
Global Competitiveness Report 2015-2016
issued by the World Economic Forum,
businesses do perceive that bribes or
irregular payments in return for favourable
judicial decisions sometimes occur.
Luxembourg, on the other hand, is
considered a low-risk country when it comes
to corruption finishing in 9
th
place with a
score of 81 on the Transparency International
Index for 2021. The risk with Luxembourg
is that the country is very small with only
633100 inhabitants (www.britannica.com/
place/Luxembourg), not much more than a
small European city. In this context, everyone
knows everyone. That makes it more likely
that an outcome might be influenced when
a foreign company is in a litigation against
a state-controlled entity. Not as outright
corruption but as a silent, or even outspoken,
wish to receive a particular outcome, or
for the police and prosecution to not take
any action. According to the GAN Integrity
Luxembourg Corruption Report (www.
ganintegrity.com/portal/countryprofiles/
luxembourg/), updated as of June 2020,
corruption does not constitute a problem
for businesses in Luxembourg in general.
The country has a strong legal framework
to curb corruption, and anti-corruption laws
are effectively enforced. Nonetheless, some
corruption cases have revealed conflicts of
interest between the private and public
sectors, tainting transparency in the country.
For comparison, Norway is in 4
th
place
with a score of 85 on the Transparency In-
ternational Index for 2021 and Norway ranks
among the least corrupt countries in the
world.
The company’s ability to mitigate this
kind of risk is very limited. The company’s
ability to change the behaviour of individu-
als in the most risk-associated jurisdictions
is non-existent. What the company can do, is
to monitor for indications of influence over
judges, arbitrators, police, and prosecutors
and try to get the disputes in front of judges
in countries that are less corrupt or influ-
enced than Italy and Luxembourg. There are
though legal limitations on which venues
that are available to the company.
Victory in court resulting in
payment from the counterparties,
out of court settlements
One of the most significant opportunities
for the company is the possibility to receive
a payment that restores lost values stem-
ming from the fraud and subsequent lost
opportunities. Such payment might either
be awarded by a competent court and en-
forced towards the counterparty or could be
reached in an out-of-court agreement where
the parties agree on fair settlement.
The company is actively pursuing a resto-
ration of values in various venues and juris-
dictions and will continue to do so until all
such possibilities are exhausted. Any pos-
sible settlement talks would be conducted
through our legal representation and be
evaluated if presented.
The outcome is binary, either you have
an award or settlement, or you do not. Once
an award has been irrevocably granted or a
settlement reached, the company may also
measure the outcome on a monetary scale,
either in comparison with costs incurred and
values lost or as a value per share issued in
the company.
New investments in solar PV in
countries and regions where corruption
is less probable at government
level, in the business environment
and in the judicial system
EAM Solar ASA’s strategy was, at the outset,
to create value by acquiring operational
power plants and, through active owner-
ship, to optimise operations and achieve
the best possible electricity yield, lowest
possible cost of operations and highest pos-
sible dividend yield. In light of the legal pro-
ceedings and their impact on the Company’s
value, EAM has been forced to change from a
YieldCo to a company primarily focused on
litigation. The company is in its eight year
of litigation activity following the P31 fraud.
Consequently, the company have lost out on
opportunities within its initial core business
activity in renewable energy.
The Company’s manager, Energeia AS is
currently investing and developing business
opportunities in the Netherlands. As of year-
end 2021, this activity has resulted in Ener-
geia AS constructing, operating and owning
a solar PV power plant in the Netherlands,
and developed a prospective Dutch project
pipeline. In 2021 Energeia AS also identified
and is currently working on the development
of solar PV power plants in Norway. This ac-
tivity is still in an early stage of development
but may result in significant power plant de-
velopments in the coming years.
Forty per cent of EAM Solar ASA is owned
directly or indirectly by Energeia AS and its
shareholders. Therefore, Energeia AS and
EAM Solar ASA have initiated a preliminary
discussion with the aim to ensure that all
shareholders in EAM Solar ASA can partici-
pate in the future business development and
value creation of Energeia AS.
The opportunity would provide addition-
al value creation for the Company’s share-
holders and an opportunity to take part in
new development within the renewable en-
ergy sector. The outcome of this opportunity
is binary.
The latest news on the strategic review
processes was communicated to the share-
holders of EAM Solar ASA during the presen-
tation of the Q4 2021 Financial Report with
the main points being:
There are several concession applications
in preparation, which entails the construc-
tion and operation of between 350MW to
700MW Solar PV power plants.
Energeia’s first grid connected energy
storage project is under development in
the Netherlands. The project is relevant for
similar projects in the Norwegian electricity
market.
Energeia AS intend to include the EAM
Solar ASA shareholders in this development
through a directed equity issue, and the cur-
rent plan, subject to approval by sharehold-
ers in Energeia and EAM Solar ASA, is that
EAM Solar ASA shareholders will receive one
share in Energeia for each share in ASA as a
dividend.
An investment memorandum will be is-
sued as part of the decision process in EAM
Solar ASA, and Energeia AS is planned list-
ed on the Oslo Stock Exchange (Euronext
Growth) following the equity issue.
The decision is subject to general meeting
resolutions on both sides.
Findings
Not having enough liquidity
to fund the legal strategy
The Company considers its liquidity situation
to be unsatisfactory. On a short-term basis,
it is expected that the Company’s liquidity
situation is adequate. However, due to
uncertainty related to the cost and the
length of the legal proceedings and the
Company’s ability to collect receivables
outstanding the situation on a long-term
basis is more uncertain.
Corrupt courts and/or judges – There is
a risk that courts or legal proceedings
are already influenced or could be
influenced, so as to affect or alter rulings
Observations in the period 2016-2021 give
reason to believe that decisions given in
courts in Italy involving the company have
been influenced, although this has not been
proven.
Observations in the period 2016-2021 give
reason to believe that the lack of police inves-
26
EAM Solar ASA annual report 2021
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND ESG REPORTING