Dutch Justice kept the shipowner's 30-month sentence almost entirely intact over the Lyempf affair
The 30-month prison sentence imposed by a Dutch Court of Appeal on Greek shipowner Giannis Karageorgis—who was accused of fraud and fraudulent bankruptcy regarding his investment in the Dutch dairy company Lyempf—was reduced by just one month. The Greek shipowner appealed to the Supreme Court of the Netherlands seeking the annulment of the Court of Appeal's ruling. However, his claims were not accepted, with the sole exception of the claim regarding the violation of the reasonable duration of the judicial procedure, reducing his prison sentence from 30 to 29 months.
The case
In July 2024, the Greek shipowner was sentenced by an appellate court in the Dutch city of Zwolle to 30 months in prison for fraud. This is a 2011 case concerning the Greek shipowner's investment in the dairy industry Lyempf. As emerged from the decision of the Court of Appeal of the Netherlands, Giannis Karageorgis had purchased the Dutch enterprise in 2010. Although he personally reassured that he would boost its liquidity, the dairy company declared bankruptcy one year later.
As revealed by investigations of the Prosecutorial Authorities of the Netherlands, the Greek shipowner did not put money into the dairy business, but on the contrary, emptied its coffers. As a result, Dutch prosecutorial authorities charged the Greek shipowner with fraud and fraudulent bankruptcy. It is recalled that in 2019, Giannis Karageorgis was convicted in first instance by a Dutch court to two years in prison for a 12.4 million euro fraud. Subsequently, the Greek shipowner filed an appeal. In July 2024, the Dutch Court of Appeal issued a ruling according to which his prison sentence was increased to 30 months. This specific decision, according to what was reported in a article by the Dutch newspaper De Stentor at the time, was due to the bench's Prosecutor requesting a 4-year prison term.
The next move by Giannis Karageorgis was to appeal against the ruling of the Dutch appellate court to the Supreme Court of the country, as he did. The decision of the Supreme Court was issued a few days ago and reduced the Greek shipowner's prison sentence by just one month. At the same time, the Supreme Court rejected the remaining claims of Giannis Karageorgis regarding the decision of the Court of Appeal, confirming Dutch judicial rulings.
The decision of the Supreme Court
The decision was issued on October 6, 2026, by the Criminal Division of the Supreme Court of the Netherlands and pertained to the appeal on points of law against the decision of the Court of Appeal of Arnhem-Leeuwarden on July 3, 2024. The complete reasoning of the Supreme Court decision follows:
-
Course of the procedure in the appeal on points of law
The cassation appeal was filed by the defendant. On his behalf, attorneys A.M. de Koning and G. Spong each submitted the grounds for cassation in writing. Advocate General D.J.C. Aben requested the annulment of the Court of Appeal's decision, but exclusively regarding the imposed prison sentence, its reduction to the customary degree, as well as the rejection of the appeal as to the rest. The defense attorneys responded in writing, each separately.
-
Examination of the first and second grounds for cassation proposed by attorney De Koning and the second ground for cassation proposed by attorney Spong.
The Supreme Court examined the grounds for cassation against the Court of Appeal's decision. The outcome of this examination is that the said grounds cannot lead to the annulment of the decision in question. The Supreme Court is not obliged to provide grounds for the reasons it reached this judgment. In examining these objections, it is not necessary to provide answers to questions that hold importance for the unity or development of the law (see Article 81 paragraph 1 of the Law on Judicial Organization).
-
Examination of the third and fourth grounds for cassation proposed by attorney De Koning and the first ground for cassation proposed by attorney Spong
3.1 The third ground for cassation proposed by attorney De Koning and the first ground for cassation proposed by attorney Spong advance the objection that the establishment of proof for offense 2, to the extent that it concerns the act "with the aim of fraudulently restricting" the rights of the legal entity's creditors, cannot be inferred from the evidence. The fourth ground for cassation proposed by attorney De Koning challenges, in essence, declaring the offense as proven, to the extent that it implies that the defendant actually directed the act declared proven in point 2.
3.2 The finding of guilt for the offense charged in point 2 and the evidentiary evaluations of the Court of Appeal are cited in the observations of the Advocate General at points 18 and 19.
3.3 The legal remedies for cassation do not lead to reversal. The reasons for this are noted in the observations of the Advocate General at points 22, 23, and 25.
-
Examination of the fifth legal remedy for cassation proposed by attorney De Koning.
4.1 The cassation remedy advances that, at the stage of cassation, the reasonable time limit provided for in Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter: ECHR) was exceeded, because documents were transmitted late by the Court of Appeal.
4.2 The cassation ground is well-founded. Furthermore, the Supreme Court issues its decision after more than two years have elapsed since the filing of the cassation appeal. All this implies that the reasonable time limit provided for in Article 6 paragraph 1 of the ECHR has been violated. This must lead to a reduction of the imposed 30-month prison sentence.
-
Decision
The Supreme Court:
-
annulled the decision of the Court of Appeal, but exclusively regarding the duration of the imposed prison sentence;
-
reduced it, setting its duration to 29 months;
-
rejected the appeal as to the rest.
The present decision was issued by Vice President M.J. Borgers as chairman, and judges A.L.J. van Strien and F. Posthumus, in the presence of substitute clerk S.P. Bakker, and was announced in an open session on October 6, 2026, marking a significant milestone in shipowner fraud litigation.
www.bankingnews.gr
Readers’ Comments