312
Annual Report -
2013
-
Vivendi
4
Financial Report | Statutory Auditors’ Report on the Consolidated Financial Statements |
Consolidated
Financial Statements
| Statutory Auditors’ Report on the Financial Statements | Statutory Financial Statements
Note 28. Litigation
Vivendi, based on the rights of CH III obtained in the settlement, sued
Stephen Bloch, a former Director of CH III, and Murray Richards, the
purchaser of CH III. The trial took place from June 12 through June 27,
2013, and on October 9, 2013, the High Court in London ruled in favor of
Vivendi. On October 25, 2013, Court entered a judgment requiring the
defendants to pay the sum of £9,666,437.
■
■
Vivendi’s complaint against Orange before the
European Commission for abuse of a dominant
position
On March 2, 2009, Vivendi and Free jointly filed a complaint against
Orange before the European Commission (the “Commission”), for abuse
of a dominant position. Vivendi and Free allege that Orange imposes
excessive tariffs on offers for access to its fixed network and on
telephone subscriptions. In July 2009, Bouygues Telecom joined in this
complaint. In a letter dated February 2, 2010, the Commission informed
the parties of its intention to dismiss the complaint. On September 17,
2010, Vivendi filed an appeal before the Court of First Instance of the
European Union in Luxemburg. On October 16, 2013, the Court denied
Vivendi’s appeal.
■
■
Free against SFR
On May 21, 2012, Free filed a complaint against SFR with the Paris
Commercial Court. Free is challenging SFR’s model of subsidizing mobile
phone purchases through what Free calls “concealed” consumer loans
and claims this constitutes an unfair and deceptive trade practice. On
January 15, 2013, the Court dismissed Free’s claims and ordered it to
pay to SFR €300,000 in damages for defamation and €100,000 for costs.
Free appealed this decision.
■
■
Orange against SFR
On August 10, 2011, Orange filed a claim against SFR before the Paris
Commercial Court. Orange asked the Court to compel SFR to stop
the overflow traffic at the point of interconnection of their respective
networks. On December 10, 2013, SFR was ordered to pay €22,133,512
to Orange. On January 10, 2014, SFR appealed this decision.
■
■
Complaint against Orange before the French
Competition Authority
On August 9, 2010, SFR filed a complaint before the French Competition
Authority against Orange for anti-competitive practices on the
professional mobile market. This case is under investigation.
■
■
SFR against Orange
On April 24, 2012, SFR filed a complaint against Orange before the Paris
Commercial Court for practices constituting an abuse of its dominant
position in the secondary residence market. On February 12, 2014, the
Paris Commercial Court ordered Orange to pay €51 million in damages.
■
■
Complaint lodged with the French Competition
Authority by Orange Réunion, Orange Mayotte,
and Outremer Télécom against Société
Réunionnaise du Radiotéléphone (SRR)
Orange Réunion, Orange Mayotte and Outremer Télécom notified the
French Competition Authority about alleged unfair price discrimination
practices implemented by SRR. On September 16, 2009, the French
Competition Authority imposed protective measures on SRR, pending
its decision on the merits.
SRR was required to end price differences that exceed the costs
borne by SRR based on the network called (off-net/on-net). The French
Competition Authority found that SRR had not fully complied with the
order it had imposed and, on January 24, 2012, ordered SRR to pay a
fine of €2 million. With regard to the proceedings on the merits, on
July 31, 2013, SRR signed a statement of no contest to grievances and
a letter of commitments. Accordingly, the Deputy Reporter General will
propose to the College of the French Competition Authority that the fine
incurred by SRR be reduced.
Following the French Competition Authority’s decision of September 16, 2009,
Outremer Télécom sued SRR on June 17, 2013, before the Paris
Commercial Court for damages it claims to have suffered as a result
of SRR’s practices. On November 13, 2013, the Court stayed the
proceedings until the French Competition Authority issues its decision
on the merits of the case.
■
■
Complaint of Bouygues Telecom against SFR and
Orange in connection with the call termination
and mobile markets
Bouygues Telecom brought a claim before the French Competition
Council against SFR and Orange for certain alleged unfair trading
practices in the call termination and mobile markets (“price scissoring”).
On May 15, 2009, the French Competition Authority (the “Authority”)
resolved to postpone its decision on the issue and remanded the case
for further investigation. On December 13, 2010, SFR was heard on
these allegations by the instructing magistrate. On August 18, 2011,
SFR received a notification of grievances in which the Authority
noted the existence of abusive price discrimination practices.
On December 13, 2012, the Authority fined SFR €66 million. SFR has
appealed this decision. The case will be argued before the Paris Court
of Appeal on February 20, 2014.
Following the decision of the French Competition Authority on
December 13, 2012, Bouygues Telecom, OMEA and El Telecom (NRJ
Mobile) brought a claim before the Paris Commercial Court against SFR
for damages suffered. They are seeking damages of €623.6 million,
€67.9 million and €28.6 million, respectively. SFR strongly disputes the
validity and the amount, which Vivendi believes cannot, in any case,
exceed €250 million in total, of these claims. Pending the decision
of the Paris Court of Appeal, the mediation process underway in the
Paris Commercial Court between Bouygues Telecom and SFR has been
suspended.
■
■
UFC against SFR
On June 7, 2012, the French Federal Union of Consumers (UFC) filed
a complaint against Orange before the Paris Court of First Instance
(Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris). It alleges that the general
conditions of use of SFR’s
La Carte
offering contain abusive clauses,
which it is seeking to have removed.
■
■
CLCV against SFR and others
On January 7, 2013, the French consumer protection association, CLCV
(consumption, housing and quality of life) sued several French telecom
operators, including SFR, before the Paris Tribunal of First Instance. It
is seeking the removal of certain clauses that it considers abusive from
subscription contracts.
