to download the 2012 registration document. - Groupe M6

More documents

Recommendations

Info

RISK FACTORS AND MANAGEMENTM6 Group disputes the validity of these claims.A judgment concerning 22 participants, in favour of M6, was delivered by an Industrial Tribunal inNanterre (Conseil des Prud’hommes de Nanterre) on 30 March 2012, finding that the candidates did nothave an employment contract but had a contract to participate in a gameshow, and therefore excludingthem from the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal in favour of the jurisdiction of the Regional Court(Tribunal de Grande Instance).The 22 candidates made an objection to the Court of Appeal which gave its ruling on 12 February 2013.The Versailles Court of Appeal decided on these disputes in accordance with current case law andacknowledged that each candidate had an employment contract.Nevertheless, these rulings are not final since Studio 89 Productions, the producer of the programmesconcerned, has filed an appeal with the Supreme Court in relation to these 22 claims.Despite this case law against television channels and production companies, it is important to note that ajudgment in favour of the M6 Group relating to 7 participants in the programme Pékin Express wasreturned on 13 March 2013 by the Industrial Tribunal of Nanterre, which reiterated that it had nojurisdiction in view of the fact that Pékin Express was an audiovisual gameshow and that the plaintiffs hadnot provided proof of the existence of an employment contract.The 7 candidates will also be able to appeal to the Versailles Court of Appeal.The other submissions are awaiting trial or consideration by the Boulogne-Billancourt Industrial Tribunal(Conseil de Prud’hommes de Boulogne-Billancourt).b) Notification of complaint by the Competition AuthorityOn 7 January 2009, stakeholders to the CanalSat TPS merger transaction that created Canal + Francereceived a notification of complaint from the French Competition Authority, which has since become theCompetition Authority, as the Committee’s Reporting Secretary considered that certain clauses of theagreement entered into by the two parties could be criticised in light of Competition regulations. In itsruling of 16 November 2010, the French Competition Authority considered that it was not its role to callinto question the exclusivity and non-competition clauses concluded between Canal + Distribution andM6 Group, which had been notified to the Ministry for the Economy and which was expressly authorisedby the latter in its decision to authorise the merger between CanalSat and TPS.This decision has not put a complete end to prosecution against Canal Plus, TF1, Métropole Télévisionand Lagardère, since the Authority claimed jurisdiction to examine, as part of the transfer to theexamining judge, exclusivity clauses relative to optic fibre and catch-up TV services concluded betweenCanal + Distribution and M6 Group, which, in the Authority’s opinion, were not included in the ruling ofthe Ministry for the Economy. This ruling by the Competition Authority was subject to an appeal beforethe Court of Appeal of Paris by France Telecom. M6 Group communicated with this court at its owninitiative. France Télécom finally withdrew this last claim, which was acknowledged by the Court ofAppeal of Paris in its ruling of 8 December 2011. The appeals procedure remains on-going.Although the M6 Group disputes the merits of this procedure, it cannot rule out the possibility of having afinancial penalty imposed on it.In addition, in a ruling dated 20 September 2011, the Competition Authority stated that the Canal PlusGroup had not honoured several commitments taken under the Minister for the Economy, Finance andIndustry’s ruling of 30 August 2006, which authorised the acquisition of TPS by Vivendi Universal andCanal+.The Authority thus fined CANAL + and withdrew its authorisation; Canal+ had to submit the requestagain. As an interested party (distribution of the Group’s channels), M6 Group participated in theAuthority’s market tests in 2012. The Competition Authority authorised the acquisition in a decision dated23 July 2012. The CANAL+ Group having lodged appeals against these two decisions, M6 Groupbecame a voluntary third party to this action. In two rulings dated 21 December 2012, the Conseil d’Etatdefinitively upheld the aforementioned decisions of the Competition Authority, as well as the injunctionstaken out against the Canal + Group companies for a minimum duration of five years, thus guaranteeingminimal protection as regards distribution of independent channels, including those of M6 Group.126 - M6 GROUP - 2012 REGISTRATION DOCUMENT
RISK FACTORS AND MANAGEMENTc) Exclusive takeover of Direct 8, Direct Star, Direct Productions, Direct Digital and BolloréIntermédia by Vivendi and CANAL + GroupIn a decision dated 23 July 2012, the Competition Authority authorised the exclusive takeover of thecompanies Direct 8, Direct Star, Direct Productions, Direct Digital and Bolloré Intermédia by VivendiCANAL + Group. M6 Group lodged an appeal against this decision to the Conseil d’Etat.M6 Group also lodged an appeal to the Conseil d’Etat against the CSA’s decision dated 18 September2012 authorising, under Article 42-3 of the Law of 30 September 1986, the sale to Canal Plus Group ofthe Direct 8 and Direct Star companies.d) Settlement of a dispute before the Conseil Supérieur de l’AudiovisuelWithin the framework of a referral to the CSA by France Télévisions, relating to the positioning of theFrance 5 TV channel in the new national service plan of the Numéricable cable operator, the ParisPremière channel which had effectively been granted the 5 th channel claimed by the public service wasparty to settlement agreement in 2010. The CSA ruled in favour of Numericable, in a ruling dated 9November 2011, which rejected the request for dispute settlement from France Télévisions and thusruled in favour of Paris Première who retains channel no 5 on Numericable. France Télévisions lodged anappeal against this decision to the Conseil d’Etat.e) Other appeals before the Conseil d’EtatAs regards the appeals of the authors’ and producers’ unions contesting the investment levels made byM6 in production in 2009, the Conseil d’Etat agreed with the CSA, ruling that these investments satisfiedthe channel’s obligations and rejected all the unions’ demands. From 2010, M6 thus continued itsinvestments without additional charges.In addition, the Conseil d’Etat rejected the interim application submitted by several local televisionchannels relating to the new numbering allocated by the CSA to the DTT HD channels selected in 2012.Consequently, 6ter could be launched immediately on channel 22 as early as 12 December 2012. TheM6 Group had given its backing to the regulation authority before the Conseil d’Etat which must now ruleon the substance of the case.Lastly, M6 Group contested the absence of its compensation channel, an award which, as set out in thelaw, is possible since the phasing out of analogue broadcasting.The financial risks arising from all the matters in progress, with the most significant described above, wereestimated prudently and provided for where required in the financial statements of the Group (see Note28 to the consolidated financial statements).To date, there are no governmental, legal or arbitrage procedures, including any procedure known to theCompany, that is pending or of which it is threatened, which is likely to have or having had a significanteffect in the last twelve months on the financial position or profitability of the Group.M6 GROUP - 2012 REGISTRATION DOCUMENT - 127
Page 4:
DisclaimerThis report is an English
Page 8:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATION1. M6 Group pr
Page 13 and 14:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATION1.4.2. 2012 fi
Page 15 and 16:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATION• Another am
Page 17 and 18:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONIn total, the
Page 19 and 20:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONIndividual Wat
Page 21 and 22:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATION Historic chan
Page 23 and 24:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONThe top ten M6
Page 25 and 26:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONChange in the
Page 27 and 28:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONshown-before s
Page 29 and 30:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONIn order to co
Page 31 and 32:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONSND was the le
Page 33 and 34:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONa) Business pr
Page 35 and 36:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONExcerpt of Top
Page 37 and 38:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONMistergooddeal
Page 39 and 40:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONwill be built
Page 41 and 42:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONSTATUTORY ALLO
Page 43 and 44:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONHowever, a Gen
Page 45 and 46:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONAs a network w
Page 47 and 48:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONb) Provisions
Page 49 and 50:
M6 GROUP PRESENTATIONThe amendment
Page 51 and 52:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCECORPORATE GOVER
Page 53 and 54:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCEMembers of the
Page 55 and 56:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE- Chairman of t
Page 57 and 58:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE- Manager of P7
Page 59 and 60:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCEAppointments an
Page 61 and 62:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCEDelphine ARNAUL
Page 63 and 64:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCEThe missions an
Page 65 and 66:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE- Director of C
Page 67 and 68:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCEcharge of imple
Page 69 and 70:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCEJérôme Leféb
Page 71 and 72:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCEa) Basis of com
Page 73 and 74:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCEtwo years of ad
Page 75 and 76:
CORPORATE GOVERNANCEb) Free shares
Page 77 and 78: CORPORATE GOVERNANCERobin LEPROUX 2
Page 79 and 80: CORPORATE GOVERNANCE- no family con
Page 81 and 82: CORPORATE GOVERNANCEEight of these
Page 83 and 84: CORPORATE GOVERNANCEMinutes are pre
Page 85 and 86: CORPORATE GOVERNANCEonce a year and
Page 87 and 88: CORPORATE GOVERNANCE• matters rel
Page 89 and 90: CORPORATE GOVERNANCE- Excluding Rob
Page 91 and 92: CORPORATE GOVERNANCE5.1.3 Allocatio
Page 93 and 94: CORPORATE GOVERNANCE- an Ethics Cha
Page 95 and 96: CORPORATE GOVERNANCEAt the balance
Page 97 and 98: CORPORATE GOVERNANCEbecoming famili
Page 99 and 100: CORPORATE GOVERNANCESHARE CAPITAL33
Page 101 and 102: SHARE CAPITALStock market performan
Page 103 and 104: SHARE CAPITAL3.4. Cash dividend pol
Page 105 and 106: SHARE CAPITAL- At least one third o
Page 107 and 108: SHARE CAPITALChange in the number o
Page 109 and 110: SHARE CAPITALTreasury shares alloca
Page 111 and 112: SHARE CAPITALDate of General Meetin
Page 113 and 114: SHARE CAPITALDate of General Meetin
Page 115 and 116: SHARE CAPITALControlled companies h
Page 117 and 118: SHARE CAPITAL3.10.4.4. Identificati
Page 119 and 120: RISK FACTORS AND MANAGEMENTRISK FAC
Page 121 and 122: RISK FACTORS AND MANAGEMENT4.1.2. D
Page 123 and 124: RISK FACTORS AND MANAGEMENT4.1.5. P
Page 125 and 126: RISK FACTORS AND MANAGEMENTIt is po
Page 127: RISK FACTORS AND MANAGEMENT4.5.3. R
Page 131 and 132: RISK FACTORS AND MANAGEMENT• the
Page 133 and 134: RISK FACTORS AND MANAGEMENT4.7. Ind
Page 135 and 136: 2012 FINANCIAL REPORT2012 FINANCIAL
Page 137 and 138: 2012 FINANCIAL REPORT5.1.1.2. Conso
Page 139 and 140: 2012 FINANCIAL REPORT5.1.2.2. M6 TV
Page 141 and 142: 2012 FINANCIAL REPORTAdvertising an
Page 143 and 144: 2012 FINANCIAL REPORT- the disposal
Page 145 and 146: 2012 FINANCIAL REPORTthe reliabilit
Page 147 and 148: 2012 FINANCIAL REPORTIt sets and de
Page 149 and 150: 2012 FINANCIAL REPORTParent company
Page 151 and 152: 2012 FINANCIAL REPORT5.4.3. Diversi
Page 153 and 154: 2012 FINANCIAL REPORT2012 FINANCIAL
Page 155 and 156: 2012 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELAT
Page 179 and 180:
2012 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND RELAT
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND CORPORA
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
COMBINED GENERAL MEETING OF 13 MAY
Page 273 and 274:
COMBINED GENERAL MEETING8.2. Report
Page 275 and 276:
COMBINED GENERAL MEETING8.3. Report
Page 277 and 278:
COMBINED GENERAL MEETINGIn ordinary
Page 279 and 280:
COMBINED GENERAL MEETING- ensure ad
Page 281 and 282:
COMBINED GENERAL MEETINGOTHER INFOR
Page 283 and 284:
OTHER INFORMATION9.4. Person respon
Page 285 and 286:
OTHER INFORMATION14. ADMINISTRATIVE
Page 287 and 288:
OTHER INFORMATIONiv.Reports of the
Page 290:
288 - M6 GROUP - 2012 REGISTRATION
show all

to download the 2012 registration document. - Groupe M6

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?