The operator of the Vilnius waste sorting plant, Energesman, confirms that shortly after VAATC initiated the termination of the contracts, a shareholder of the company met with VAATC CEO Marius Švaikauskas. The meeting was arranged by a third party. During the meeting, the head of VAATC proposed a compromise: Energesman would be allowed to continue carrying out the modernisation contract if it agreed not to challenge the termination of the operating contract. The offer was rejected.
The meeting took place at 7 p.m. on 14 July at a cigar club in Vilnius. On 16 August, Skirmantas Malinauskas reported on the meeting in his podcast, saying that he had been told about it by Vilnius Mayor Valdas Benkunskas. However, the Mayor incorrectly described both the location and the content of the meeting.
“First of all, we want to make it clear that Skirmantas Malinauskas was not discussed at the meeting. We have no influence whatsoever over the content produced by the blogger. The account of the meeting allegedly relayed to him by the Mayor of Vilnius also does not correspond to reality. We believe this was a deliberate attempt to spread false information and discredit our company,” says Algirdas Blazgys, CEO of Energesman.
During the meeting with Energesman’s shareholder, VAATC CEO Marius Švaikauskas proposed a compromise: if Energesman did not challenge the termination of the operating contract, VAATC would allow the company to continue carrying out the modernisation contract, which Energesman had secured after winning an international public procurement tender. The company won the tender with the lowest bid.
“We rejected the offer because this is not a marketplace where a municipal company can terminate contracts whenever it chooses and pressure suppliers into giving up activities to which they are legally entitled. Our contract remains valid for another ten years, and we are prepared to continue carrying it out once we prove that it was terminated unlawfully,” says A. Blazgys.
During the meeting, M. Švaikauskas also acknowledged that VAATC would be prepared to enter into a settlement agreement with Energesman if the court granted interim measures concerning the termination of the contract.
The decision of the Vilnius Regional Court not to grant interim measures has now been appealed to a higher court.
“The conduct of the VAATC CEO clearly indicates that the termination of the contracts is part of a process aimed at redistributing the market, being carried out by VAATC and the Vilnius City Municipality through what appears to be unlawful coordination of their actions. Offers based on pressure further confirm that VAATC has no right to terminate the contracts and is using the terminations as an unlawful means of putting pressure on Energesman. We have no information indicating that the VAATC CEO had formal authorisation from the board to make the offers in question,” says attorney Dr Paulius Miliauskas, partner at the law firm Miliauskas ir Lauraitytė.
According to the attorney, questions also arise as to why M. Švaikauskas discussed the content of the meeting with the Mayor of Vilnius.
“M. Švaikauskas is not subordinate to the Mayor of Vilnius – he reports to the VAATC board, on which the Vilnius City Municipality is represented by municipal employee Dalius Krinickas. This communication raises serious questions about a possible abuse of the VAATC CEO’s authority and the Mayor’s abuse of office,” says P. Miliauskas.
The Vilnius Regional Court has already accepted two claims filed by Energesman challenging the termination of both contracts – the operating contract and the modernisation contract. The court has also granted interim measures prohibiting VAATC from demanding, and the insurance company from paying out, the contract performance guarantees, which are worth EUR 1.3 million.
Pending a final court ruling, Energesman maintains that both the operating and modernisation contracts for the Vilnius waste sorting plant remain valid. The company bases its position on the provision of the operating contract that termination is possible only if two conditions are met: there must be significant grounds for termination and 20 working days’ notice must be given.
In Energesman’s view, the grounds cited by VAATC are not significant because the decisions of the Vilnius Emergency Operations Centre (ESOC) and its head (ESOV) deliberately discriminated against the company, while the accumulation of waste at the plant resulted from the Vilnius combined heat and power plant being unable to accept waste for incineration, rather than from any fault on the part of the operator.
At the same time, VAATC itself failed to perform its obligations under the modernisation contract by failing to make the EUR 4.4 million initial payment to Energesman within the contractual deadline.
According to preliminary estimates, Energesman’s losses will amount to approximately EUR 20 million. These losses may increase further the longer VAATC remains in control of the plant.