Caso Avícola Villalobos
  • Guatemala
  • Panama
  • Records

Case File

Exp. 83573-21

Summary Accounting Lawsuit

Country
Panama
Group
Villamorey Dividend Recovery
Plaintiffs
  • Lisa, S.A.
  • BDT Investments Inc.
Defendant
  • Juan Luis Bosch Gutierrez

Documents

  1. Appeal RulingSep 30 2022
  2. Order 12Jan 5 2023
  3. Order E-127Jan 25 2023
  4. Order 712Apr 11 2023
  5. Letters Rogatory 29Jul 19 2023
  6. NotificationOct 4 2023
  7. MotionJan 10 2024
  8. Edict 246Jun 21 2024
  9. OrderAug 9 2024
  10. Order 18Jan 10 2025
  11. AppealFeb 19 2025
  12. AppealMar 13 2025
  13. EdictApr 7 2025
  14. Appeal RulingJul 9 2025
  15. MotionJul 21 2025
  16. Appeal RulingAug 21 2025
  17. Order AutoSep 12 2025
  18. Cassation AppealOct 20 2025
  19. Edict 1537Nov 24 2025
Exp. 83573-21
Download

Appeal Ruling

Denies Bosch's petition to impose costs on Lisa, S.A., upholding good-faith finding

Issued on

Aug 21 2025

Issued by

1st Superior Tribunal

DownloadPDF

The First Superior Tribunal of the First Judicial District of Panama denied the petition for cost modification filed by Galindo, Arias y López, counsel for Juan Luis Bosch Gutierrez, and upheld the exoneration of Lisa, S.A. from costs in the Summary Accounting Proceeding. The ruling, dated August 21, 2025, reaffirmed the position adopted in the July 9, 2025 appellate judgment, which had modified the first-instance Judgment No. 71 solely to exonerate Lisa, S.A. from costs.

Defendant's Petition

Bosch's counsel grounded the petition in Article 999 of the Judicial Code, which permits a court to modify its cost determination within three days of notification. The petition argued that Lisa, S.A. lacked standing to sue (legitimación activa) and that Bosch was not the depositary of the shares or dividends claimed, negating his standing to be sued (legitimación pasiva). Counsel invoked Article 1071 of the Judicial Code, which mandates cost awards against the losing party as the default rule and enumerates circumstances under which good faith cannot be presumed, including when no evidence is offered to support the claims in the complaint.

Tribunal's Analysis

The tribunal acknowledged the procedural viability of the petition, confirming it was filed within the three-day window under Article 999 of the Judicial Code, but rejected its substantive arguments. The panel held that, although Lisa, S.A.'s arguments did not succeed, it cannot be said that Lisa acted recklessly, abusively, or in bad faith. The tribunal emphasized that Lisa attempted to assert its rights in a complex legal context with documentary evidence that, while insufficient, was not entirely without foundation.

"Esta colegiatura se mantiene en el criterio en que la parte actora sostuvo su pretensión y aunque su argumentación no próspero, no puede afirmarse que haya actuado de forma temeraria, abusiva o de mala fe en este proceso." (Page 4)

Ruling

  • The court maintained Judgment No. 71 of July 9, 2025, issued by the First Superior Tribunal in the Summary Accounting Proceeding brought by Lisa, S.A. against Juan Luis Bosch Gutierrez
  • The exoneration of Lisa, S.A. from costs remains in effect

Legal Basis

  • Article 999 of the Judicial Code — establishes the principle of immutability of judicial decisions, with an exception permitting costs to be completed, modified, or clarified within three days of notification
  • Article 1071 of the Judicial Code — governs cost awards and good-faith determinations; the tribunal applied it to conclude that Lisa, S.A.'s exoneration was warranted

Signatories

  • Miguel A. Espino G., Magistrate
  • Yira Bernal González, Magistrate
  • Carlos I. Pizarro H., Magistrate
Next in case
Tribunal corrects date error in Judgment No. 71 reference, confirms cost exoneration stands
Sep 12 2025