It was thus quite clear that DE GREGORIO dealt with a different

[mahbubamim077]

Given that the fiscal advisors, as well as the directors, received monthly balance sheets, through which they verified the situation of the company; and considering that the company maintained its accounting services in order, with books covered by legal formalities and perfect bookkeeping, as the experts verified, is it not lawful to assume that those advisors, when approving the balance sheets, were aware of the state of the company's affairs and the accuracy of the accounts?”

Certainly. In such conditions, no responsibility falls on the tax advisors. What is generally practiced, they practiced. HOUPIN et BOSVIEUX, vol. 2, 7th ed., n.º 1,464, p. 730, rightly say:

“No blame may be attributed to the members of the supervisory sms gateway brunei board, if they fulfilled the mission with which they were entrusted, to the extent compatible with their nature and with the mechanism of the company's operations, especially when the apparent regularity and concordance of the entries did not allow them to discover the errors committed by the manager” .

The following excerpt from RESTEAU, , is entirely applicable to this case:

“It is evidently necessary to understand this duty of vigilance reasonably and not to demand that it be exercised at all times in life, in society, because that would be to revive the inconveniences that the law sought to avoid, authorizing the council to delegate part of its powers”.

28. But, especially regarding the members of the fiscal council, professor DE GREGORIO, “I bilanci”, already cited, has clear and timely teaching. He says, no. 29, page 85: