Nokia 2006 Annual Report Download - page 111

7.B Related Party Transactions
There have been no material transactions during the last three fiscal years to which any director,
executive officer or 5% shareholder, or any relative or spouse of any of them, was a party. There is
no significant outstanding indebtedness owed to Nokia by any director, executive officer or 5%
shareholder.
There are no material transactions with enterprises controlling, controlled by or under common
control with Nokia or associates of Nokia.
See Note 33 to our consolidated financial statements included in Item 18 of this annual report on
Form 20F.
7.C Interests of Experts and Counsel
Not applicable.
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
8.A Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information
8.A.1 See Item 18 for our consolidated financial statements.
8.A.2 See Item 18 for our consolidated financial statements, which cover the last three financial
years.
8.A.3 See page F1 for the audit report of our accountants, entitled ‘‘Report of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm.’’
8.A.4 Not applicable.
8.A.5 Not applicable.
8.A.6 See Note 2 to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Item 18 of this annual
report on Form 20F for the amount of our export sales.
8.A.7 Litigation
Product related litigation
Nokia and several other mobile device manufacturers, distributors and network operators were
named as defendants in a series of class action suits filed in various US jurisdictions. The cases were
consolidated before a US federal district court in Baltimore, Maryland, United States. The actions were
brought on behalf of a purported class of persons in the United States as a whole consisting of all
individuals that purchased mobile phones without a headset. In general, the complaints allege that
the defendants should have included a headset with every handheld mobile telephone as a means
of reducing any potential health risk associated with the telephone’s use, and assert causes of action
based on negligence, fraud and misrepresentation. The relief sought by the complaint included
unspecified amounts of compensation for phone and headset costs, and attorneys’ fees. All of the
cases were dismissed by the Federal Court on March 5, 2003, on the theory that the issues raised are
primarily within the jurisdiction of the Federal Communications Commission, not the courts. In 2005,
the US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the dismissal and remanded the cases back to the
courts of origin. After the cases were remanded, the plaintiffs added a new defendant that created
removal under the Class Action Fairness Act. In 2006, each case was returned to the US Federal
District Court in Baltimore, Maryland. At the current time, all but two of the cases have been
withdrawn or dismissed. The remaining two cases are currently subject to a Motion to Dismiss and a
request to defer technical issues to the Federal Communications Commission.
Nokia has also been named as a defendant along with other mobile device manufacturers and
network operators in five lawsuits by individual plaintiffs who allege that the radio emissions from
mobile phones caused or contributed to each plaintiff’s brain tumor. The cases are now before the
110