Half-yearly financial Report at June 30, 2013 - A2A

Half-yearly financial report at June 30, 2013Other informationOn November 10, 2008, Consul Latina attempted to file a new claim against BAS S.p.A., EXP095148, requesting information about Enerfin S.r.l. in liquidation, designed to find out if ASMS.p.A. was still a shareholder or, if it had sold the investment, the sales price. On November 16,2009, the judge ordered A2A S.p.A. to pay a fine of 300 pesos per day from May 6, 2009 for nothaving provided the information required about the sale on that date; the lawyers immediatelyappealed against this sentence and for this reason no fine was paid. On June 30, 2011, the Courtof Appeal repealed the interim statement that declared A2A S.p.A to be the defaulting party,hence A2A S.p.A., who had never paid the daily penalty, was released from this obligation.In February 2010, A2A S.p.A. renewed the mandate of the legal firm Garrido to find a way ofsettling the original lawsuit brought by Consul Latina and take the necessary steps to revokethe lien filed by Consul Latina on HISA’s subsidiaries. At the end of September 2011 the legalteam advised of a proposed settlement, however without documenting the actual terms,submitted by Consul Latina for US$ 3.9 million. A2A S.p.A. communicated that this would notbe acceptable, confirming its availability to settle for up to US$ 750 thousand. No informationis available about Consul Latina’s formal response. In June 2013, A2A S.p.A.’s lawyers advisedthat under instruction from HISA’s current shareholders, Aseguradores de Cauciones S.A.intends to request a guarantee from A2A S.p.A. in the form of a deposit regarding theobligation to pay Consul Latina, having HISA’s present shareholder as the beneficiary. Checksare currently taking place.117The company is represented by the legal firm Garrido of Buenos Aires.ENEL/AEM Elettricità S.p.A. (now A2A Reti Elettriche S.p.A., a subsidiary of A2A S.p.A.)By means of a writ served in 2001, ENEL requested annulment of the decision made by theBoard of Arbitrators appointed in accordance with Decree no. 79 of March 16, 1999 (the“Bersani Decree”), which set at 820 billion lire the price to be paid to ENEL for the sale to AEMElettricità S.p.A. (now A2A Reti Elettriche S.p.A.) of the power distribution business in themunicipalities of Milan and Rozzano. AEM Elettricità S.p.A. asked for ENEL’s request to berejected, as the arbitrators’ decision could not be considered manifestly unfair or erroneousin accordance with article 1349 of the Italian civil code. AEM Elettricità S.p.A. in turn filed acounter-claim asking for ENEL to be sentenced to pay compensation for the damages causedby the delay with which ENEL implemented the sale of the business, as imposed by the law.In AEM Elettricità S.p.A.’s opinion, the judge would only be able to change the arbitrators’decision if it appeared to be “manifestly unfair or erroneous”, as also confirmed by an expertwitness’s report which the judge ordered.The Court-appointed expert witness carried out a detailed review of the situation, makingnumerous adjustments, and in the end established a figure of 88 million euro as the upper