Company: CENN
Filing Date: 2025-05-15
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001140361-25-019312
Chunk: 25

Company: Cenntro Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-05-15
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part I, Item 3
Chunk 25
---
 a violation of article XI. 165 §1 of the Belgian Code of Economic Law and thereby ordered the cessation of the distribution of the METRO-model, a penalty in the form of a fine of EUR20,000.00 per sold vehicle in Belgium and
            EUR5,000.00 for each other infringement in Belgium after the judgement was served with a maximum fine of EUR500,000.00 for LEIE and EUR1,000,000.00 fine for CAE. Because CAE has not sold any METRO-models in Belgium, the Company believes the
            judgement is incorrect but has accrued the related liability according to the judgement made. On April 17,2023 CAE filed a writ of appeal. The introductory hearing was scheduled for May 22, 2023. The judge did not give any legal assessment at
            the hearing. All parties had been granted deadlines for written pleadings. On January 29, 2025, CAE rejected the late delivered final writ by lawyers of Sevic, which should have been received by September 2, 2024. As of the date of this report,
            it is not possible to determine the outcome of these proceedings related to Sevic.

On July 22, 2022, Xiongjian Chen filed a complaint against Cenntro Electric Group Limited (“CENN”), Cenntro Automotive Group Limited (“CAG”), Cenntro Enterprise Limited (“CEL”) and Peter Z. Wang (“Wang,” together
            with CENN, CAG and CEL, the “Defendants”) in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The complaint alleges eleven causes of action sounding in contract and tort against the Defendants, all pertaining to stock options
            issued to Mr. Chen pursuant to his employment as Chief Operating Officer of CAG. With respect to the four contract claims, Plaintiff alleges breach of contract claims pertaining to an employment agreement between Plaintiff and CAG and a
            purported letter agreement between Plaintiff and CEL. With respect to the seven tort claims, Plaintiff alleges claims regarding purported misrepresentations and promises made concerning the treatment of Plaintiff’s stock options upon a
            corporate transaction, including claims for tortious interference, fraud, promissory estoppel, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and conversion. The complaint seeks, among other things, money damages (including compensatory and
            consequential damages) in the amount of $19 million, plus interest, attorneys’ fees and expenses. Defendants moved to