Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 1654/2001 Generato dall'IA

Supreme Court allows conviction of sole shareholder for accounting offense despite lack of formal board position.

Numero d'incarto KKO 1654/2001
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Finlandia (FI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Accolto (Allowed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Court of Finland allowed the conviction of a sole shareholder for the crime of accounting offense. Although the defendant held no formal position on the company's board, the court found he exercised actual control over the company's affairs. The decision establishes that formal titles do not exempt individuals from criminal liability when they possess de facto decision-making power.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Section 1 of the Act on the Crime of Accounting Offense; Section 1 of the Act on the Crime of Accounting Offense: A person who exercises actual control over a company's affairs, regardless of formal board membership, may be held criminally liable for accounting offenses committed by the company.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
accounting offense sole shareholder actual control criminal liability formal position corporate governance Supreme Court difetto di legittimazione dell'azionista

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Section 1 of the Act on the Crime of Accounting Offense
Generato dall'IA
kko-precedent_2001_85
Supreme Court dismisses state compensation claim when partial acquittal occurs alongside partial conviction on same charge.
kko-other_2020_982
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; signing documents to hide fraud constitutes aiding in serious accounting offense.
kko-precedent_2001_86
Supreme Court dismisses charge against de facto manager lacking formal role or shareholding for bookkeeping crime.
kko-precedent_2015_88
Supreme Court allows conviction for gross fraud and bookkeeping crime but dismisses business ban due to lack of necessity.
kko-precedent_2006_63
Court distinguishes forgery from false evidence when a document is used as proof in administrative proceedings.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Kysymys siitä, voiko osakeyhtiön koko osakekannan omistanut ja yhtiössä tosiasiallista määräysvaltaa käyttänyt henkilö, jolla ei ollut muodollista asemaa yhtiön hallinnossa, syyllistyä kirjanpitorikokseen tekijänä.