Studio Legale Pavan Website

Article 31 (3) of the TUF provides that "the authorized person who assigns the assignment shall be liable for any damage sustained to third parties by the on-site financial adviser, even if such damage is the result of liability established in criminal proceedings”.

By judgment no. 18363 of 26 July, the Supreme Court has clarified that in the matter of liability of the principal party for damages caused to third parties by the financial promoter, pursuant to art. 31, third paragraph, TUF, the execution by the latter of deliberately aimed conduct at concealing the real negative performance of the assets management entrusted to him - ascertained by the judge, by assessing in civil matters the sentence of application of the sentence under the articles 444 and 445 cod. proc. pen for the offense of fraud - assumes the causal link between the fraudulent of the financial promoter and the damage suffered by the investor consisting in the loss, in whole or in part, of the invested capital.

Without prejudice to the contrary evidence to the financial promoter or to the principal party that the client's risk profile has been respected or the losses would have been verified equally or differently even if the client's risk profile was respected or whether the financial promoter had been ill-treated, or that the client would not have disposed of even if it had been made aware of the real negative performance of asset management.