Wiedeking and Härter as witnesses in the proceedings against Porsche SE

Created: 09/28/2022Updated: 09/28/2022, 11:30 am

Wendelin Wiedeking, then CEO of Porsche, is sitting in a Porsche 911. © Bernd Weißbrod/dpa/Archive image

With prominent witnesses, the test case against Porsche SE starts in December in the hot phase.

Two former board members are to be heard.

The background is the VW diesel scandal.

Stuttgart - In the test case against the VW umbrella company Porsche SE (PSE) in the course of the diesel scandal, the Higher Regional Court in Stuttgart wants to hear the former board members Wendelin Wiedeking and Holger Haerter as witnesses.

This was stated by the presiding judge of the 20th civil senate, Stefan Vatter, on Wednesday.

Wiedeking and Härter used to be CEO and CFO of PSE.

Both held the same positions at the sports car manufacturer Porsche.

The interrogation of the two ex-managers is scheduled for December 7th.

The legal dispute concerns claims for damages by PSE shareholders.

They accuse the major shareholder of Volkswagen of having informed too late about the emissions scandal.

The planned hearing of witnesses is intended to clarify whether a decision by Volkswagen in June 2008, alleged by a shareholder, to sell vehicles with an EA 189 engine equipped with an impermissible defeat device, has since represented insider information for the holding company - and whether this may therefore violate a disclosure obligation became.

How the proceedings continue depends on the testimony of Wiedeking and Härter, who were also members of the VW supervisory board at the time.

Since July 2021 there have already been several oral hearings.

A spokesman for Porsche SE said on Wednesday that the company maintained its assessment that the alleged claims for damages did not exist.

"Porsche SE is convinced that the taking of evidence will confirm this."

A sticking point in the proceedings is whether and under what circumstances PSE, as the parent company of VW, was independently obliged to publish mandatory stock market disclosures about price-sensitive events at Volkswagen.

Although PSE is the main shareholder of VW, it does not have any operational business itself.

The Porsche SE lawyer has argued in the past that there is a duty to publish where the event is taking place.

On the other hand, the plaintiffs' lawyers had stated that investors were interested in the effects of the diesel scandal on the holding company.

The plaintiffs emphasize that - in ignorance of the diesel fraud - they paid too much money for their PSE shares years ago.

Her reasoning: If VW and then the holding company had informed the markets about the scandal earlier, it would have depressed the share price earlier and they would have had to pay less for their shares.

The PSE considers the complaints to be "obviously unfounded".

One is a holding company and not a car manufacturer.

For this reason, they were not involved in the development, manufacture or sale of diesel engines that had become conspicuous.

The Higher Regional Court declared a British fund to be a model plaintiff, asserting a claim of 5.7 million euros.

dpa