CHICAGO, Jan. 20, 2004 (PRIMEZONE) -- Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C. announces that a class action lawsuit is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of the securities (including American Depository Receipts "ADR's", and bonds) of Parmalat Finanziaria SpA (Pink Sheets:PARAF) (Milan:PRFI) ("Parmalat" or the "Company") between January 5, 1999 and December 29, 2003, inclusive ("Class Period").
It has been alleged that Parmalat, Calisto Tanzi, Stefano Tanzi, Luciano Del Soldato, Domenico Barili, Francesco Giuffredi, Giovanni Tanzi, Fausto Tonna Deloitte & Touche Tohmatsu, Deloitte & Touche SpA, Citigroup, Inc., Grant Thornton International, Grant Thornton SpA, Bonlat Financing Corp., Coloniale SpA, Zini & Associates, and Buconero LLC violated the federal securities laws by issuing a series of materially false and misleading statements to the market. These misstatements have had the effect of artificially inflating the market price of Parmalat's securities.
Much Shelist is currently investigating these claims. If you wish to discuss your rights and interests, or if you have information relevant to the lawsuit, you may contact Carol V. Gilden or Louis A. Kessler at Much Shelist Freed Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C., by calling a toll-free number 1-800-470-6824, or by sending an e-mail to investorhelp@muchshelist.com. Your e-mail should refer to Parmalat.
Specifically, the Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, the Company failed to disclose that: the defendants' statements were materially false and misleading because they failed to disclose and/or misrepresented the following adverse facts: (1) that its assets in its audited financial statements were overstated; (2) that Parmalat falsely stated that it had used its "excess cash balances" -- which actually did not exist -- to repurchase corporate debt securities worth 2.9 billion euros (approximately $3.6 billion), when in fact it had not repurchased those debt obligations and they remained outstanding; (3) that the $625 million of Parmalat's cash allegedly invested in a liquid investment fund in the Cayman Islands could not be retrieved because it was falsified; (4) that the Company used off-shore shell companies, such as Bonlat Financing Corp., Buconero LLC, and Epicurum to falsify its financial results; (5) that defendants C. Tanzi and S. Tanzi siphoned as much as 800 million euros ($1 billion) from Parmalat operations, mainly to finance other family businesses; (6) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls and was therefore unable to ascertain the true financial condition of the Company; and (7) that as a result, the value of the Company's net income and financial results were materially overstated at all relevant times.
On December 9, 2003, defendant Calisto Tanzi, then Parmalat's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and his son, defendant Stefano Tanzi, a senior Parmalat executive, met with representatives from a New York City-based private equity and financial advisory firm regarding a possible leveraged buyout of Parmalat. During that meeting, in response to a comment by one of the Tanzis about liquidity problems at Parmalat, one of the New York firm's representatives noted that Parmalat's financial statements showed that the company had a large amount of cash. In response, defendant Stefano Tanzi stated that the cash was not there, and that Parmalat really had only 500 million euros in cash. Later, defendant Luciano Del Soldato, then Parmalat's Chief Financial Officer, joined the meeting. During a discussion of Parmalat's outstanding debt, Mr. Del Soldato stated that Parmalat's debt was actually 10 billion euros, much higher than the balance sheet showed. Mr. Del Soldato indicated that the balance sheet was incorrect because the company had not repurchased 2.9 billion euros of Parmalat bonds. The balance sheet falsely reflected that the bonds had been repurchased. These revelations ultimately lead to Parmalat announcing that it had been declared insolvent by an Italian Court on December 29, 2003.
If you purchased Parmalat's securities during the Class Period and if you meet certain other legal requirements, you may file a motion in the court where the lawsuit has been filed to serve as a lead plaintiff. You must file your motion no later than March 5, 2004.
A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the court must determine that the class member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as "lead plaintiff." Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. The requirements for serving as a lead plaintiff are set forth in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. Section 78u-4).
Much Shelist's history is one of experience, leadership and results. For more than 25 years, Much Shelist has represented plaintiffs in class action litigation in federal and state courts across the United States. The firm has successfully prosecuted cases involving securities fraud, antitrust violations, consumer fraud, unlawful business practices and insurance company fraud. Under Much Shelist's leadership, class members have obtained judgments and settlements in excess of $4 billion.