponendovi l'indicazione, quale traente, della ditta (...) Ltd and simulating, with a signature, the signature of the legal representative of it, and who had then made use of (...) handing it to the entry into service.
He appealed to the Supreme Court the accused, through the defender, and has entrusted to a single reason. With it challenges the configurability of the offense, not being able to qualify as the initials illegible signature affixed on the certificates, which therefore could not be considered bills in the absence of the requirement in art. RD No. 8 December 14, 1933 1669.
The appeal is unfounded.
In verifying that, in signing the bill, the requirement of Article. RD No. 8 December 14, 1933 1669, it is necessary to keep that the name and surname of the person liable is required only when the latter is a natural person (although, in this case, the identification of an individual entrepreneur, the company is enough) and when the bond is signed in the name and on behalf of a legal person, just an expression to be the name of it, ye say without it being necessary to the identity of those who subscribes to the declared name as a representative. Under these conditions, the promissory notes which bear the signature name of the company and the letter drawer - albeit unreadable - the one who undertakes it, giving his legal representative, is perfectly aligned with the provisions of the rule cited above: so has no basis in the argument that it would not be an offense as the falsehood does not, in this case, a formally valid bills of exchange, nor a promise of payment. The port
different interpretation reached by the first civil section of this Supreme Court Judgement No 1058 of January 25, 2001 (cited by the recount) in conscious contrast with Cass. Civ. sect. 1, No. 19 June 1987 5374, is not convincing because it is contradicted by the wording of Article. RD No. 8 December 14, 1933 1669, which does not affect the validity of the bills of exchange, even when the identity of the investor, rather than the use of the name, is manifested through the name of the company: the same criterion can not be considered applicable to the company, whose identity is uniquely expressed by name, while the powers of the subscriber are verified by indicating the corporate relationship, whence comes the legal representative of the collective subject. The
have therefore issued four promissory notes bearing a false indication that drawer, the company (...) Inc., by affixing the initials falsely attributed to its director, making it then use the other for delivery to the presentation to the bank , has repeatedly incorporated the crime referred to 491 cp, as correctly held by the trial court. In rejecting the
appeal follows the conviction of the applicant to pay the costs.
PQM
rejects the appeal and ordered the applicant to pay the costs.
0 comments:
Post a Comment