Company: CRESW
Filing Date: 2025-10-24
Form Type: 20-F
Source: 0001654954-25-012195
Chunk: 224

Company: CRESUD INC
Filing Date: 2025-10-24
Form: 20-F
Item: Item 4
Chunk 224
---
 should be considered a foreign company for the purposes of Law No. 5,709/71, we may be subject to challenges involving acquisitions and leases made by the Company after the approval of the AGU-LA- 2010 Opinion, and the possible application of Law No. 5,709/71 could result in substantial delays in our future acquisitions of rural properties and our inability to obtain the necessary approvals. In addition, acquisitions made in breach of existing restrictions may be declared null and void.

 The applicability of Law No. 5,709/71 is being discussed in the Original Civil Action (Ação Cível Originária) No. 2,463 and in the Action for Breach of Constitutional Provision (Ação de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental) No. 342, both before the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF). The first action (Original Civil Action No. 2,463) concerns the Opinion No. 461/2012-E of the General Inspectorate of Justice of the State of São Paulo (Corregedoria-Geral de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo), which established that notaries and real estate registry officials of the State of São Paulo would be exempt from complying with the restrictions imposed by Law No. 5,709/71 and by Decree No. 74,965/74. The second action (Action for Breach of Constitutional Provision No. 342), which is related to the first lawsuit, was filed on April 16, 2015 by the Brazilian Rural Society (Sociedade Rural Brasileira) questioning the applicability of paragraph 1, article 1, of Law No. 5,709/71 and consequently, of the opinion issued by the Federal Attorney General’s Office (AGU) in 2010.

 A trial began before the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) in February 2021, with the vote of the rapporteur Justice stating that the restrictions on companies considered to be controlled by a foreign entity must be maintained. A second Justice asked to pause the proceedings to review the file, thereby interrupting the trial, which was only resumed in June 2021, when the Justice presented his vote diverging from the rapporteur, confirming the inapplicability of the restrictions. As of the date of this Annual Report, a final judgment is still pending, and Brasilagro is not able to provide an estimate of the timeframe for a final judgment to be issued by the Supreme Court. Depending on