ESTAR (EST): Announcement - raport 8

Raport bieżący nr 8/2017

Podstawa Prawna:
ENEFI Energy Efficiency Plc. (“Company”) hereby informs its Honourable Investors that the

Romanian affiliate thereof, E-Star CDR srl. has informed the Company about the following:

1. CDR has been informed that the Town has published its decisions made on 16/01/2017

about which the Town has not informed CDR until today in spite of its obligation set forth by

law, although the decision also refers to this.

The Town Council of Gheorgheni city with county authority decided on its meeting held on

16/01/2016 amongst others that it shall amend its earlier decision No: 243 of 2016. also

objected by the Prefect with the following:

“Considering that the validity of the licence No: 1225 for public district heating services

issued by Department 3. for S.C. E-STAR CENTRUL DE DEZVOLTARE REGIONALĂ S.R.L.

(Ltd.) on 24/10/2011 expired on 23/11/2015, it shall be stated that the concession agreement

No: 7258 on district heating concluded between Gheorgheni town with county authority and

E-STAR CENTRUL DE DEZVOLTARE REGIONALĂ S.R.L. (Ltd) on 13th* September 2010 is

legally terminated.”

The town has been emphasising in its statements that according to their view the agreement

between the parties is valid and it may only be terminated by a court decision in the lawsuit

initiated by CDR and if CDR stopped the services it would commit breach of contract.

Irrespectively of the above now the Town declares that the agreement was terminated on

23/11/2015 because the licence of CDR expired.

The viewpoint of CDR is still that also referring to the court decisions made meanwhile, that

the agreement between the parties was terminated due to the notice of CDR in September

2015, however the new decision of the town is incomprehensible, also proving the fraudulent

and unlawful conduct of the Town seen in the past year.

Considering that the Town has not taken over the service until now, there are severe questions

of responsibility in the case, since after this it is difficult to explain why the service has not

been taken over, why the Town put the assets of the town and the security of residents at risks

by initiating uncertain court proceedings with the opposite basis of reference than the above.

CDR shall address the Prefect in order to clarify the situation.

No actual decision was made at the hearing on 25/01/2017. The Town and the proceeding

judge asked at the hearing to assign another judge in the case; however this application was

rejected by the court authorised to judge the application. The date of the next hearing is 8th*

March 2017. The case shall be heard by the same court which had proceeded in the lawsuit

initiated by the Town.

2. The Mures County Tribunal finally rejected the appeal of the Romanian Financial Authority

for the RON 9,867,217 claim under case number 1291/320/2015 in relation with the case

initiated by the Romanian Financial Authority against Nyrt SP applying for the annulation of

the unified executive order.

3. The Court approved the application of the company for suspension in the case of the land

valuation of the real estate in Zalău and obliged the Romanian Financial Authority to pay the

costs of the lawsuit.

Załączniki