The Management Board of Mostostal Warszawa S.A. (“Company”) informs that yesterday, it received a petition from the litigation attorney filed by the State Treasury represented by the General Director of National Roads and Motorways (“GDNRM”, “Petitioner”) against companies Mostostal Warszawa S.A. and two other entities (“Defendants”). The Petitioner seeks for its claims to be paid jointly and severally by three Defendants. The value of the object of the dispute amounts to PLN 539,957,535.00 including statutory interest calculated as of 17 July 2009 until the date of payment. The object of the dispute is compensation for a damage caused in the State Treasury property as a result of tort by substitution of autonomic economic decisions by agreements made between the competitors who filed tenders in one public tender procurement procedure. According to the Petition, as a result of forbidden “agreed practice”, performance of the object of the tender, i.e. construction of the section of the S8 route Piotrków – Rawa Mazowiecka, which was not performed by Mostostal Warszawa S.A., was done at a much higher price than the price which would have been accepted and paid if the Defendants acted in the conditions of undisturbed competition; it is necessary to indicate that the above-mentioned procurement was completed at a price lower than the Employer’s/ Petitioner’s budget.

In the Petition, the Petitioner refers in particular to documents and to materials from the files of a criminal procedure currently pending under ref. No. II KK 324/16, in the course of which the actual status of this case was – at least partially - the object of analysis of Penal Courts. In the procedure, the District Court for Warszawa Wola and subsequently the Regional Court in Warsaw, performing analysis of the entire brief of evidence, concluded that there is evidence confirming – in a manner that does not raise doubts – that there was any arrangement of practice. All clarifications filed by the defendants in the course of the preparatory proceedings and at the trial before the District Court, as well as testimonies of witnesses did not confirm “entering into an agreement to act to the detriment of the Petitioner” i.e. to the detriment of the GDNRM, the institution for whom the tenders were organised. According to the received information, a cassation appeal was filed in the penal case to the Supreme Court.

The Issuer, having analysed the content of the petition, challenges all of the claims filed by the Petitioner in full. Primarily, the Petitioner failed to present the necessary premises for liability for payment of compensation.

The Management Board of Mostostal Warszawa S.A. (“Company”) informs that yesterday, it received a petition from the litigation attorney filed by the State Treasury represented by the General Director of National Roads and Motorways (“GDNRM”, “Petitioner”) against companies Mostostal Warszawa S.A. and two other entities (“Defendants”). The Petitioner seeks for its claims to be paid jointly and severally by three Defendants. The value of the object of the dispute amounts to PLN 539,957,535.00 including statutory interest calculated as of 17 July 2009 until the date of payment. The object of the dispute is compensation for a damage caused in the State Treasury property as a result of tort by substitution of autonomic economic decisions by agreements made between the competitors who filed tenders in one public tender procurement procedure. According to the Petition, as a result of forbidden “agreed practice”, performance of the object of the tender, i.e. construction of the section of the S8 route Piotrków – Rawa Mazowiecka, which was not performed by Mostostal Warszawa S.A., was done at a much higher price than the price which would have been accepted and paid if the Defendants acted in the conditions of undisturbed competition; it is necessary to indicate that the above-mentioned procurement was completed at a price lower than the Employer’s/ Petitioner’s budget.

In the Petition, the Petitioner refers in particular to documents and to materials from the files of a criminal procedure currently pending under ref. No. II KK 324/16, in the course of which the actual status of this case was – at least partially - the object of analysis of Penal Courts. In the procedure, the District Court for Warszawa Wola and subsequently the Regional Court in Warsaw, performing analysis of the entire brief of evidence, concluded that there is evidence confirming – in a manner that does not raise doubts – that there was any arrangement of practice. All clarifications filed by the defendants in the course of the preparatory proceedings and at the trial before the District Court, as well as testimonies of witnesses did not confirm “entering into an agreement to act to the detriment of the Petitioner” i.e. to the detriment of the GDNRM, the institution for whom the tenders were organised. According to the received information, a cassation appeal was filed in the penal case to the Supreme Court.

The Issuer, having analysed the content of the petition, challenges all of the claims filed by the Petitioner in full. Primarily, the Petitioner failed to present the necessary premises for liability for payment of compensation.