Losses and reputational damage from product liability claims and recalls
First written in FY2016. 8 of 15 entries say "Restated". Latest entry: FY2022.
The whole theme swung hardest in 2026: 11 of 57 companies on the "Worse" side.
125 other companies' latest entry also says "Restated".
- FY2022RestatedAnnual report
「In addition, the products provided by the Group may develop unforeseen defects, and recalls may occur.」
The company reconfirms the impact of payments, creditworthiness and reputation arising from product defects and recalls as general product liability risks. - FY2021Restated general product liability risk separately from the specific litigationAnnual report
「In addition, the products provided by the Group may develop unforeseen defects, and recalls may occur.」
After the description of the past litigation involving テプニエ社 disappeared, the company again described the general risks of compensation, payments and reputational damage arising from product defects and recalls. - FY2020DroppedAnnual reportThe current year's text contains no new information on the litigation concerning the oral cleansing product that had been described through the previous period.
- FY2019-Q3MitigatedAnnual report
「On 14 November 2018 (local time), a judgment was issued dismissing the Plaintiff's appeal, and テプニエ社's victory on appeal before the Paris Court of Appeal on 10 February 2017 became final and binding.」
In the litigation concerning the crystallisation phenomenon in the oral cleansing product, the Plaintiff's appeal was dismissed and テプニエ社's victory on appeal became final and binding. - FY2019-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「The Plaintiff subsequently appealed the Court of Appeal judgment to the French Court of Cassation on 16 May 2017 (local time). テプニエ社 will continue to assert the validity of its position so that the Court of Appeal judgment, which fully accepted its claims, is upheld in the appeal proceedings before the French Court of Cassation.」
The Plaintiff's appeal to the Court of Cassation continued after テプニエ社's victory on appeal following reversal of the first-instance judgment, and the company reconfirmed its policy of seeking to uphold the Court of Appeal judgment. It also recognised a reversal of litigation-related loss of ¥9.191 million and a litigation-related loss of ¥7.659 million. - FY2019-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「The Plaintiff subsequently appealed the Court of Appeal judgment to the French Court of Cassation on 16 May 2017 (local time). テプニエ社 will continue to assert the validity of its position so that the Court of Appeal judgment, which fully accepted its claims, is upheld in the appeal proceedings before the French Court of Cassation.」
The Plaintiff's appeal to the Court of Cassation continued after テプニエ社's victory on appeal following reversal of the first-instance judgment, and the company reconfirmed its policy of seeking to uphold the Court of Appeal judgment. - FY2018Recognised litigation-related gains and losses; Supreme Court appeal continuedAnnual report
「Reversal of litigation-related loss: ¥11.414 million」
In the litigation involving テプニエ社's oral cleansing product, the Plaintiff's appeal to the Supreme Court continued after テプニエ社's victory on appeal following reversal of the first-instance judgment. During the fiscal year, the company recognised a reversal of litigation-related loss and a litigation-related loss. - FY2018-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「The Plaintiff subsequently appealed the Court of Appeal judgment to the French Supreme Court on 16 May 2017 (local time). テプニエ社 will continue to assert the validity of its position so that the appellate judgment, which fully accepted its claims, is upheld in the Supreme Court appeal proceedings.」
The Plaintiff's appeal to the Supreme Court continued after テプニエ社's victory on appeal following reversal of the first-instance judgment, and テプニエ社 stated that it would seek to uphold the appellate judgment. - FY2018-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「The Plaintiff subsequently appealed the Court of Appeal judgment to the French Supreme Court on 16 May 2017 (local time). テプニエ社 will continue to assert the validity of its position so that the appellate judgment, which fully accepted its claims, is upheld in the Supreme Court appeal proceedings.」
The Plaintiff's appeal to the Supreme Court continued after the victory on appeal following reversal of the first-instance judgment, and テプニエ社 stated that it would seek to uphold the appellate judgment. - FY2018-Q1RestatedAnnual report
「The Plaintiff subsequently appealed the Court of Appeal judgment to the French Supreme Court on 16 May 2017 (local time). テプニエ社 will continue to assert the validity of its position so that the appellate judgment, which fully accepted its claims, is upheld in the Supreme Court appeal proceedings.」
The Plaintiff's appeal to the Supreme Court continued after テプニエ社's victory on appeal following reversal of the first-instance judgment, and テプニエ社 stated that it would seek to uphold the appellate judgment. - FY2017After winning on appeal following reversal of the first-instance judgment, the case proceeded to an appeal to the Supreme CourtAnnual report
「On 10 February 2017 (local time), the Paris Court of Appeal issued a judgment in favour of テプニエ社, whose principal provisions were that (1) the Plaintiff's claims in the original action were dismissed and (2) the Plaintiff pay テプニエ社 €20,000 in legal costs. The Plaintiff subsequently appealed this judgment to the French Supreme Court on 16 May 2017 (local time).」
The case progressed from a payment order at first instance to a judgment in favour of テプニエ社 on appeal following reversal of the first-instance judgment, but the Plaintiff had appealed to the Supreme Court by the filing date and the litigation remained ongoing. - FY2017-Q3RestatedAnnual report
「Regarding a crystallisation phenomenon that occurred in an oral cleansing product in August 2007, テプニエ社 was sued by SUNSTAR FRANCE S.A.S. (the "Plaintiff") in the Paris Commercial Court on 4 February 2011 (local time) for damages of €8,586,163 and litigation costs and other expenses. On 23 September 2014 (local time), the Paris Commercial Court in France issued a first-instance judgment whose principal provisions were that (1) テプニエ社 pay €5,013,426, equivalent to two-thirds of the €7,520,140 in damages suffered by the Plaintiff; (2) the Plaintiff pay テプニエ社 €749,000, equivalent to one-third of the €2,246,000 in damages suffered by テプニエ社; and (3) provisional enforcement of the payments ordered under (1) and (2) would not be permitted. テプニエ社 subsequently appealed the judgment to the Paris Court of Appeal in France on 31 October 2014 (local time), and the appeal application was accepted on 3 November 2014 (local time).」
The company reiterates the status of the damages lawsuit and appeal proceedings arising from the crystallisation phenomenon in the oral cleansing product. - FY2017-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「Regarding a crystallisation phenomenon that occurred in an oral cleansing product in August 2007, テプニエ社 was sued by SUNSTAR FRANCE S.A.S. (the "Plaintiff") in the Paris Commercial Court on 4 February 2011 (local time) for damages of €8,586,163 and litigation costs and other expenses. On 23 September 2014 (local time), the Paris Commercial Court in France issued a first-instance judgment whose principal provisions were that (1) テプニエ社 pay €5,013,426, equivalent to two-thirds of the €7,520,140 in damages suffered by the Plaintiff; (2) the Plaintiff pay テプニエ社 €749,000, equivalent to one-third of the €2,246,000 in damages suffered by テプニエ社; and (3) provisional enforcement of the payments ordered under (1) and (2) would not be permitted. テプニエ社 subsequently appealed the judgment to the Paris Court of Appeal in France on 31 October 2014 (local time), and the appeal application was accepted on 3 November 2014 (local time).」
The company reiterates that the damages lawsuit and appeal proceedings arising from the product crystallisation phenomenon remain ongoing. - FY2017-Q1MaterialisedAnnual report
「Regarding a crystallisation phenomenon that occurred in an oral cleansing product in August 2007, テプニエ社 was sued by SUNSTAR FRANCE S.A.S. in the Paris Commercial Court on 4 February 2011 for damages of €8,586,163 and litigation costs and other expenses.」
The general risk of product defects and recalls materialised as a specific damages lawsuit involving テプニエ社's oral cleansing product, and the appeal proceedings continued after the first-instance judgment. - FY2016First statedAnnual report
「Products supplied by the Group may contain unforeseen defects, and recalls may occur.」
The Company identifies compensation costs and damage to product reliability and reputation arising from defects and recalls as risks.