Company: TCMFF
Filing Date: 2025-02-28
Form Type: 20-F
Source: 0001104659-25-019133
Chunk: 339

Company: TELECOM ARGENTINA SA
Filing Date: 2025-02-28
Form: 20-F
Item: Item 18
Chunk 339
---
 consumer association “Cruzada Cívica para la defensa de los consumidores y usuarios de Servicios públicos”. 
The plaintiff’s claim relates to the manner in which content and trivia games are contracted, requesting the application of punitive damages to Personal.
As of the date of these consolidated financial statements, this claim for an unspecified amount is in its preliminary stages because notice of the claim has not been served on all interested parties.
Based on the advice of its legal counsel, the Company’s Management believes to have strong arguments for its defense. However, given the absence of any case law, the final outcome of these claims cannot be assured.
d)     Claims filed by unions in connection with union contributions
The unions FOEESITRA, SITRATEL, SILUJANTEL, SOEESIT, FOETRA, SUTTACH, and the Union of Telephone Workers and Employees of Tucumán brought seven legal actions against Telecom claiming unpaid union contributions set forth in their respective collective bargaining agreements, corresponding to employees of third-party companies that provide services to the Company, for a 5-year term for which the statute of limitations has not expired, plus damages caused by the failure to pay said contributions. The items claimed are “Fondo Especial” (special fund) and “Contribución Solidaria” (solidarity contribution).

F-

TELECOM ARGENTINA S.A.

The above-mentioned unions argue that Telecom is jointly and severally liable for the payment of the above-mentioned contributions. Telecom answered all the claims.
In the action brought by FOEESITRA, the judge of first instance rejected the summons to third parties made by Telecom. This decision was confirmed by the Labor Court and the case is being appealed with a request for opening of evidence.
In the action brought by FOETRA, the Court of Appeals revoked the decision rendered by the court of first instance that had declared the incompetence. The judge of first instance must render a decision on the exceptions filed by Telecom.
In the action brought by SITRATEL, the judge of first instance declared himself competent to intervene and rejected the summons of third parties made by Telecom. This decision was appealed and recently confirmed by the IX Chamber. This last decision of the court is not final.
In the action brought by the Union of Telephone Workers and Employees of Tucumán, the judge of first instance rejected the summons of third parties requested and the claim of lack of jurisdiction. The decision was confirmed by the Labor Chamber and the case was