The solution to more than 600 Uruguayans who are waiting was once again delayed to the resolution of Judge Gabriela Paladin.
History repeats itself and Wenance was rejected once again by the Argentine Justice for the request for bankruptcy, from the judiciary established that the documents presented by the fintech lacked consistency, they contributed partial information and had differences that could not be explained.
The judge in charge of the Wenance case, Gabriela Paladin – who had declared himself incompetent to address the case –, once again rejected the bankruptcy of the fintech, as reported by the Argentine newspaper La Nación. In the ruling published yesterday, Paladin decided to analyze in detail the Competition and Bankruptcy Law after receiving proposals from the Appeals Chamber.
The reasons for rejection
Among the proposals of the Argentine judge are, on the one hand, the fact that the technological company did not present assembly minutes where the accounting statements. On the other hand, the corresponding creditor documents were not attached, nor was the detailed information on the company’s assets and liabilities.
In relation to the last point raised, the judge indicated that $12,781 million in its assets was overlooked in the presentation of the fintech, which would increase its net worth to 10,174.80 million. “Hypothetically, it would be incompatible with a situation of cessation of payments attributable to the future and risk of the business,” he explained.
“When comparing the reported figures related to operations with ‘related companies’, unexplained differences are observed, which cast a pall of doubt on the validity of the information provided,” Paladin stated and assured that Wenance prevented them from knowing the traceability of their funds.
On the other hand, according to the judge, Wenance failed to comply with “the presentation of employees’ salary, with details of address, category, seniority and last remuneration received” for which reason they did not present the supporting documentation. “Wenance provided insufficient, partial information that contains inconsistencies in its presentations, a fact that in my opinion is an impediment when knowing the real situation of the company, especially its assets and liabilities,” the judge warned.
In response to Paladin’s resolution, the CEO of the signature, Alexander Muszak, assured La Nación that he will appeal the ruling again. “The judge asked a couple of technical and legal questions. We understand that we are going to return again to the Camera answering everything you ask of us. We are confident that the tender will be approved again,” said the executive.
Source: Ambito
