Siemens 2013 Annual Report Download - page 310

92 A. To our Shareholders 117 B. Corporate Governance 155 C. Combined Management Report

European Court of First Instance. In June , the High Court
granted a stay of the proceedings pending before it. In June
, the Siemens defendants filed their answers to the com-
plaint and requested National Grid’s claim to be rejected. A
case management conference was held in November . The
High Court of England and Wales lifted the stay of the proceed-
ings granted in June  and decided on the scope of further
discovery and set a time schedule leading up to a court session
expected to be held in .
As previously reported, in December  and in March ,
the Turkish Antitrust Authority searched the premises of sev-
eral diagnostic companies including, among others, Siemens
Healthcare Diagnostik Ticaret Limited Sirketi in Turkey, in re-
sponse to allegations of anti-competitive agreements. Siemens
cooperated with the authority. In May , the Turkish Anti-
trust Authority decided that the law had not been violated, and
discontinued the proceedings.
As previously reported, the Italian Antitrust Authority searched
the premises of several healthcare companies, among others
those of Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics S.r.l. and Siemens
S.p.A. in February . The investigation addresses allega-
tions of anti-competitive agreements in relation to a tender of
the procurement entity for the public healthcare sector in the
region of Campania for the supply of medical equipment in cal-
endar . In May , the Italian Antitrust Authority sent a
Statement of Objections to the companies under investigation
which confirmed that the proceedings against Siemens
Healthcare Diagnostics S.r.l. were closed, but accused Siemens
S.p.A. of having participated in an anti-competitive arrange-
ment. In August , the Italian Antitrust Authority fined
several companies, including Siemens S.p.A. for alleged anti-
competitive behavior. The fine imposed on Siemens S.p.A.
amounts to €. million. The company appealed the decision.
In April , the Regional Administrative Court overturned
the decision of the Italian Antitrust Authority. In November
, the Italian Antitrust Authority appealed the decision of
the Regional Administrative Court.
As previously reported, in September , the Competition
Commission of Pakistan requested Siemens Pakistan Engineer-
ing Co. Ltd., Pakistan (Siemens Pakistan), to present its legal
position regarding an alleged anti-competitive arrangement
since calendar  in the field of transformers and air-insu-
lated switchgears. Siemens cooperated with the authority. In
December , Siemens Pakistan filed a leniency application.
In April , the Competition Commission of Pakistan accept-
ed the leniency application and granted Siemens Pakistan a
% penalty reduction for the alleged behavior.
As previously reported, in June , the Turkish Antitrust
Agency confirmed its earlier decision to impose a fine in an
amount equivalent to € million on Siemens Sanayi ve Ticaret
A.S., Turkey, based on alleged antitrust violations in the traffic
lights market. Siemens Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. has appealed this
decision and this appeal is still pending.
In May , the Brazilian Anti-Trust Authority notified
Siemens Ltda., Brazil of an investigation into anti-trust behav-
ior in the field of air-insulated switchgear and other products
from calendar  to . Siemens is cooperating with the
authorities.
As mentioned above, in May , Siemens Ltda. Brazil entered
into a leniency agreement with the Administrative Council for
Economic Defense and other relevant authorities relating to
several Brazilian metro transport projects. The Company is
cooperating with the authorities. It cannot be excluded that
significant cartel damages claims will be brought by customers
against Siemens Ltda. Brazil based on the outcome of the
investigations.
OTHER PROCEEDINGS
As previously reported, Siemens AG is a member of a supplier
consortium that has been contracted to construct the nuclear
power plant “Olkiluoto ” in Finland for Teollisuuden Voima
Oyj (TVO) on a turnkey basis. Siemens AG’s share of the con-
sideration to be paid to the supplier consortium under the
contract is approximately %. The other member of the sup-
plier consortium is a further consortium consisting of Areva
NP S.A.S. and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Areva NP GmbH.
The agreed completion date for the nuclear power plant was
April , . Completion of the power plant has been de-
layed for reasons which are in dispute. In December , the
supplier consortium informed TVO that the completion of the
plant is expected in August . In February  TVO an-
nounced that it is preparing for the possibility that the start of
the regular electricity production of the plant may be post-
poned until calendar year . The supplier consortium and
TVO continue to assess the schedule and the risk of further
slippage in detail. The final phases of the plant completion re-
quire the full cooperation of all parties involved. In December
, the supplier consortium filed a request for arbitration
against TVO demanding an extension of the construction
time, additional compensation, milestone payments, damag-
es and interest. In June , the supplier consortium in-
creased its monetary claim to €. billion. TVO rejected the
claims and made counterclaims against the supplier consor-
tium consisting primarily of damages due to the delay. In June
, the arbitral tribunal rendered a partial award ordering