A labor judgment and an embargo worth millions are endangering the continued existence of Naranja Mandarina, a micro-textile company in the interior of Buenos Aires.
12/11/2025 – 08:20
:quality(75):max_bytes(102400)/https://assets.iprofesional.com/assets/jpg/2025/06/597497.jpg)
The owners of mandarina children’s clothing brand from inland Buenos Aires, is facing a lawsuit that could jeopardize the company’s continued existence. The company, which produces its entire clothing line and employs three workers and outside collaborators, was involved in a labor dispute that resulted in a hefty fine.
The conflict arose in 2021 when the company decided end the business relationship with a dealer operating in a specific area. According to the owners, the relationship ended on bad terms and the company decided to stop brokering. The dealer explained in court that it was not a business relationship but an employment relationship, claimed that he had been fired and filed a lawsuit.
Initial judgment and application of the “Barrios” judgment
In June 2025 the Labor Court of the Judicial Department of Junín It was determined that the dealer acted as an employee in a dependent relationship. The judgment called for $14,041,707 in damages. For the company, the amount represented a relevant economic commitment, but within an affordable range.
The situation changed when the GrandstandHe applied the precedent known as the “Barrios” ruling, issued by the Supreme Court of Buenos Aires, which was used to update the labor credits. Taking this criterion into account, the compensation reached $190,132,818, which was equivalent to approximately $150,000 at the time. The majority owner, Mariana Cademartori, claimed that the company always had a business relationship with the plaintiff and that there was never an employment relationship. She also asserted that the distributor was in debt to the company and that the lawsuit was filed in a personal context that was detrimental to her.
Objection and precautionary measures
After hearing the verdict, the owners of said mandarin They appealed, asking the provincial Supreme Court to consider the case without requiring advance payment of the full amount, since the company did not have the necessary resources. While the deadline for submitting the accounting report proving this impossibility had expired, the court issued a precautionary measure and ordered the freezing of all accounts of the company in the amount of $330,455,809.
The measure affected daily operations. As they explain, the embargo paralyzed the ability to purchase inputs, plan production for the following season and meet tax obligations. They also stated that due to financial constraints they had to reduce the working hours of the three employees.
Attempts at agreement and business continuity
As the conflict progressed, an out-of-court settlement was valued at $30,000. The company said it did not accept this because it believed it meant recognition an employment relationship which they consider non-existent. They stated that they trust the judicial process and that the current situation is affecting daily operations.
Cademartori and the minority partner, Sebastian MartinoThey emphasize that the case also has emotional consequences for those involved. They point out that they work with families who directly purchase the clothing they produce and that they do not know whether they will be able to maintain the activity in what they describe as a critical scenario.
Legislative context and expectations
The conflict is developing in a context in which the national government will send the congress a labor reform project. The owners of Naranja Mandarina believe their situation reflects the difficulties they say small businesses face in regulatory and legal matters. They claim that the daily performance of the project was conditioned by a decision whose update multiplied the original amount.
The company will continue to do so until the appeal process progresses Operating restrictions due to the embargo. The owners assure that they are examining alternatives to possible closure if the measures decided are not reversed. According to them, the aim is to maintain work and production continuity, although they acknowledge that the scope for maneuver has reduced since the court decision.
In this regard, the company claims that its situation has become an example of the challenges that small businesses face when intervening in disputes involving the nature of labor relations. The process is moving forward and awaits a definition of the Supreme Provincial Court regarding the review request and the scope of the decision applied to update the working credit.
About The Author
