[2]<\/sup><\/sup><\/a> The amounts of funds allocated to provisions for litigation are those which the company considers could be necessary to meet the costs of ongoing litigation, or for any risks it has identified, even if there are no lawsuits in that regard.<\/p>\nIn this study, we have taken into account the data attributable to provisions of funds to cover probable lawsuits and other liabilities. Thus, we detail the amounts allocated by the companies of the IBEX 35<\/strong> to these provisions in 2016<\/strong> if they were included in the annual accounts, and we outline the most relevant conclusions by sectors of activity <\/strong>and types of risks or lawsuits <\/strong>they must respond to in all the markets in which they are present, though they are listed in Spain. Likewise, in some of the most significant cases, we will consider their evolution compared to the previous year (2015) and will give some information on the provisions of 2017 which have already been published during the year to date.<\/p>\nIt is necessary to clarify that, as there is no specific nomenclature <\/strong>used by all companies to refer to the provision set aside for lawsuits, the concept taken into account for this study differs in many cases (some examples are “provision for liabilities”, “provisions for taxes and other legal contingencies and other provisions\u201d, \u201cjudicial matters and lawsuits for taxes pending” or “provisions for lawsuits, compensation and other legal or contractual obligations\u201d). Therefore, it should also be noted that it is possible that not all the companies include the same items in the selected provision. Thus, while some include, for example, the provisions deriving from the regulatory framework, others only mention the costs equal to the amounts claimed in the lawsuits.<\/p>\n[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section admin_label=”section”][et_pb_row admin_label=”Fila”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=”OIL AND ENERGY SECTOR” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid”]<\/p>\n
OIL AND ENERGY SECTOR<\/span><\/h1>\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_tabs admin_label=”Pesta\u00f1as” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” custom_css_tabs_controls=”margin-left: 0px !important;” custom_css_tab=”list-style: none !important;” saved_tabs=”all” module_class=”tab-close”] [et_pb_tab title=”ENAGAS ” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em”]<\/p>\n
Provisions:<\/span> <\/strong>11.235,000 \u20ac<\/p>\nMain litigations:<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- It does not disclose any litigation in 2016. It only refers to a litigation that the \u00a0Sociedad Compa\u00f1\u00eda Transportista de Gas Canaria had with the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) that was concluded after the announcement of the TSJ of Madrid in January 2016.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Deferred tax assets and liabilities: Provisions for litigation and others.<\/em><\/span>
\n<\/em><\/span>Source used: Consolidated annual accounts.\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n[\/et_pb_tab][et_pb_tab title=”REPSOL” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em” background_color=”#00ab59″]<\/p>\n
Provisions:\u00a0<\/strong>1.501,000,000 \u20ac<\/p>\nMain litigations:<\/span><\/h4>\nUnited Kingdom:<\/span><\/strong> Arbitration against Talisman for the purchase of shares that required the repayment of the amount invested. Claim to Repsol for \u00a0the leakage in the Galley pipeline.<\/p>\nUnited States<\/span><\/strong>: Lawsuit against Repsol for polluting the Passaic River.<\/p>\nSpain:\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>Supreme Court recognizes the right of Repsol to be compensated for the setting of the maximum price of bottled LPG.<\/p>\nTax litigations:<\/span><\/h4>\nBolivia:<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0\u00a0Litigation against administrative acts that deny the deductibility of certain concepts.<\/p>\nBrazil:<\/strong><\/span> Formal breach of material movements from the mainland to the oil platform.<\/p>\nCanada<\/span>:<\/strong>\u00a0The Canadian Administration denied the application of tax inventions. In 2015, the Tax Court issued a favorable ruling for Repsol.<\/p>\nEcuador:<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0The Internal Revenue Service of Ecuador denied the deductibility in the Income Tax of the tariff payments for transportation of crude oil.<\/p>\nSpain:<\/strong><\/span> Irregularities in Corporate Tax and retentions related to transfer prices, deduction of losses due to investments abroad.<\/p>\nIndonesia:<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>Various claims relative to the imposition on the benefit of the the group.<\/p>\nMalaysia:<\/span><\/strong> \u00a0Deductibility of certain expenditures.<\/p>\nTimor:<\/span><\/strong> Deductibility of certain expenses in the tax on benefits.<\/p>\nTrinidad and Tobago:<\/strong> <\/span>\u00a0Taxes relative to the financial years of Impuestos relativos a los ejercicios 2003-2009.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Visions:\u00a0This section includes tax claims, litigation and arbitration, among others.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\nSource used: Consolidated annual accounts.\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n[\/et_pb_tab][et_pb_tab title=”ENDESA” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em”]<\/p>\n
Provisions:<\/strong>\u00a0732.000,000 \u20ac<\/p>\nRESOURCE AND CLAIMS:\u00a0<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Appeal of cassation before AN related to a surplus value. There is no significant impact on the company.<\/li>\n
- Claim for damages for breach of agreement when not constructing a substation (2013).<\/li>\n
- Delivery of 25% of the energy produced by\u00a0the Ebro hydroelectric projects.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
FIRES:<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- 2 procedimientos judiciales en curso contra Endesa por incendios forestales en Catalu\u00f1a de los que pudieran resultar reclamaciones por da\u00f1os y perjuicios por aproximadamente 23 millones de euros.<\/li>\n
- La Junta de Andaluc\u00eda reclama a Endesa una indmenizaci\u00f3n por da\u00f1os y perjuicios derivada de un incendio (2016).<\/li>\n
- 2 ongoing legal proceedings against Endesa for forest fires in Catalonia which could result in claims for damages of approximately 23 million euros.<\/li>\n
- The Junta de Andaluc\u00eda wants to be compensated by Endesa for the damages derived from a fire (2016).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
FINES:<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Fine for a serious infringement in breach of the obligation to adapt to the new law on the regime of ownership of the operating authorizations of nuclear power plants.<\/li>\n
- 4 sanctions of the Ministry of Energy (2009) for the release of radioactive particles in 2007.<\/li>\n
- Sanctioning file initiated in 2013 for non-compliance in the control of the unused radioactive sources.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
COMPETENCE:<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- The CNMC notifies a sanction against Endesa for abusing its\u00a0power.<\/li>\n
- Fine for an abusive conduct in the electrical installations market (2012).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
FISCAL:\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n\n- The Tax Agency notified the initiation of inspections (currently ongoing) in relation to the IS, VAT and withholding tax.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Other provisions: Provisions for litigation, indemnities and other legal or contractual obligations.\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/p>\nSource used: Consolidated annual accounts.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n
[\/et_pb_tab][et_pb_tab title=”GAS NATURAL ” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em”]<\/p>\n
Provisions:<\/strong> 345.000,000 \u20ac<\/p>\nTAX LITIGATIONS:<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- It corresponds to the deduction for export activities in the fiscal years of 2003 to 2008.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
CONTINGENT LIABILITIES:<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- The Tax Administration of Rio de Janeiro does not recognize the offsetting of the credits for the contributions on certain sales.<\/li>\n
- Claim of amount against the branch in Panama. The company, claiming damages, was awarded a public contest, although it was not finally able to comply with the guarantees required in the bidding documents.<\/li>\n
- Arbitration proceedings against Qatar Liquified Gas Company with the aim of fixing the prices for the gas supplies that this company receives.<\/li>\n
- Egyptian Natural Gas Holding ceased supplying gas to Uni\u00f3n Fenosa Gas (50% owned by Gas Natural Fenosa) as well as the plant’s usage fee. Union Fenosa Gas has initiated arbitration against Egypt and the supplier.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Other provisions: Included in this section are tax claims, litigation, arbitration and contingent liabilities, among others.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\nSource used: Consolidated annual accounts.\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n[\/et_pb_tab][et_pb_tab title=”IBERDROLA” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em”]<\/p>\n
Provisions:<\/strong> 600.733,000 \u20ac<\/p>\nQUANTITY CLAIMS\u00a0<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Banco Mare Nostrum (BMN) files a lawsuit against Iberdrola requesting the nullity of the deed of sale of certain installments.<\/li>\n
- Iberdrola files a lawsuit for a quantity against GESA Group, who replied requesting the payment of 4 million euros for the bonus of success left to pay, when processing and granting megawatts to Iberdrola in Andalusian wind contests.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
LITIGATIONS WITH OTHER COMPANIES<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Iberdrola files a lawsuit against Bankia for losses suffered after investing in shares. Iberdrola claims that the information provided by Bankia in the prospectus was “seriously inaccurate, incorrect and false.”<\/li>\n
- Iberdrola, together with other affected companies, claims to Euskaltel the payment of the variable price agreed in the purchase agreement when it acquired shares of the company in 2012.<\/li>\n
- Scottish Power (of Iberdrola) has initiated legal proceedings against BP for breach of a gas supply contract.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Iberdrola has filed several contentious-administrative appeals against regulatory provisions.<\/li>\n
- Administrative procedure inherited after the absorption of a Greek energy company. Iberdrola faces a fine from the Greek Securities Market Commission as part of the formulation of the takeover bid in 2008.<\/li>\n
- Iberdrola considers “excessive and disproportionate” the provisional liquidation of the City of Lorca.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Arbitration<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n- Arbitration procedure before the International Chamber of Commerce initiated by the purchasing company of 30 wind farms that belong to Iberdrola. They claim the breach of the declarations and guarantees provided in the contract on the maximum allowed noise levels.<\/li>\n
- Arbitration lawsuit against Iberdrola of a Canadian subcontractor for executed work, surcharges and delays.<\/li>\n
- Iberdrola initiated an arbitration procedure in order to claim damages caused by the client’s actions in Kenya<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Others<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n- Claims for environmental breach against Iberdrola.<\/li>\n
- Iberdrola asks to be recognized the ownership of a plot against 18 co-owners who claim to have a title on the estate.<\/li>\n
- Elektro (a subsidiary of Iberdrola in Brazil) is seeking annulment of the Court’s decision to include the company in the payment of highway use fees.<\/li>\n
- The California Public Utilities Commission is claiming against several electricity-producing companies for market manipulation on the grounds that the prices of energy sales contracts were “unfair and unreasonable.”<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Other provisions: Provisions for litigations, compensation, and other contractual and legal obligations.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\nSource used: Consolidated annual accounts.\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n[\/et_pb_tab][et_pb_tab title=”RED EL\u00c9CTRICA DE ESPA\u00d1A ” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em”]<\/p>\n
Provisions:<\/strong> 39.053,000 \u20ac<\/p>\nLITIGATIONS<\/span><\/h4>\nOnly mentions that the Group “does not have litigations regarding protection and improvement of the environment”.<\/p>\n
Non-current provisions: Other provisions\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/p>\nSource used: Consolidated annual accounts.\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n[\/et_pb_tab] [\/et_pb_tabs][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][et_pb_row admin_label=”Fila”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=”BASIC MATERIALS. INDUSTRY AND CONSTRUCTION SECTOR” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid”]<\/p>\n
BASIC MATERIALS. INDUSTRY AND CONSTRUCTION SECTOR<\/span><\/h1>\n[\/et_pb_text][et_pb_tabs admin_label=”Pesta\u00f1as” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid” custom_css_tabs_controls=”margin-left: 0px !important;” custom_css_tab=”list-style: none !important;” module_class=”tab-close”] [et_pb_tab title=”ARCELORMITTAL” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em”]<\/p>\n
Provisions:<\/strong> 351.000,000 (expressed\u00a0inUSD in their accounts: 413.000.000 USD \/\/ equivalent: 1 d\u00f3lar = 1.18 \u20ac)<\/p>\nFISCAL AND COMPETENCE CLAIMS:<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Tax claims of $ 211 in Brazil, France, Mexico, Ukraine.<\/li>\n
- Competition \/ antitrust claims in the US, Brazil, Romania, South Africa and Germany.<\/li>\n
- \u00a0Other legal claims valued at USD 202 in Argentina, Canada, Italy, Luxembourg, Senegal and France.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Litigation and other<\/i><\/span><\/p>\nSource used:\u00a0Annual Report<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n[\/et_pb_tab][et_pb_tab title=”ACERINOX” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em”]<\/p>\n
Provisions<\/strong>:<\/span> 387.000 \u20ac<\/p>\nLITIGATIONS AND CLAIMS<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Labor claim.<\/li>\n
- Complaint of the CDTI (Centro de Desarrollo Tecnol\u00f3gico Industrial) for the reimbursement of a subsidy from a consortium of companies, including Acerinox.<\/li>\n
- Litigation with the Port Authority of Algeciras and France’s electricity company.
\nLabor claim.<\/li>\n - Complaint of the CDTI (Industrial Technology Development Center) for the reimbursement of a subsidy from a consortium of companies, including Acerinox.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Other provisions: Litigations\u00a0<\/em><\/span><\/p>\nSource used: Consolidated annual accounts.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n[\/et_pb_tab][et_pb_tab title=”ACCIONA” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em”]<\/p>\n
Provisions:<\/strong> 170.00,000 \u20ac<\/p>\nCIVIL CLAIMS:\u00a0<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- For defects in construction of the works carried out and complaints regarding discrepancies in the provision of services, among others.<\/li>\n
- Claims for construction defects against the company.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
LAWSUITS:<\/span><\/strong><\/h4>\n\n- Against the energy division (contractual breach in the United States).<\/li>\n
- In the area of infrastructure.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
APPEAL:<\/span><\/strong><\/h4>\n\n- Contentious-administrative \u00a0interjected by ATLL (Catalonia).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Non-current liabilities: Provisions and litigations.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\nSource used: Consolidated annual accounts.\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n[\/et_pb_tab][et_pb_tab title=”GRUPO ACS” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em”]<\/p>\n
Provisions<\/strong>: 831.807,000 \u20ac<\/p>\nARBITRATION: <\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Request by the concession company Metro de Lima L\u00ednea 2, S.A. against the Republic of Peru for the serious breach of the concession contract.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
COMPETENCIA:\u00a0<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Appeal against the CNMC in relation to the modular building business.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
OTROS:<\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Litigation derived by a potential right of having the option of the sale of the “builder partners” of Alazor on “non-builders”.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Provisions for responsibilities: The section includes litigations, environment, guarantees and contractual and legal obligations.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\nSource used: Consolidated annual accounts.\u00a0\u00a0<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n[\/et_pb_tab][et_pb_tab title=”GRUPO FERROVIAL” tab_font_select=”default” tab_font=”||||” tab_line_height=”2em” tab_line_height_tablet=”2em” tab_line_height_phone=”2em” body_font_select=”default” body_font=”||||” body_line_height=”2em” body_line_height_tablet=”2em” body_line_height_phone=”2em”]<\/p>\n
Provisions:<\/strong> 415.000,000 \u20ac<\/p>\nPROVISIONS OF FISCAL CHARACTER: <\/span>247 millions.<\/h4>\n\n- Taxes, taxes or local \/ state taxes for different interpretations that could be given to the tax rules in the different countries where the group operates.<\/li>\n
- Tax claims by Promociones Habitat (20% of Ferrovial), pending resolution or payment. No amount is specified.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
LITIGATIONS IN RELATION TO THE HIGHWAY BUSINESS: <\/span><\/strong><\/h4>\n\n- Demand for the Terresa Manresa (Autema) Motorway, controlled by Ferrovial, against the Generalitat de Catalunya by Decree 161\/2015. It is in the process of being answered by the Generalitat and the Regional Council of Bages.<\/li>\n
- Demand for M-203 Motorway, Ferrovial concessionaire, against the Community of Madrid. Failure in appeal in favor of Ferrovial, is expected to enter 63 million of the CM.<\/li>\n
- Lawsuit against I-77 North Carolina Highway (Ferrovial concessionaire). Appeal awaiting for sentence. Investment\u00a0of 1 million euros.<\/li>\n
- Motorway AP36 Oca\u00f1a- La Roda. The company is still in settlement process. – Radial Motorway 4. Creditors contest process, settlement has not yet begun.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
LITIGATIONS RELATED TO THE CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS: aprox. 127 litigations.<\/span><\/span><\/h4>\n\n- Possible defects in construction of the works carried out and claims for civil liability.<\/li>\n
- Muelle del Prat. It is estimated the appeal filed by the companies where they are absolved. The Port of Barcelona presents an appeal. Currently pending resolution.<\/li>\n
- Arbitration in relation to works at the Warsaw airport. It is a complaint addressed to the joint venture formed by Ferrovial and Budimex (Polish subsidiary of Ferrovial) for cancellation of the execution contract.<\/li>\n
- Civil suit against Budimex by the General Directorate of Roads and Highways in Poland. February 2017 the lawsuit is withdrawn so there is no provision for this litigation.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
LITIGATIONS RELATED TO THE SERVICES BUSINESS: <\/span><\/strong><\/h4>\nUnited Kingdom<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n\n- Provision of 50 million for a litigation relating to the contract Amey (subsidiary) maintains with the Birmingham City Council. (Currently in negotiations with the City Council to reach a solution). There is a favorable sentence to Amey against which there is appeal by the City.<\/li>\n
- Amey’s claim to a client (Cumbria County Council). Court sentence in favor of Amey. Currently, the parties discuss the final amount of legal costs (possibility of judicial appeal).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n