The Bank informs on the written answer to the newspaper "AXIA" as regards to a full page article (page 9) to which the reporter's name was not mentioned, published on 21 July 2007 under the main title "The partner of Geniki who became a victim", to which a reference was made to the judicial dispute between Maniateas Group and our Bank without a prior confirmation by the Bank.
The main part of this dispute has already been decided by the competent arbitral tribunal in its final and unappealable judgment, whereas any "new" actions and claims are covered by the res judicata of the arbitral decision.
Hence it is particularly surprising to notice that despite the article's reference to the arbitral decision published and quotation therefrom, nevertheless a series of "questions" and "issues" are presented at a way selective, distorting and misleading for the Bank, whereas the fact that all these have already been set before the arbitral tribunal by Maniateas Group in the context of the trial and they have already been finally and unappealably examined by the above mentioned decision of the tribunal, is concealed.
Among others, indicative points by the article:
- It is concealed that the contractual provision of the collaboration according to which MULTICAPITAL assumes all distressed loans over 1%, has been found by the court to be legal and therefore it is responsible for the distressed loans.
- An untruthful alleged reference of the Court to an "illegal appropriation of MULTICAPITAL's clientele by Geniki Bank" is made, whereas, on the contrary, the Court considered that there was no case of appropriation or interception.
- The issue of whether the related agreement between Geniki Bank - Geniki Cards - MULTICAPITAL constitutes a factoring agreement is presented as pending and under consideration although this position has been argued by Maniateas side before the court and has been rejected.
- It is concealed that Maniateas Group put under the judgment of the arbitral tribunal its various alleged claims amounting to 57,371,574.69 euro, of which the court finally accepted only the amount of 300,000 euro. It should be mentioned that the plaintiff was based on a related study made by Grand Thorton in order to justify its above claims. More specifically MULTICAPITAL claimed the following amounts with its lawsuit examined by the Court:
a) euro 2,530,870.63 as alleged unpaid fees arising under the above agreement: fully rejected and dismissed.
b) euro 27,093,075.03 as damages from the early termination of the trilateral contract: fully rejected and dismissed.
c) euro 199,299.03 against General Cards only as alleged unpaid fees under a bilateral collaboration agreement between this company and General Cards subsequent to the trilateral one: fully rejected and dismissed.
d) euro 10,000,000.00 as damages for moral prejudice: fully rejected and dismissed.
e) euro 17,858,400.00 as compensation for the alleged destruction of their clientele: the Court rejected the allegations of the lawsuit as regards the claim to pay damages for the total value of the clientele on the grounds that the Bank's and Geniki Cards actions do not constitute an "appropriation" or "interception". The Court has adjudicated only euro 300,000 of the amount of euro 17,858,400.00 which was claimed, and this only for the changing of the plastic part of the cards and for the claim for the total value of the distressed loans. The Court has reached the above ruling after having examined the whole evidence brought before it in its totality.
To be noted that the so-called "new lawsuits" only bring before the Court the same issues that have already been judged - as above under (d) and (e).
- Finally it is omitted that MULTICAPITAL included in its lawsuit a request to the Court to rule that it does not have any obligations under financing received by the Bank, which was rejected by the Court as inadmissible of action, whereas, it was ruled that by the related agreement the above financings were not provided to the company exclusively for the production and promotion of credit cards.
As it comes up by the decision itself, the Arbitral Tribunal took into consideration not only the related studies made by Grant Thorton but also those made by Deloitte (the external auditors company of our Group) in order to reach the above judgment.
However, except from the above mentioned points, the article is full of inaccuracies, untruths and arbitrary but misleading references to the Bank such as among others:
- that the Bank has allegedly issued a payment order without proceeding to the execution thereof for a three-years period aiming to keep MULTICAPITAL as hostage, which is absolutely untrue since the Bank has sought its execution by serving an order to comply on 14.10.2003; however, due to the lack of visible assets not only of MULTICAPITAL but also of the guarantor, the satisfaction of its demands was impossible. It goes without saying that if anyone is aware of the existence of any asset, can set it under the attention of the Bank, so that the Bank may show its intentions.
- that, allegedly, the Bank does not apply the court decision denying to disclose exhibits; whereas not only the bank has already disclosed exhibits but additionally in response to a request by MULTICAPITAL for the provision of further exhibits, to which the bank was not obligated but acting to the full extend in good faith, the Bank has collected such further exhibits and has undergone expenses which have not been paid by MULTICAPITAL.
The question remains: If MULTICAPITAL respects the Court decisions, why it does not proceed with the payment of the amounts owed to the Bank according to the Arbitral Tribunal decision?
Finally the article attempts to give the false and untrue impression that the Bank may disorientate investors or even spread false news; the fact that this is attempted in a sensitive period where the Bank proceeds to its share capital increase, shows clearly the aim of manipulating the present juncture for the fulfilment of illegal interests against the Bank.
The fact that, since March 2004, Geniki Bank is member of SOCIETE GENERALE international Group, does not mean that it will abrogate its legal rights, which have been finally and unappealably judged, nor to tolerate articles misleading, untrue and misleading such as the above, aiming to harm its image and interests, particularly during the sensitive period of the share capital increase.
For this reason the Bank reserves all its legal rights against anyone acting against its interests for any reason.
The present announcement is publishable according to the provisions of the law.