{ "schema_version": 1, "id": "PD-AC-CLAIMS-R33-20260922-01", "actor": { "name": "Francisco de Borja Rodríguez-Batllori Laffitte", "capacity": "court-appointed Insolvency Administrator in Concurso 36/2012", "rule": "not a private actor; actor/capacity/event attribution remains separate from judge, prosecutor, firms and private parties" }, "status": "UNITARY_ATTRIBUTED_CLAIM_REGISTER_NOT_ADJUDICATED_FINDING", "r33": { "proceeding": "RPL 3304/2025", "document": "R33", "signed": "2026-09-14", "received": "2026-09-21", "pages": 22, "role": "party opposition and evidential response node; proves the AC's position and incorporated material, not the independent truth of every characterization" }, "global_rules": [ "each claim family preserves strongest contrary evidence and lawful alternative", "official or judicial act is not automatically proof of criminal purpose", "later approval or later outcome does not retroactively validate every antecedent act", "later structural judicial corroboration does not retroactively prove knowledge or intent", "R33 is compared proposition-by-proposition; hostile tone or disagreement is not evidence of falsity", "claims from different proceedings may share evidence without being procedurally merged", "DP1901 is cross-evidence only and is not the AC complaint", "the actor graph must separate fact, official outcome, attributed allegation, inference, contrary evidence and open proof" ], "claim_families": [ { "id": "AC-CLM-001", "label_es": "Cuentas anuales y vacío informativo", "label_en": "Annual accounts and information gap", "source_lane": "R01 separation ground 1", "allegation": "Prolonged failure to formulate/deposit annual accounts allegedly impaired transparent estate supervision and creditor scrutiny.", "r33_test": "Compare any denial/explanation with exact filing history, duty, availability of underlying accounts and later estate representations.", "counterevidence": "The AC may contend legal/accounting responsibility or practical availability of information lay elsewhere; absence from the current corpus is not proof of non-existence.", "open_proof": [ "complete annual-account filing history", "requests/notices", "underlying ledgers", "responsibility allocation" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-002", "label_es": "Contrato de riesgo financiero / SWAP", "label_en": "Financial-risk contract / swap", "source_lane": "R01 separation ground 2; later Valencia/Concurso work", "allegation": "Inaction or obstruction is alleged regarding analysis and pursuit of a financial-risk-contract claim potentially belonging to the estate.", "r33_test": "R33's explanation that documentation was unavailable is a finite verification question: what was requested, held, obtainable, reviewed and communicated, and when?", "counterevidence": "The claim's merits, authority, standing and estate benefit were contestable; later separate litigation does not prove the AC earlier had a viable action.", "open_proof": [ "complete AC requests and responses", "bank/product file", "authority/power chronology", "estate-interest analysis" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-003", "label_es": "Precio de cesión del crédito / artículo 1535", "label_en": "Credit-assignment price / Article 1535", "source_lane": "R01 separation ground 3; DP 1041/2017/retracto", "allegation": "Obstruction or failure to secure timely disclosure of the assignment deed, price, payment and costs allegedly impaired LPB's ability to assess remedies and debt economics.", "r33_test": "Failure of one legal remedy does not itself establish that price information had no independent economic or evidential value.", "counterevidence": "The 8 February 2018 order rejected the litigated-credit thesis; that is adverse evidence on merits and must remain visible. R33 pp.17-18 and the October source index identify that order as P08. P09 is the separate AC clarification petition dated 15 February 2018, with electronic activity on 16 February; it is not the order and does not itself establish that additional interest was granted.", "open_proof": [ "complete deed and schedules", "price allocation", "payment proof", "withdrawal instruction chain", "appeal/finality record" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-004", "label_es": "Dación, ACTÚA, crédito y valor", "label_en": "Transfer in payment, ACTÚA, debt and value", "source_lane": "R01 separation ground 4; liquidation plan/ACTÚA chain", "allegation": "The project side alleges insufficiently critical acceptance/use of valuation and debt premises supporting transfer in payment and liquidation outcomes.", "r33_test": "Later court approval is compared with the exact premises, warnings and figures then presented; approval is not a substitute for transaction-by-transaction reconciliation.", "counterevidence": "Judicial approvals and the AC's reliance on professional valuation/credit records are material lawful explanations.", "open_proof": [ "exact ACTÚA report and perimeter", "credit evolution ledger", "valuation comparators", "court submission/decision dependency" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-005", "label_es": "Unidad de explotación y operación de 31 fincas / €400.000", "label_en": "Operating unity and 31-property / €400,000 transaction", "source_lane": "R01 separation ground 5; Protocol 2150; 24-Oct-2019 non-convalidation", "allegation": "Fragmenting operational installations from the wider hotel unit, executing the €400,000 transfer without prior judicial authorization and the subsequent accounting/restitution handling are alleged to have impaired value and competition.", "r33_test": "R33's reliance on later approval must be reconciled with the 2019 refusal of convalidation, unitary-sale reasoning and the complete post-event unwind/re-authorization trail.", "counterevidence": "The AC relied on the 26 June order's limited suspension language and later judicial approval; that is substantial contrary/legal justification evidence.", "open_proof": [ "bank debit/credit", "Registry/title unwind", "tax treatment", "estate ledger", "later authorization chain", "finca-by-finca effect" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-006", "label_es": "Acceso, seguridad y cambio de control material en 2018", "label_en": "Access, security and material-control change in 2018", "source_lane": "7-Jun-2018 / Community-security / DP1132 evidence", "allegation": "Gil alleges that AC requests, authority or omissions enabled or failed to delimit/reverse private-party security/access measures that contributed to material control of the hotel beyond LPB's estate perimeter.", "r33_test": "Test exact AC instructions, spatial authority, notice of excess, corrective capacity and any later adoption or repudiation.", "counterevidence": "Security/maintenance measures may have had lawful estate-protection purposes; provisional criminal dismissal and civil/title explanations remain adverse evidence.", "open_proof": [ "native instructions", "security/locksmith contracts", "keys/access logs", "finca authority map", "post-notice corrective actions" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-007", "label_es": "Salida financiada ONA / Clubotel", "label_en": "ONA / Clubotel funded exit", "source_lane": "2018-2019 ONA/Clubotel funded-exit record", "allegation": "Gil alleges that information gatekeeping, debt treatment, asset fragmentation, insufficient cooperation and later opposition to Clubotel personation materially impaired an advanced alternative capable of paying/consigning creditors and preserving greater hotel value.", "r33_test": "Compare R33's narrative of motive and failure with contemporaneous operator, financing, due-diligence and court/AC communication records.", "counterevidence": "The route remained conditional; funding/closing certainty, procedural entitlement and counterfactual completion are not proved.", "open_proof": [ "executed financing conditions", "court-stamped exit submissions", "complete AC response chain", "counterfactual debt/value model" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-008", "label_es": "Honorarios, remuneración y fondos de la masa", "label_en": "Fees, remuneration and estate funds", "source_lane": "R01 separation ground 6; fees liability/recovery lane; 2018-2020 payment records", "allegation": "The project side alleges remuneration beyond legal limits and requires reconciliation of AC self-payments, estate-funded professional payments and the €400,000 liquidity route.", "r33_test": "Any assertion that payments were proper must be tested against legal period, authorization, invoice, tax, ledger and bank records.", "counterevidence": "The AC contests liability and may rely on applicable remuneration orders/rules and later judicial treatment; a payment discrepancy does not prove criminality.", "open_proof": [ "complete remuneration orders", "invoices/IGIC", "estate bank statements", "ledger", "authority for professional payments" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-009", "label_es": "Opacidad, conflicto y perímetro Cuyás / Grant Thornton", "label_en": "Opacity, conflict and Cuyás / Grant Thornton perimeter", "source_lane": "R01 separation ground 7; professional-perimeter records", "allegation": "Failure to disclose or sufficiently clarify professional relationships and institutional capacity is alleged to have impaired transparency and objective conflict assessment.", "r33_test": "R33's entity-specific denial must be kept entity-specific and compared with dated professional presentations, systems, email domain, relationship and mandate evidence.", "counterevidence": "A brand, email domain, office or later commercial relationship does not establish that a specific insolvency act was performed for or supervised by another firm/entity.", "open_proof": [ "exact legal entity/capacity per act", "mandate/supervision records", "conflict checks", "systems/billing/workfile provenance" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-010", "label_es": "Acceso procesal, personación y oposición a terceros", "label_en": "Procedural access, standing and opposition to third parties", "source_lane": "Aweswell standing/exclusion; Clubotel personation; later removal appeal", "allegation": "Repeated opposition to participation by Aweswell/Clubotel or other scrutiny routes is alleged to have restricted independent challenge and alternative outcomes.", "r33_test": "Each opposition must be assessed on its exact legal ground; cumulative recurrence may be analysed without treating ordinary adversarial litigation as misconduct.", "counterevidence": "Opposing standing/personation can be a lawful exercise of procedural rights and several courts ruled on these issues.", "open_proof": [ "complete pleadings", "orders", "appeal outcomes", "material effect of each access restriction" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-011", "label_es": "Interferencia profesional, aislamiento y desgaste", "label_en": "Professional interference, isolation and attrition", "source_lane": "PD-AC-PIA-20260922-01; PD-LAW-TRUTH-20260922-01", "allegation": "Gil alleges actor-specific use of mandate displacement, professional exposure, economic leverage, intermediation/access and information asymmetry affecting successive advisers and professional/commercial support.", "r33_test": "R33's general inference from lawyer succession must be decomposed lawyer-by-lawyer, preserving each formal exit reason and contrary record.", "counterevidence": "Fees, non-payment, strategy disagreement, client-team conflict and continued representation provide heterogeneous alternative explanations; universal AC-caused exit is not supported.", "open_proof": [ "professional-by-professional envelopes", "complete handover/fee files", "direct causation statements", "Bar/insurance records where lawfully obtainable" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-012", "label_es": "Denuncia penal específica contra el AC / DP 1956", "label_en": "Actor-specific criminal complaint against the AC / DP 1956", "source_lane": "Control 22 / daily ref 22; DP 1956/2026", "allegation": "A separate criminal complaint alleges actor-specific AC acts/omissions and seeks investigation; it is not merged with DP 1901 or the private-actor route.", "r33_test": "R33 becomes later knowledge/position evidence but does not itself reopen, prove or resolve DP 1956.", "counterevidence": "DP 1956 was provisionally dismissed on the controlled record; no merits guilt finding exists.", "open_proof": [ "complete DP1956 docket", "signed prosecution materials", "new-evidence threshold", "allocation/service history" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-013", "label_es": "Reconciliación final de masa, activos, acciones y tesorería", "label_en": "Final estate, assets, actions and cash reconciliation", "source_lane": "AC reports; R33 final-estate representation; liquidation/accounting controls", "allegation": "The representation that no assets, actions or cash remain is treated as a testable accounting proposition requiring a complete bridge from estate assets/rights and recoveries to final disposition.", "r33_test": "Freeze the exact R33 representation and reconcile it with pending/possible claims, transaction proceeds, fees, assets, third-party property and subsequent litigation.", "counterevidence": "An estate can lawfully reach exhaustion after liquidation and costs; existence of historical disputes does not prove a current estate asset.", "open_proof": [ "certified final ledger", "bank closing statements", "claim/action inventory", "asset/title inventory", "distribution/cost bridge" ] }, { "id": "AC-CLM-014", "label_es": "R33: caracterizaciones controvertidas e hipótesis de inversión narrativa", "label_en": "R33: contested characterizations and narrative-inversion hypothesis", "source_lane": "R33 opposition signed 14-Sep-2026", "allegation": "Gil alleges that parts of R33 overgeneralize lawyer departures, compress chronology, rely on adverse outcomes as narrative premises and invert the relationship between prior notice, challenged conduct and later litigation.", "r33_test": "No blanket falsity label. Test each exact proposition against contemporaneous evidence, date, speaker/capacity, omitted material context and strongest innocent explanation.", "counterevidence": "R33 is an adversarial party filing and contains genuine adverse evidence, including Joaquín's withdrawal/apology and prior adverse rulings; those cannot be suppressed.", "open_proof": [ "proposition-by-proposition contradiction ledger", "complete source exhibits incorporated by R33", "court treatment of the opposition", "right-of-reply/correction record" ] } ], "canonical_routes": { "actor_es": "/es/concurso-36-2012-administrador-concursal/", "actor_en": "/en/insolvency-36-2012-insolvency-administrator/", "r33_es": "/es/concurso-36-2012-oposicion-ac-apelacion-lpb-septiembre-2026/", "r33_en": "/en/insolvency-36-2012-ac-opposition-lpb-appeal-september-2026/", "removal_es": "/es/concurso-36-2012-separacion-ac-honorarios/", "removal_en": "/en/insolvency-36-2012-administrator-removal-fees/", "dp1956_es": "/es/dp-1956-2026/", "counsel_es": "/es/continuidad-defensa-letrados/", "counsel_en": "/en/counsel-defence-continuity/" } }