Company: TCMFF
Filing Date: 2025-02-28
Form Type: 20-F
Source: 0001104659-25-019133
Chunk: 335

Company: TELECOM ARGENTINA SA
Filing Date: 2025-02-28
Form: 20-F
Item: Item 18
Chunk 335
---
, the Court held “that the amount of profit-sharing bonds corresponding to former employees of Telefónica de Argentina should be calculated based on the taxable income of Telefónica de Argentina S.A. on which the income tax liability is to be assessed”. 
Federación Argentina de las Telecomunicaciones and Other v. Telecom Argentina S.A. on profit-sharing
In June 2013, the Company was served notice of this claim. The lawsuit was filed by four unions claiming the issuance of profit-sharing bonds (hereinafter “the bonds”) for future periods and for periods for which the statute of limitations is not expired. To enforce this claim, the plaintiffs have requested that the court declare that Decree No. 395/92 is unconstitutional.
This collective lawsuit is for an unspecified amount. The plaintiffs presented the criteria that should be applied for the determination of the percentage of participation in the Company’s profit. The lawsuit requiring the issuance of a profit-sharing bond represents an obligation with potential future economic impact for the Company.
The Company filed its response to the claim, arguing that labor courts lack jurisdiction over the matter. In December 2017, the Court of First Instance dismissed the claim on the grounds that the claimant lacks standing because the claim is individual and not collective. The claimant filed an appeal, which is pending before Chamber VII of the Court of Appeals.
In June 2019, the Court of Appeals revoked the decision rendered by the Court of First Instance, returned the file, and ordered discovery proceedings.
The Company, based on the advice of its legal counsel, believes that there are strong arguments to defend its position in this claim, based, among other things, on the application of the statutes of limitations to the claim relating to the unconstitutionality of Decree No. 395/92, the lack of active legal standing for a collective claim relating to the issuance of bonds —due to the existence of individual claims— in addition to arguments based on plaintiff’s lack of active legal standing.
b)   Sanctions Imposed by the Regulator 
The Company is subject to various sanction procedures, in most cases promoted by the Regulatory Authority, for delays in repairs and service installations to fixed-line customers.
c) “Asociación por la Defensa de Usuarios y Consumidores vs. Telecom Personal S.A.” claim
In 2008, the “Asociación por la Defensa de Usuarios y Consumidores” sued Personal, seeking damages for an unspecified amount, in connection with the billing of calls to the automatic answering machine and