Procedural fraud

  Criminal law, crimes

He fraud procedural in it  criminal law It is often equated with what we call procedural fraud. Thus, procedural fraud exists whenever during a process one or another party uses means to incite the judge to make an error that could lead to an illicit and inequitable settlement. 

While procedural fraud occurs when this same conduct includes a desire for profit and a claim for family damages. That is why here we are going to tell you everything you need to know about procedural fraud.

It remains until the end of this article, when When you reach the end, it will surely become much easier for you to understand this interesting topic of procedural fraud in criminal law. 

 What can we understand by procedural fraud?

 Fraud involves the use of deception for profit in order to provoke the blame of the victim by transferring assets to his disadvantage or to a third party. In this case, procedural fraud involves the use of deception through a legal process in which both the opposing party and the judiciary can be deceived.

Are you looking for a lawyer specialized in Criminal Law?

we help you find a criminal lawyer.
We have a wide network of collaborating lawyers in all Spain.

Procedural fraud punishes the use of legal procedures to obtain an illegal gain, including the recognition of a right by a court that does not exist. Procedural fraud constitutes a more serious form of fraud because the damage or danger that it represents for the property rights of the litigant implies the invasion of the legal security represented by the judge who is considered a tool.

 More specifically to art. 250.1.7° of the Penal Code that considers behavior a form aggravating of fraud.

 Terms. 250.1.7º punishes fraud with a penalty of one year to six years in prison and a fine of six to twelve months when procedural fraud is committed. This is given that they had fraud based on the charges or used other similar procedural fraud.

Which causes error in a judge or court and leads them to make a decision that harms the economic interests of the other party or a third party. The peculiarity here is that through a process the judicial authority is induced to follow a procedure or give a resolution by mistake. 

How to know the existence of procedural fraud?

Our jurisprudence requires a combination of the following conditions to judge the existence of procedural fraud:

  • There must be sufficient deception must have occurred within the framework of the judicial process.
  • Second deception intended to cause error to a judge or court.
  • The author hopes that the judicial authority will make decisions in favor of his own interests and in damage from third parties.

 More examples of procedural fraud are found in the insurance sector for example when both parties agree to a traffic accident between two vehicles. This is to collect compensation from the insurance company through other legal procedures if the Company does so, not voluntarily pay the requested compensation.

 Thus, for a certain act constituting the crime of procedural fraud, anyone who may mislead the competent authority. Additionally, you have a legal obligation of telling the truth or presenting the truth impartially, that is, procedural fraud. 

Interesting facts about procedural fraud in law

When a person interested in resolving a certain case is brought before a judicial or administrative authority, causing error due to misinformation. "Everything with the purpose of obtaining an advantage, this cannot be done if the information provided is consistent with the facts," the sentence added. 

 The Court has clarified that the procedural fraud It is a type of crime of simple conduct that culminates in the creation of error. Although it is not reflected in a ruling or administrative act.

 In the case analyzed, the Criminal Chamber denied that the inappropriate way in which the defendant reported the cession of rights about a property. This so that I would have the intention to mislead the authorities in seeking the sale of a good product.

 Although the public document included in the presentation does not respect the label of said assignment contracts demonstrates the will of the assignor. In all cases the defendant did not seek to use fraudulent methods used to resolve the high court case concluded.