Acceso usuarios
Carmen González Suárez
La STS 1091/2025, de 9 de julio desestima la acción individual del art. 241 LSC ejercitada por un acreedor por el impago de su crédito. Reitera que la responsabilidad del administrador exige la identificación de un ilícito orgánico distinto del mero incumplimiento por la sociedad y acreditar su conexión con el daño. En el caso examinado, confirma la desestimación de la demanda al no apreciarse ilícito orgánico en la operación de transmisión de activos con asunción de pasivos atendidas las circunstancias acreditadas en la instancia. Asimismo, desestima la acción de responsabilidad por deudas del art. 367 LSC al no haberse probado que la deuda naciera después de la concurrencia de la causa de disolución del art. 363.1.e) LSC y precisa que la presunción del art. 367.2 LSC admite prueba en contrario.
Judgment 1091/2025 of 9 July dismisses an individual claim for directors’ liability under section 241 of the Spanish Companies Act brought by a creditor whose loss consisted of the non-payment of an acknowledged debt. The Supreme Court reiterates that, where the alleged damage is a simple default, liability cannot be grounded on the company’s breach itself: the claimant must identify a distinct corporate wrongful act attributable to the directors and establish a causal link to a direct loss. On the facts as established on appeal, the Court upholds the dismissal because it finds no such wrongful act in a transaction whereby the company transferred its assets and liabilities to another company lacking prior activity, given the surrounding circumstances showing an attempt to achieve an orderly solution to the crisis. The judgment also rejects the statutory liability for company 1.debts under section 367, stressing the decisive temporal requirement: the debt must arise after the ground for dissolution under section 363(1)(e), and the presumption in section 367(2) is rebuttable where contrary evidence has been fixed at first instance.
