Money Laundering Defence Lawyer in Spain

Because nobody documents the intent to launder, Spanish courts convict on circumstantial evidence. The Supreme Court has settled the elements that the prosecution normally has to assemble: an unusual increase in assets or handling of cash disproportionate to declared income, the absence of a lawful business explaining the movements, and a connection with persons or activities linked to criminality.

Each of those is contestable, and the defence is essentially an accounting exercise carried out before it is a legal one. Reconstructing the lawful origin of the funds with contemporaneous documents, showing the real economic activity behind the transfers, explaining the commercial logic of operations that look artificial in isolation, and demonstrating the absence of any link with the alleged predicate offence. Where the case rests on the negligent form, the work focuses on what the client actually verified at the time, which is why records of due diligence are decisive.

Articles 301 and following of the Criminal Code punish acquiring, converting, transferring or concealing assets that derive from unlawful activity, with the aim of disguising their origin or of helping a participant in the offence to evade the consequences. Money laundering can be committed even through gross negligence, and it may be charged against the author of the predicate offence as well.

The breadth of the offence means that ordinary commercial and banking operations can attract suspicion. Establishing what the accused actually knew and intended is therefore central to any sound analysis.

The defence focuses on the proof of the unlawful origin of the assets, on the accused’s knowledge of that origin and on the genuine intention to disguise it. A mere coincidence of transactions is not sufficient to found a conviction.

We examine the financial flows, the banking documentation and any accounting expert evidence, because these cases are won or lost on the detail of the movements rather than on their superficial appearance.

A conviction for money laundering does not require a prior conviction for the offence that generated the funds. It is enough to establish, including through indicia, that the assets derive from unlawful activity and that the accused knew or ought to have known this.

This reliance on indicia is precisely why these cases must be examined closely: an inference drawn from the appearance of a set of transactions is not the same as proof, and the defence works to show that innocent explanations have not been excluded.

Banks, notaries, lawyers in certain functions and other obliged subjects are bound by anti-money-laundering duties, including reporting suspicious transactions to the authorities. A failure in these duties can itself give rise to liability.

We advise regulated professionals and businesses on the scope of these obligations and on how to respond where a transaction or client raises concerns, so that compliance is genuine rather than merely formal.