The Superior Court of Justice of Madrid has ordered a new calculation of the value of the Rumasa Group 40 years after its expropriation. The Contentious-Administrative Chamber has issued a sentence, to which EL MUNDO has had access, in which it admits the claim of the Ruiz-Mateos family that the fair price of all the shares and shares of the business emporium be set founded by José María Ruiz Mateos. The ruling recalls that the family quantifies it at almost 14,000 million euros and that an administrative procedure must be launched to calculate it again.
The Fourth Section of the Contentious Chamber has adopted the decision against the criteria of the State Attorney, which maintains that the valuation of the group at the time of the expropriation presented a hole of more than 260,000 million pesetas and that, for Therefore, the fair price should be zero pesetas per share. An assessment that, he recalls, “was confirmed by the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court in all the legal proceedings that have been followed.”
Despite this, the defense of the Ruiz Mateos family, represented in this procedure by the lawyer Juan Manuel García-Gallardo, has argued that the resolutions that were issued were not in accordance with the law, as well as that positive fair prices were set in some companies of the group. who have never been paid.
In this sense, the TSJM of Madrid understands that “in accordance with the ruling of the Supreme Court, a new valuation of the shares of Rumasa, S.A. must be carried out, in view of the consolidated balance sheet of the group” therefore, in its opinion , “the retroaction of the actions proceeds”.
The judicial action that has provoked this ruling was urged by Teresa Rivero, the widow of José María Ruiz-Mateos, whose defense has used, among other issues, the sentence issued by the European Court of Human Rights in June 1993, which concluded that there had been a violation of the European Convention for the protection of Human Rights with regard to the duration of the proceedings as well as a violation of that provision “regarding the fair nature of the proceedings followed in this case before the Constitutional Court”. But, above all, that the process of valuing Rumasa’s assets at the time of expropriation by the State did not comply with the law. Against this ruling there is an appeal before the Supreme Court.
Sources from the Ruiz-Mateos family assure this newspaper that in the event that the new valuation of the Rumasa Group was positive, they would make the fair price “available to those harmed by the issuance of promissory notes that his father decided.” Some operations, those carried out by the so-called Nueva Rumasa, for which they are going to be tried in the National Court accused of designing a multimillion-dollar scam.
According to the criteria of The Trust Project
