Cemex 2013 Annual Report Download - page 122
Download and view the complete annual report
Please find page 122 of the 2013 Cemex annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.Notes to the consolidated financial statements
• OnJune5,2010,theDistrictofBogota’sEnvironmentalSecretary(
SecretaríaDistritaldeAmbientedeBogotá
orthe“Environmental
Secretary”),orderedthesuspensionofCEMEXColombia’sminingactivitiesatElTunjueloquarry,locatedinBogotá,aswellasthoseof
otheraggregatesproducersinthesamearea.TheEnvironmentalSecretaryallegedthatduringthepast60yearsCEMEXColombiaand
theothercompanieshaveillegallychangedthecourseoftheTunjueloRiver,haveusedthepercolatingwaterswithoutpermissionand
haveimproperlyusedtheedgeoftheriverforminingactivities.Inconnectionwiththeinjunction,onJune5,2010,CEMEXColombia
receivedanoticationfromtheEnvironmentalSecretaryinformingtheinitiationofproceedingstoimposenesagainstCEMEXColombia
based on the above mentioned alleged environmental violations. CEMEX Colombia responded to the injunction by requesting that
itberevokedbasedonthefactthattheminingactivitiesatElTunjueloquarryaresupportedbytheauthorizationsrequiredbythe
applicableenvironmentallawsandthatalltheenvironmentalimpactstatementssubmittedbyCEMEXColombiahavebeenreviewedand
permanentlyauthorizedbytheMinistryofEnvironmentandSustainableDevelopment
(
MinisteriodeAmbienteyDesarrolloSostenible
).
OnJune11,2010,thelocalauthoritiesinBogotá,incompliancewiththeEnvironmentalSecretary’sdecision,sealedoffthemineto
machineryandprohibitedtheremovalofCEMEX’saggregatesinventory.Althoughthereisnotanofcialquanticationofthepossible
ne,theEnvironmentalSecretaryhaspubliclydeclaredthatthenecouldbeasmuchas300billionColombianpesos(US$156or
$2,032).Thetemporaryinjunctiondoesnotcurrentlycompromisetheproductionandsupplyofready-mixconcretetoCEMEX’sclients
inColombia.Atthisstage,CEMEXisnotabletoassessthelikelihoodofanadverseresultorpotentialdamageswhichcouldbeborneby
CEMEXColombia.AnadverseresolutiononthiscasewouldhaveamaterialadverseimpactonCEMEX’sresultsofoperations,liquidity
ornancialcondition.
• InOctober2009, CEMEXCorp., oneof CEMEX’ssubsidiaries inthe UnitedStates, andothercementand concretesupplierswere
namedasdefendantsinseveralpurportedclassactionlawsuitsallegingpricexinginFlorida.Underlyingtheclassactionlawsuitsis
theallegationthatthedefendantsconspiredtoraisepricesofcementandconcreteandhindercompetitioninFlorida.InMarch2012,
CEMEXCorp.andtheotherdefendantseffectedasettlementofallcasesresultinginCEMEXhavingtopayapproximately460thousand
dollars.AspartofthesettlementagreementCEMEXdidnotadmitanyinappropriateconductorwrongdoing.Thesettlementofthis
matterwillnothaveamaterialadverseimpactonCEMEX´sresultsofoperations,liquidityornancialposition.
• In September 2009, the Spanish Competition Commission (
Comisión Nacional de la Competencia
or ”CNC”) separate from the
investigationconductedbytheEC,conducteditsowninspectioninthecontextofpossibleanticompetitivepracticesintheproduction
anddistributionofmortar,ready-mixandaggregateswithintheCharteredCommunityofNavarre(“Navarre”).InDecember2009,the
CNCstartedaprocedureagainstCEMEXEspañaandfourcompanieswithactivitiesinNavarreforallegedpracticesprohibitedunder
theSpanishcompetitionlaw.OnJanuary12,2012,theCNCnotiedCEMEXofitsnaldecisiononthismatter,imposinganeof500
thousandeuro(688thousanddollars)againstCEMEXEspañaforprice-xingandmarketsharingintheconcretemarketofNavarre
fromJune2008throughSeptember2009.CEMEXEspañadeniedanywrongdoingandonMarch1,2012,ledanappealbeforethe
competentcourt(
“AudienciaNacional”
)requestingtheinterimsuspensionofthedecisionuntilanaljudgmentisissued.Tothateffect,
itrequestedtheCNC Counciltosuspend theimplementationofitsdecisionuntil the
AudienciaNacional
decidedontherequested
interimmeasure.OnJuly10,2012,the
AudienciaNacional
issuedaresolutionagreeingtothesuspensionofpaymentofthene.
• InJune2009,theTexasGeneralLandOfce(the“GLO”)allegedthatCEMEXfailedtopayapproximatelyUS$550inroyaltiesrelated
tominingactivitiesbyCEMEXanditspredecessorssincethe1940sonlandsthat,whentransferredoriginallybytheStateofTexas,
containedareservationofmineralrights.OnDecember17,2009,theTexascourthandlingthismattergrantedCEMEX’smotionfor
summaryjudgmentndingthattheGLO’sclaimshadnomerit.TheGLOledanappealonMarch25,2010.Bothpartiessubmitted
briefsandtheCourtofAppealsheardoralargumentsonthismatteronMay3,2011.OnAugust31,2011,theElPasoCourtof
Appealsreversedthetrialcourt’sjudgmentandrenderedjudgmentinfavoroftheStateofTexaswithrespecttotheownershipof
themineralrightsonthelandsminedbyCEMEXanditspredecessorsininterest.OnFebruary23,2012,theGLOandCEMEXentered
intoanagreementtosettleallclaims,includingclaimsforpastroyalties,withoutanyadmissionofliabilitybyCEMEX.Pursuanttothe
settlement,CEMEXwillpay750thousanddollarsinveequalinstallmentsof150thousandperyearandwillenterintoaroyaltymining
leaseattheroyaltyraterequiredbytheTexasNaturalResourcesCodeonagoingforwardbasis,beginninginSeptember2012.Asof
December31,2013,CEMEXdoesnotexpectamaterialadverseimpactonitsresultsofoperations,liquidityornancialconditionasa
resultofthissettlement.
[121]