|
|
 |
Notification of Lawsuit Against A Yamaha Subsidiary |
|
This news release serves to give notice that a lawsuit was brought against YAMAHA CORPORATION OF AMERICA (YCA), a U.S. subsidiary of Yamaha Corporation, in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, on November 29, 2005 (with a formal complaint served on January23, 2006). The details are as follows:
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
| 1. Parties to the lawsuit |
|
| |
(1) |
Party initiating the lawsuit (Plaintiff)
|
|
|
ACE PRO SOUND AND RECORDING L.L.C.
(Location of the head office: Florida, United States of America; Lines of business: Retail sales of musical instruments and audio equipment)
(The plaintiff's lawsuit includes a request for a class action suit)
|
|
(2) |
Party being sued (Defendants)
|
|
|
YAMAHA CORPORATION OF AMERICA (hereinafter, YCA)
(Location of head office: California, United States of America; Lines of business: Sales, etc., of musical instruments and audio equipment; President: Yoshihiro Doi)
YCA, together with a leading U.S. retailer of musical instruments and audio equipment and its Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, and six other U.S. suppliers, engaged in the sale of musical instruments and audio equipment, have been named as co-defendants in the lawsuit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2. Causes of Action claimed in the Complaint by the Plaintiff |
|
|
The Plaintiff claims that a leading U.S. retailer of musical instruments and audio equipment, along with its Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board, trading with YCA and the six other supplier of musical instruments and audio equipment (a total of seven companies) gave notice to such seven companies that it would no longer trade with the seven companies if the seven companies should sell any products whatsoever to the Plaintiff, and, in response to such notice, the seven companies ceased to trade with the Plaintiff, and that such act of the retailer and the seven companies constitutes a refusal of transactions with the Plaintiff and the monopoly of market. In addition, the Plaintiff claims that a sales contract was entered into between YCA and the Plaintiff, and that YCA was in breach of this contract. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3. Details of the lawsuit |
|
The Plaintiff prays for judgment against YCA and the other co-defendants for the compensation of the treble damages in the amount of $45 million for the refusal to make sales of products as provided for under Section 1 of the Sherman Act;
the compensation of damages in the amount of $15 million, as provided for under the Antidumping Act of 1916 for the retailer's conspiracy with the co-defendants to sell products at a price substantially less than the actual market;
the compensation of the damages in the amount of $15 million and the punitive damages in the amount of $100 million for the violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act; and
the compensation of the damages in the amount of $15 million and the punitive damages in the amount of $100 million claiming that such acts constitute illegal restraint of trade in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, the Antidumping Act of 1916, and the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act; and
also prays for judgment against YCA for the compensation of the damages in the amount of $15 million for violation of the sales contract claimed to be entered into between the Plaintiff and YCA.
Furthermore, the Plaintiff prays for judgment against YCA and the other co-defendants for the compensation of the treble damages in the amount of $1 billion on behalf of the Plaintiff itself and the U.S. musical instrument retailers in a class action for the act of restraint of trade and conspiracy to monopolize in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act respectively. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4. Outlook for the lawsuit proceedings |
|
|
Regarding this matter, YCA is investigating the factual accuracy of the claims made in the lawsuit, but does not consider that a sales contract has been entered into between YCA and the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff's claim that transactions were refused or that monopoly action took place are based on a misunderstanding of the facts on the part of the Plaintiff. Moreover, the bases for calculation of the damages made by the Plaintiff are unclear, and therefore, Yamaha Corporation believes that it has no reason for YCA to compensate the damages as claimed by the Plaintiff. YCA intends to prove that it is not responsible in the process before the court. |
|
|
|
 |
For further information, please contact
YAMAHA CORPORATION
Public & Investor Relations Group,
Public Relations Division
Mr. Misao Tanaka
TEL. +81-3-5488-6601
FAX. +81-3-5488-5060
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
