131
HEINEKEN N.V. ANNUAL REPORT 2008
31. Off-balance sheet commitments
Less than
1-5
More than
Total
In millions of EUR
Total
1 year
years
5 years
2007
Guarantees to banks for loans (by third parties)
408
181
165
62
387
Other guarantees
89
20
13
56
78
Guarantees
497
201
178
118
465
Lease operational lease commitments
378
66
195
117
242
Property, plant equipment ordered
56
56
-
-
49
Raw materials purchase contracts
1,318
216
393
709
604
Other off-balance sheet obligations
2,325
384
1,306
635
410
Off-balance sheet obligations
4,077
722
1,894
1,461
1,305
Undrawn committed bank facilities
1,640
56
1,584
-
2,014
Heineken leases buildings, cars and equipment.
Guarantees to banks for loans relate to loans to customers, which are given by external parties in the ordinary
course of business of Heineken.
During the year ended 31 December 2008 €177 million (2007: €140 million) was recognised as an expense in
he income statement in respect of operating leases and rent.
Dther off-balance sheet obligations mainly include distribution, rental, service and sponsorship contracts.
iommitted bank facilities are credit facilities on which a commitment fee is paid as compensation for the bank's
equirement to reserve capital. For the details of these committed bank facilities refer to note 24. The bank is
egally obliged to provide the facility under the terms and conditions of the agreement.
he off-balance sheet obligations relating to own-use commodities are not included in the above information.
2. Contingencies
he Netherlands
leineken is involved in an antitrust case initiated by the European Commission for alleged violations of the
U competition laws. By decision of 18 April 2007 the European Commission stated that Heineken and other
rewers operating in the Netherlands, restricted competition in the Dutch market during the period 1996-
999. This decision follows an investigation by the European Commission that commenced in March 2000.
leineken fully cooperated with the authorities in this investigation. As a result of its decision, the European
ommission imposed a fine on Heineken of €219 million.
\U cartel decisions by the European Commission may be appealed against before the European Court of First
istance and then before the Court of Justice of the European Communities in Luxembourg. These two courts are
mpowered to annul decisions in whole or in part and to reduce or increase fines, where this is deemed appropriate.
Dn 4 July 2007 Heineken filed an appeal with the European Court of First Instance against the decision of the
uropean Commission as Heineken disagrees with the findings of the European Commission. Pending appeal,
leineken was obliged to pay the fine to the European Commission. This imposed fine was treated as an
xpense in 2007.
he European Commission filed its defence on 22 November 2007. Heineken filed its statement of reply on
March 2008. The European Commission filed its reply by rejoinder on 29 May 2008. Heineken is entitled
a request oral pleadings before the court. A final decision by the European Court is expected thereafter.
arlsberg
he consideration paid (purchase price) for the acquisition of S&N is subject to change as, inline with the
onsortium agreement, the final net debt settlement is being discussed between the consortium partners. It is
ot expected that these discussions will be completed before expiration of the one-year time window under IFRS 3.
»ny changes to the consideration paid in subsequent accounting periods will be adjusted to goodwill. Given that
he outcome is not certain, it would not be practicable to estimate the financial effects of the net debt settlement.