Design and defence · offices in Madrid and Alicante
Corporate criminal liability follows a precise logic: only the genuinely implemented model exempts. The courts examine whether the programme identifies the business’s real risks, whether the compliance body has autonomy, whether the whistleblowing channel operates, whether training is verifiable and the disciplinary response effective.
In brief. A document without a compliance culture does not survive judicial examination. Our double condition as litigating criminal lawyers and model designers makes the difference: we build programmes thinking of how a court will examine them, and we defend companies with the model as the central piece of the case.
Corporate criminal liability has a precise logic: only the model that is genuinely implemented exempts. The courts analyse whether the programme identifies the real risks of the business, whether a compliance body with autonomy exists, whether the whistleblowing channel operates, whether training is verifiable and whether the disciplinary response is effective. The document without a culture of compliance does not pass the judicial examination.
Our double condition as litigation criminal lawyers and designers of models marks the difference: we build programmes thinking about how a court will examine them, and when the company is nevertheless investigated, the model becomes the central piece of the defence: the exemption of Article 31 bis or the mitigation of Article 31 quater.
| Penalty | Provision | Extent | Real impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fine (by instalments or proportional) | 33.7.a | Up to five years of profit | Direct impact on cash |
| Suspension of activities | 33.7.c | Up to five years | Operational paralysis |
| Closure of premises | 33.7.d | Up to five years | Establishments shut |
| Prohibition of activities | 33.7.e | Temporary or definitive | Loss of the business object |
| Disqualification from subsidies | 33.7.f | Up to fifteen years | Exclusion from public contracting |
| Judicial intervention | 33.7.g | Up to five years | Loss of management control |
| Dissolution | 33.7.b | Definitive | The company’s civil death |
| Interim measures | 33.7 in fine | During the investigation | Closure and suspension before any judgment |
The applicable penalties depend on the offence in the corporate catalogue and the circumstances; several can be ordered as interim measures during the investigation.
A model is worth what it can prove. Dates certain, board minutes, training records, an operating channel, documented investigations and periodic reviews: that is what survives cross-examination. We audit existing models with judicial criteria and reinforce them where they would not withstand questioning, and when proceedings arrive we defend the entity by proving suitable design, real implementation and the individual author’s fraudulent circumvention. We apply LIWARD, Legal Intelligence Warfare for Defense, our own methodology integrating legal intelligence, financial analysis and e-forensics into a single strategy.
Businesses exposed to corporate liability: design proportionate to size and risk, built for judicial examination.
Entities with existing programmes: audit with judicial criteria and reinforcement where they would not withstand questioning.
Governing bodies documenting their diligence: supervision, resources and the decisions that protect them personally.
Entities already summoned: the model as the central piece of the exemption or mitigation defence.
Speak to a criminal lawyer
Criminal defence in English before the courts of Alicante and the rest of Spain, for residents and for visitors who have flown home.