Dispute over waste removal costs and loss in the court of first instance
First written in FY2017-Q1. 2 of 4 entries say "Materialised", first in FY2017-Q1. Latest entry: FY2018.
No other company in this theme has enough history to compare yet.
- FY2018Cited as achievedAnnual report
「There were no matters to report for the fiscal year ended 28 February 2018 (from 1 March 2017 to 28 February 2018).」
The company notes the background to the settlement and recognition of the ¥302 million uncollectible amount as a bad debt loss in the previous fiscal year, and states that there was no new bad debt loss in the current fiscal year. - FY2017-Q3MaterialisedAnnual report
「In the first quarter, the company received a trial court judgment regarding the receivable under dispute and had recorded a ¥392 million provision for doubtful receivables. However, following the settlement, the confirmed uncollectible amount of ¥302 million has been recorded as a bad debt loss.」
The dispute over waste removal costs was settled, and the confirmed uncollectible amount of ¥302 million was recorded as a bad debt loss. - FY2017-Q2RestatedAnnual report
「The company sought reimbursement under the seller's warranty against defects for the cost of removing waste buried on land acquired for use as a store. The matter was in dispute because the seller refused to make payment, but following a trial court judgment against the company, it recorded a ¥392 million provision for doubtful receivables. The company has appealed the trial court judgment to the Tokyo High Court.」
The dispute over waste removal costs, the trial court loss, the ¥392 million provision for doubtful receivables and the appeal are restated with the same details. - FY2017-Q1MaterialisedAnnual report
「The company sought reimbursement under the seller's warranty against defects for the cost of removing waste buried on land acquired for use as a store. The matter was in dispute because the seller refused to make payment, but following a trial court judgment against the company, it recorded a ¥392 million provision for doubtful receivables. The company has appealed the trial court judgment to the Tokyo High Court.」
The company lost at trial in a dispute over a receivable, and recorded a ¥392 million provision for doubtful receivables. It has appealed to the Tokyo High Court.