In a notable development from Spain’s judicial landscape, the 3rd Criminal Court in Barcelona delivered its verdict in September 2022 regarding the case against former FC Barcelona president Sandro Rosell. He faced allegations of defrauding the Treasury by approximately 230,296 euros, tied to his 2012 financial statement. The court’s ruling acquitted Rosell, a decision that was subsequently reviewed by Europa Press and confirmed this week. The appeal filed by both the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the State Prosecutor’s Office against the initial judgment was rejected, reinforcing the acquittal and ending one chapter of a high-profile legal journey for the football club and its leadership (citation: Europa Press).
The court’s decision stands in contrast to the prosecutors’ position, which had argued that Rosell used his sole proprietorship TOC to finance personal activities, masking personal work as external consultancy and exploiting a corporate structure to secure favorable taxation. The judges found no basis for these charges and concluded that the first sentence rested on the evidence presented during the hearing. In essence, the court determined that the activities attributed to Rosell were not simulations but legitimate professional services delivered through the TOC entity, with services rendered, invoices issued, and tax returns reflecting these operations (citation: Europa Press).
As the trial unfolded, the central question hovered over whether the corporate facade concealed personal gain. The magistrates echoed the lead judge’s earlier caution that the mere existence of a company cannot automatically be treated as a façade or a device for evasion. The court reiterated that TOC’s activities represented genuine professional work billed as consultancy. This stance underscores the importance of distinguishing between lawful corporate practices and schemes designed to circumvent tax obligations, a distinction that can be nuanced in complex financial arrangements (citation: Europa Press).
The prosecutor requested two years in prison
During the proceedings, the prosecution sought a prison sentence of two years and nine months for Rosell. His defense, led by lawyer Pau Molins, described the case as a persecution linked to ongoing operations in the political-financial arena, notably referencing what critics call “Operation Catalunya.” The defense’s framing of the case as politically charged did not persuade the court, which ultimately acquitted Rosell on the substantive charges (citation: Europa Press). The acquittal, however, did come with an acknowledgment of the personal toll the process had taken on Rosell. The sentence notes the negative consequences endured by his personality under the lengthy procedural cycle, including the time he spent in custody before the acquittal and the impact of the proceedings on his public image (citation: Europa Press).
Even with the acquittal, the judge issued a caveat. The ruling stated that the acquittal should not be read as blanket immunity from other, separate investigations or potential future procedures. The court emphasized that there was no finding of improper actions by the Tax Office in this specific case and warned against drawing broader conclusions about the conduct of inspectors. The defense’s argument—that inspections were stimulated by attempts to avoid statute of limitations—was met with a reminder that open inquiries can arise for legitimate reasons, and that the outcome of this case does not extinguish all possible scrutiny related to the broader tax affairs involved (citation: Europa Press).
Overall, the decision marks a definitive end to this particular set of accusations against Rosell within the Barcelona court, while simultaneously highlighting the enduring complexity of tax and corporate governance in high-profile sports administration. The acquittal is now part of the public record, illustrating how the legal system weighs evidence and the nuance required when corporate structures intersect with personal financial activities. The case thus becomes a reference point for future discussions about how self-employed individuals and executives report income, manage corporate entities, and interface with tax authorities in Spain, especially under heightened public attention and scrutiny (citation: Europa Press).