Acceso usuarios
Rafael Marimón Durá
España ha vivido diversos casos de hundimiento de entidades de crédito desde la crisis de 2008. En dos de ellas la crisis vino precedida del lanzamiento de sendas operaciones de Oferta Pública de Suscripción de Acciones que dieron pie a importantes pérdidas por parte de los inversores que suscribieron los valores. Los dos supuestos presentan un alto grado de similitud, por cuanto en ambos casos se dio una situación de deficiente información precontractual. Sin embargo y a pesar de que en los dos casos se contaba con normas de tutela del inversor, basadas en la responsabilidad por la inexactitud de la información difundida por la entidad emisora de los valores, solo en uno de ellos los suscriptores pudieron ver satisfechas sus pretensiones de resarcimiento mediante sus demandas judiciales.El diferente tratamiento otorgado por la jurisprudencia civil a los dos casos analizados no ha sido debido al sistema de protección del inversor aplicable, sino a las distintas reglas para abordar la crisis empresarial de las entidades de crédito emisoras que se encontraban vigentes en cada momento y a la interpretación que les ha dado el TJUE, seguida posteriormente por el TS, y que se examina en este trabajo desde un punto de vista crítico.
Spain has experienced several cases of collapse of credit institutions since the 2008 crisis. In two of them, the crisis was preceded by the launch of two Public Offerings for the Subscription of Shares which led to significant losses by the investors who subscribed to the securities. The two cases are highly similar, since in both there was a situation of lack of pre-contractual information. However, and despite the fact that in both cases there were rules for the protection of investors, based on the responsibility for the inaccuracy of the information disseminated by the entity issuing the securities, only in one of them were the subscribers able to see their claims for compensation satisfied through their legal claims.
The different treatment given by civil case law to the two cases analyzed did not respond to the applicable investor protection system, but to the different rules for addressing the business crisis of the issuing credit institutions that were in force at each time and to the interpretation given to them by the Court of Justice of the European Union, subsequently followed by the Spanish Supreme Court, which is examined in this work from a critical point of view
