Post by nijhumnishita033 on Jan 11, 2024 7:29:52 GMT
The obligation to install these complaint boxes, provides that the protection of complainants is only possible if the procedure is carried out within this tool. The “complaint channel” must guarantee the confidentiality of both the complainant and any third party who appears in the complaint (in order to avoid fear of possible retaliation). Given the near mandatory nature of this tool, many companies are already implementing it.
In short, the Court has no doubt that "the accused received the complainant's savings by delivering them in cash, without having justified or proven that he had made an investment of any kind and without having proceeded to Phone Number Data return them." of the money, no longer having the capacity to do so in view of the account balance (...), definitively making the amount that was given to him his own.” Bankinter will not be liable for the damage caused Although the Investigative Court No. 27 of Madrid and the Public Prosecutor's Office have already warned of Bankinter's subsidiary liability, the AP of Madrid rules out ratifying such a point. “There have been no indications of the participation of other natural or legal persons in the events ,” the ruling states.
In the opinion of the Chamber, the subsidiary civil liability claimed by the private prosecution cannot be admitted, since the operations carried out by the agent were “in a personal capacity”, “in a private manner”, “ unrelated to the banking entity and not linked to the same ", Lawyer Marcelino Tamargo , Managing Partner of Espacio Legal | Law & Tax assumes the private prosecution of this and more than a dozen matters related to this same financial agent. Marcelino Tamargo. (Photo: Espacio Legal | Law & Tax) Although the lawyer has already confirmed that he will appeal this ruling to obtain a declaration of civil liability of the banking entity, the Chamber refers to a list of orders that support the criterion adopted here: orders issued by the Court of Instruction no. º 18 of Madrid, as well as the orders of the Fifth Section of the AP of Madrid dated September 18, 2017, and of the Second Section of said Court dated March 29, 2019.