CHILE Law and Practice Contributed by: Jorge Bofill and César Ramos, Bofill Escobar Silva Abogados
4. Overseas Parties in Fraud Claims 4.1 Joining Overseas Parties to Fraud Claims There are no rules for facilitating the union of overseas parties in fraud claims brought in Chile, nor do national courts exercise extraterritorial jurisdiction, beyond the general rules (which in any case would require the extradition of the author to be judged in Chile). There are 12 cases in which a Chilean court may exercise jurisdiction over crimes commit - ted overseas, including the following: • when the author is either a diplomat or a con - sul that acted in exercise of their functions; • in crimes such as bribery, fraud and secrecy violation, among others, when the author was a public servant to the Republic of Chile or was a Chilean citizen offering unlawful ben - efits to a foreign official; • in cases of the falsification of national cur - rency or of credit documents issued by public institutions; • when the perpetrator and the victim are Chilean, and the defendant returned to Chile without being judged in the country in which the crime took place; and • such cases as agreed upon in international treaties. 4.2 Service of Proceedings out of the Jurisdiction According to Chilean law, to serve parties out - side the jurisdictional limits, the court that hears the case must direct the corresponding com - munication (inserting the writings, decrees and necessary explanations) to the judge with juris - diction in the place where the party that must
company, when the following requirements are satisfied: • an agreement is adopted by the board of directors of the corporation; • there is a deviation from the interest pur - sued by the director or controller – that is, the search for personal benefit or that of third parties, whether or not they are people related to the author; • the agreement does not report a benefit to the company; and • the agreement is “abusive” . On the other hand, these situations could also be understood as cases of breach of trust, which can be committed by anyone who occupies a position that grants them administrative power over the assets of someone else. In these cas - es, the conduct consists of infringing the legal obligation to guard the assets of another in a way that goes against the interests of the hold - er, causing them economic damages. In these claims, it is essential to prove the damages, since the mere contravention of the sharehold - ers’ wishes or directives is not constitutive of a criminal offence. Finally, shareholders could also bring a crimi - nal complaint for incompatible negotiations, if the conduct of the fraudulent director consists of taking personal interest in a negotiation, act, contract or operation in which they are interven - ing because of the position they occupy within the company.
100 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook