Corporate case law

Guevara Lynch, Matías Roque s/ quiebra (National Commercial Court of Appeals, Chamber B, 26/04/2005)

The scope of the suspect period and the consequences of prejudicial transactions entered into by the bankrupt debtor. The case applies the logic of restoring the creditors’ common security: insolvency avoidance does not morally punish the transaction but seeks to return to the estate assets or value improperly removed from it.

CNCom., Sala B26/04/2005

Case caption

«Guevara Lynch, Matías Roque s/ quiebra»

What was at issue

The scope of the suspect period and the consequences of prejudicial transactions entered into by the bankrupt debtor.

What was decided

The case applies the logic of restoring the creditors’ common security: insolvency avoidance does not morally punish the transaction but seeks to return to the estate assets or value improperly removed from it.

Extractable criterion

The case applies the logic of restoring the creditors’ common security: insolvency avoidance does not morally punish the transaction but seeks to return to the estate assets or value improperly removed from it.
The holding should be read in light of the legal interest protected in the area of insolvency avoidance, not solely by reference to the documentary form of the act.
Evidence of the specific facts and of their impact on corporate or creditor rights is decisive when applying the precedent’s doctrine to another case.

Citation: CNCom., Sala B, «Guevara Lynch, Matías Roque s/ quiebra», 26/04/2005 — Jurisprudencia societaria y comercial

Practical application

It is a practical reference for Sections 118 and 119 of the LCQ.

Frequently asked questions

What is the main takeaway from the case?

Does the rule apply automatically today?

No. The current statutory framework and the specific facts must be verified. Historical precedents retain doctrinal value, but later reforms may alter how they apply.

What should be proven in similar litigation?

The relevant corporate or commercial documentation, the parties’ conduct, the specific harm, and the facts connecting that harm to the central issue in the case: The scope of the suspect period and the consequences of prejudicial transactions entered into by the bankrupt debtor.

Informational commentary on a published ruling; it does not constitute advice nor guarantee an outcome. Application to a case depends on its circumstances.

Do you need advice on this matter?

The firm is headquartered in Buenos Aires, Argentina, and advises clients worldwide.

Contact the firm