17 Jul 2015 07:32
GRUPO CLARIN S.A.
Court Grants Injunction to Subsidiary Cablevisión S.A.
On 15 July 2015, Grupo Clarín S.A. (the "Company") informed the Argentine Securities Commission and the Buenos Aires Stock Exchange that its subsidiary Cablevisión S.A. ("Cablevisión") had been served notice of a decision rendered by the Federal Court of Appeals of the City of Mar del Plata in re "Cablevisión S.A. re/ Injunction" (File No. 81008682/2012), whereby the court grants partially an injunction requested by Cablevisión against the National Government and the Audiovisual Communication Services Law Federal Enforcement Authority.
Attached below is a free translation of the relevant sections of the decision rendered by the Federal Court of Appeals of the City of Mar del Plata.
Enquiries:
In Buenos Aires:
Alfredo Marín/Agustín Medina Manson
Grupo Clarín
Tel: +5411 4309 7215
Email: investors@grupoclarin.com
In London:
Alex Money
Jasford IR
Tel: +44 20 3289 5300
Email: alexm@jasford.com
In New York:
Melanie Carpenter
I-advize Corporate Communications
Tel: +1 212 406 3692
Email: clarin@i-advize.com
FREE TRANSLATION
National Judicial Branch
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEALS OF MAR DEL PLATA
/// del Plata, July 2015
HAVING REVIEWED:
These proceedings entitled "Cablevisión S.A. v. MINISTRY OF ECONOMY AND AFIP re/ INJUNCTION". File No. 81008682/2012, which come to us from Federal Court No. 4, ad hoc Secretariat, of this City.-
AND WHEREAS:
Dr. Jiménez said:
That this appeal, filed by claimant under these proceedings, is aimed at questioning the dismissal of the request for the issuance of an injunction, made by appellant in the previous instance
[Remaining recitals intentionally omitted]
In light of the above, I hereby propose that we Agree: 1) TO DECLARE the unconstitutionality of Sections 2, 4 Subsection 2, and 5 of Law No. 26,854 (passed by the legislature on 24/04/2013 and enacted on 29/04/2013), which governs the issuance of injunctions in litigations where the Argentine National State or its decentralized agencies are a parties or intervene, or injunctions requested by the latter, 2 TO GRANT PARTIALLY the appellant's request, maintaining the factual and legal situation that exists in this case, for a maximum term of THREE (3) MONTHS, counted as from the communication of this decision to the enforcement authority, and stating that this decision must also be made known to the intervening administrative agency (AFSCA), clarifying that this does not imply by any means an interference with the process to conform to the Audiovisual [Communication] Services Law, which must continue on its corresponding legal course, to the extent that it does not oppose this resolution, and [stating also] that that agency must communicate to this court the adoption of any measure that-while this injunction remains in effect-may be aimed at altering in any way such "status", 3) COSTS SHALL BE BORNE as incurred, given the nature of the matter under debate, 4) LET IT BE NOTED that the appellant has reserved the right to bring a Federal Case, and the right to appeal to international bodies, as indicated in the presentation that originated these proceedings.
Such is my vote.-
/s/ Eduardo Pablo Jiménez - Judge of the Court of Appeals
Dr. Tazza said:
That I adhere to the vote of Dr. Jiménez, above.
/s/ Alejandro Osvaldo Tazza - Judge of the Court of Appeals
Dr. Ferro said:
That having examined the vote of the Judge that precedes me in this decision and the factual and legal evidence that informs these proceedings, I share such vote and I will only add a brief consideration with respect to such vote.
[Additional statement intentionally omitted]
That said, in all other respects, I concur with the statements made by my respected colleague.
Such is my vote.
/s/ Jorge Ferro - Judge of the Court of Appeals