Jul 21 2025
Lisa, S.A.
The accounting proceeding against Juan Luis Bosch Gutiérrez, docketed as <law id="pty-83573-21" />, reached this juncture after the First Superior Tribunal's <doc id="pty-83573-21-2025-07-09-a" /> of July 9, 2025 modified Judgment No. 71 of January 31, 2025 from the Sixteenth Circuit Civil Court solely to exempt Lisa, S.A. from paying $40,000.00 in costs, while otherwise affirming the trial court's determinations in full: the declaration of Lisa, S.A.'s lack of active standing, Bosch Gutiérrez's lack of passive standing, and the denial of BDT Investments Inc.'s request for intervention as litisconsorte. Following the announcement, the defendant unsuccessfully sought reimposition of costs, a request the Tribunal denied in its <doc id="pty-83573-21-2025-09-03-a" /> of August 21, 2025, reaffirming Lisa's good-faith conduct throughout the proceedings.
Although the cassation announcement is by nature a brief filing that does not develop the grounds for appeal, the formal <doc id="pty-83573-21-2025-10-20-a" />, filed on October 20, 2025, revealed the two axes of Lisa's challenge:
Error of law in the assessment of evidence. Lisa argues the Tribunal incorrectly evaluated <doc id="pty-31638-12-2022-04-12-a" />, issued on April 12, 2022 in <law id="pty-31638-12" />, which judicially approved the assignment of rights to BDT Investments Inc. Because the accounting demand was filed on August 26, 2021, before the judicial approval of the assignment, Lisa held full active standing at the time the action was commenced.
Direct violation by omission. The Superior Tribunal failed to rule on BDT Investments Inc.'s request for intervention as litisconsorte, in contravention of Articles 612 and 835 of the Judicial Code and Article 32 of the Constitution, violating due process and the right to effective judicial protection.