Porsche 2010 Annual Report Download - page 213
Download and view the complete annual report
Please find page 213 of the 2010 Porsche 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.-
1 -
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
-
11
-
12
-
13
-
14
-
15
-
16
-
17
-
18
-
19
-
20
-
21
-
22
-
23
-
24
-
25
-
26
-
27
-
28
-
29
-
30
-
31
-
32
-
33
-
34
-
35
-
36
-
37
-
38
-
39
-
40
-
41
-
42
-
43
-
44
-
45
-
46
-
47
-
48
-
49
-
50
-
51
-
52
-
53
-
54
-
55
-
56
-
57
-
58
-
59
-
60
-
61
-
62
-
63
-
64
-
65
-
66
-
67
-
68
-
69
-
70
-
71
-
72
-
73
-
74
-
75
-
76
-
77
-
78
-
79
-
80
-
81
-
82
-
83
-
84
-
85
-
86
-
87
-
88
-
89
-
90
-
91
-
92
-
93
-
94
-
95
-
96
-
97
-
98
-
99
-
100
-
101
-
102
-
103
-
104
-
105
-
106
-
107
-
108
-
109
-
110
-
111
-
112
-
113
-
114
-
115
-
116
-
117
-
118
-
119
-
120
-
121
-
122
-
123
-
124
-
125
-
126
-
127
-
128
-
129
-
130
-
131
-
132
-
133
-
134
-
135
-
136
-
137
-
138
-
139
-
140
-
141
-
142
-
143
-
144
-
145
-
146
-
147
-
148
-
149
-
150
-
151
-
152
-
153
-
154
-
155
-
156
-
157
-
158
-
159
-
160
-
161
-
162
-
163
-
164
-
165
-
166
-
167
-
168
-
169
-
170
-
171
-
172
-
173
-
174
-
175
-
176
-
177
-
178
-
179
-
180
-
181
-
182
-
183
-
184
-
185
-
186
-
187
-
188
-
189
-
190
-
191
-
192
-
193
-
194
-
195
-
196
-
197
-
198
-
199
-
200
-
201
-
202
-
203 -
204 -
205 -
206 -
207 -
208 -
209 -
210 -
211 -
212 -
213 -
214 -
215 -
216 -
217 -
218 -
219 -
220 -
221 -
222 -
223 -
224
-
225
-
226
-
227
-
228
-
229
-
230
-
231
-
232
-
233
-
234
-
235
-
236
-
237
-
238
-
239
 |
 |
211
[27] Subsequent events
In January 2011, all plaintiffs appealed against the dismissal by the United States District Court
for the Southern District of New York of actions for damages against Porsche SE.
In January 2011, a private investor filed a claim for damages against Porsche SE and an-
other defendant in the amount of approximately €3 million. The plaintiff claims to have entered into
options relating to shares in Volkswagen AG in 2008 on the basis of inaccurate information and the
omission of information as well as market manipulation by Porsche SE and to have incurred losses
from these options due to the share price development in 2008 in the amounts claimed. The action
is currently pending in the Regional Court of Stuttgart. Porsche SE considers the asserted claims to
be without merit and will defend itself against the claims.
In addition, the Stuttgart public prosecutor announced on 22 February 2011 that the inves-
tigations against the former members of the executive board Dr. Wendelin Wiedeking and Holger P.
Härter in connection with allegations of manipulating the market in Volkswagen shares were taking
longer than planned. They are not expected to be concluded before the start of 2012. In addition,
the public prosecutor is investigating the two former members of the executive board in connection
with allegations of breach of fiduciary duty to the detriment of Porsche SE. According to the public
prosecutor, there is reason to suspect that the two former members of the executive board may
have taken risks jeopardizing the company’s ability to continue as a going concern by entering into
share price hedging transactions in the course of acquiring the shareholding in Volkswagen AG.
According to the public prosecutor, the investigations on suspicion of trading-based (not information-
based) market manipulation have been dropped. Please refer to note [25] for details of the litigation.
On 18 February 2011, three plaintiffs filed an action for damages in New York state court. In
their complaint, which has not yet been served on Porsche SE, they allege common law fraud and
unjust enrichment based on allegations similar to those made in the US claims set out above. The
plaintiffs claim to have lost at least 390 million US dollars. Porsche SE believes this claim to be
legally insufficient and without merit.