Bribery offense
Translation generated by AI. Access the original version
Access to private data of an individual by a public official
The National Court (AN) has just issued a ruling in a rather complex case where complaints offraud,public officials, and illegal access toprivate information are mixed. It all started when a complaint was filed against a businessman, in whichlawyers from a law firm linked to a business group and severalpolice officers, both active and retired, were involved.
The problem arose when some of thesepolice officers accessed, without legal justification,very confidential information about the businessman, which was safeguarded by the Centralized Prevention Body of the General Council of Notaries (where public deeds, among other sensitive data, are collected). That information, which should only be used with specific authorization, was evensent to third parties.
The defendants tried toinvalidate the process alleging violations of rights and errors in the custody of evidence. In addition, they deniedhaving committed any crime or having direct involvement.
In the end, the National Courtacquits one of the police officers, because it was not proven that he had used his position to obtain or disseminate the information. It is also stated that thelaw firm acted correctly in the legal procedures. However, itsentences the other police officer, who held an important position in the General Information Police Station, because he didaccess that confidential data without justification anddisclosed it, which constitutes a crime of revelation of secrets. Hissuperior is also sentenced, who accessed the filesusing his own password to extract all thenotarial history of the entrepreneur, without any legal basis to do so.
LA AN makes it clear that you mustdistinguish betweenaccessing confidential information within the scope of thefunctions that correspond to you and doing so "on your own", even if the law does not allow it. Also, remember how important it is to maintain the chain of custodyof evidence and protect data in these types of investigations, especially when public and private sector officials may be involved. of the tests and protect the data in this type of research, even more so when officials with activities in the public and private spheres may be involved.
Our lawyers ensure the defense of your rights in proceedings arising from acts that may constitute a crimeCONTENIDO RELACIONADO
-
Crimes of misappropriation and fraud
Misappropriation of amounts delivered to complete a housing promotion The case revolves around a real estate promotion in Riogordo (Málaga), consisting of 20 homes, managed by a promoting company. In the first stage, two people were listed as joint administrators (although one of them handled the daily management). Between 2008 and 2009, several homes were sold and buyers delivered amounts on account. Some were even given the keys, despite the fact that the work was not actually finished (it was said to be 90% complete), no deed was granted, and the construction company ended up abandoning due to non-payments. The result was that buyers found themselves living in houses without deeds and without a clear situation in the Registry. Some time later, those administrators sold their shares and a third person entered as the sole administrator. This new administrator was aware of the previous problem, but still asked some buyers for additional money (for example, 8,000 euros) on the argument that it was to complete the promotion. The relevant point is that this money was not used for what was promised nor was it returned. Furthermore, between 2010 and 2011, new sales of homes occurred under similar conditions, and later the entire set of 20 homes was sold to another company, generating a serious conflict between those who had bought earlier and those who appeared later as titleholders. The Provincial Court acquitted the first two administrators (it was not proven that they had diverted the money), but convicted the last one for aggravated misappropriation and fraud. The Supreme Court (TS) confirmed the conviction and rejected the appeal as it did not accept reopening the evaluation of the evidence and considered the denial of new documentation correct because it referred to subsequent facts and was not relevant to what was judged.
-
Union law
The CJEU supports the Amnesty Law for normalizing the situation in Catalonia
-
Gender violence
Illegal detention and attempted homicide
This website uses both its own and third-party cookies to analyze our services and navigation on our website in order to improve its contents (analytical purposes: measure visits and sources of web traffic). The legal basis is the consent of the user, except in the case of basic cookies, which are essential to navigate this website.