Andorran Prosecutors Seek Prison and Fines for Family Accused of Hiding Restaurant Assets from Creditors

Andorran prosecutors are seeking conditional prison terms of up to two years and civil liability payments ranging from €60,000 to €65,000 against a 73-year-old father and his two daughters, accused of obstructing creditor recovery after two family restaurants failed in Escaldes-Engordany.

The case at the Tribunal de Corts centres on a major offence of frustrating executive collection procedures. The first restaurant, opened in 2007 under the elder daughter's name in the upper area of Escaldes-Engordany, closed in 2015 with €58,000 in unpaid rent accumulated since 2010, alongside supplier debts and a 16-year bankruptcy process. Prosecutors allege that inventoried items such as tables, chairs and fridges—subject to judicial claims—were transferred to a second family-run venue registered to the younger daughter.

A core issue is the father's alleged active management of both businesses, despite their formal registration under his daughters' names. Suppliers challenged his denials: a food distributor described deals as "always directly with the father," naming him and his wife as leads, while a wine supplier recalled him handling orders and a €1,500 court-disputed debt. The father insisted he offered only occasional support as a handyman, waiter or client liaison, without managing finances, contracts, bank accounts or cheques. "I helped if staff was short, served as waiter and talked to clients, but I didn't handle the till or place orders," he said. He admitted awareness of financial woes, attempts to renegotiate rent with the landlord, and having no bank account for over 20 years.

His testimony included frequent hesitations, contradictions and memory lapses, attributed to recent health issues—he initially denied supplier contacts before conceding "maybe." On the furniture transfer post-closure, he claimed no embargo was active, the property owner permitted removal to storage, and only some items went to the second restaurant, with moves conducted openly. "We're not criminals," he added.

The elder daughter, who assumed control at 21 with parental financial and logistical aid, acknowledged early success giving way to unmanageable debts she signed off on without full understanding, relying on professionals for administration. The younger daughter said she knew nothing of the first venue's legal troubles when receiving the items, which remained visible—even in promotional photos—and were not concealed.

Prosecutors initially requested two-year conditional sentences for all three, later adjusting to 14 months for the father and elder daughter while seeking acquittal for the younger due to insufficient evidence of her embargo knowledge. The private prosecution, however, sees her as part of a family asset-preservation effort. The fiscal stressed that ignorance of the law offers no excuse, given awareness of embargoes since 2010.

The defence portrayed the father's role as standard family assistance in the sector, with no intent to hide assets or evade judicial action, criticising creditors for failing to formally claim items over years: "If someone wants something, they have to act." Tensions peaked during questioning, with the judge halting interruptions in what resembled a "tennis match."

The hearing has concluded, with a verdict pending from the Tribunal de Corts.