Das wurde heute von Bayer versendet. Nüchterne Einschätzung, was am Supreme Court passieren kann und wie Bayer darauf vorbereitet ist. So kann sich jeder selbst ein Bild machen.
Refresher: US Supreme Court conference
As of December 10, 2021
In an effort to continually improve our level of transparency and service to our investors, we want to keep you informed about the next steps in the glyphosate litigation complex, which may come in form of a Supreme Court procedural ruling. Essentially, we are repeating what we have communicated earlier but thought it might be helpful to provide a refresher.
It is likely that the US Supreme Court will discuss our petition to review the Hardeman case at its conference on December 10. However, it may take until December 13 before any decision is made public by the Court.
As we communicated in July, we consider the Supreme Court not accepting the case for review as the realistic scenario. To reasonably account for this scenario including claims settlement, future litigation defense and administrative expenses, we took an additional provision in Q2 2021 of $4.5 billion (3.8 billion), before tax and discounting. Therefore, we have financially compartmentalized the issue and are prepared to address this outcome holistically with the five-point plan, in particular by way of a claims administration program (self-help program) which would start immediately following a denial of the US Supreme Court to accept our motion to review.
The potential outcomes are as follows:
Scenario 1: Straight denial
A denial of the US Supreme Court to accept the Hardeman case for review would end the process and would activate the voluntary claims administration program which is one element of the five-point plan to help bring closure to the litigation. As mentioned above, we have incorporated this scenario in our provisions, i.e. latency, number of claims, average settlement amounts as well as occasional future trials.
Scenario 2: Postponement of Decision
The Court could postpone the decision by either re-listing the case or by asking for the views of the Solicitor General. We would see the latter as an encouraging sign given the position the US Government has taken so far. Indeed, the EPA has consistently found that glyphosate- based herbicides can be used safely and are not carcinogenic and the DOJ has weighed in in favor of us at the appellate court level through an amicus brief.
Scenario 3: Acceptance of the case for review
The acceptance of the case would be a positive sign for us because in general the acceptance rate is extremely low (less than 1 % on average). Following acceptance, the final ruling on the merits could come at the earliest 6 months thereafter.
If accepted and ultimately decided in favor of defendant (e.g. based on federal pre-emption), and depending on the details of the decision, this would virtually end or at least significantly narrow the litigation. We will then assess the potential release of accruals we have made for current as well as potential future claims and cases. The provisions released could be used for general corporate purposes.
Forward-Looking Statements
This release may contain forward-looking statements based on current assumptions and forecasts made by Bayer management. Various known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors could lead to material differences between the actual future results, financial situation, development or performance of the company and the estimates given here. These factors include those discussed in Bayers public reports, which are available on the Bayer website at www.bayer.com. The company assumes no liability whatsoever to update these forward-looking statements or to conform them to future events or developments.