Judge declares Barreras bankruptcy ‘coincidence’

Bankruptcy administration and prosecution already they had coincided with describing the contest as “a coincidence”. First, he found in his report that Douglas Prothero saw no fault in the actions of the shipyard managers for whom he was responsible. “concealment or disappearance of assets and rights” “which may delay, impede or prevent the effectiveness of an embargo”.

Judge Amelia María Pérez Mosteiro therefore, He asked for a case file. There is no recourse against your car.

“We should point out that found no evidence of fraud or gross negligence in their behavior The bankruptcy administration conducted by Tahice Legal was pointed out in the aforementioned report. For example, the Ritz-Carlton’s ship change evolution so as not to be without him in the case Bankruptcy – which happened later – was not a sufficient argument for the derivation of responsibilities.

The claims (only put forward) by the legal representatives of about thirty UGT workers did not work, pointing to the “priority” given to the Evrima cruise ship headed by Douglas A. Prothero. “In the same scenario – defending the team that suffered a deflated ERE – it is decided that: the ship is sent to a shipyard in Santander.. The ship departs under the pretext of painting, but the truth is that Barreras never returns to their workshop. Moreover, “warehouse stocks are sent to Santander”, no payment is made in return. However, for judges There has been no “hiding of assets”.