technicolor - 2020 Universal Registration Document

6 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

NOTES TO THE PARENT COMPANY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Note 11 - Provision & Contingencies

As of December 31, 2020

As of December 31, 2019

Usage during the period

Reversals and reclassifications

Increases

(in million euros)

Provisions for retirement benefit and jubilee

3

- -

- -

- -

3

Subsidiaries and other risks

- -

-

Restructuring measures relating to employees

7

(4)

(1)

2

Related to activities disposed of (1)

32

- -

(15)

- -

17

Other (2)

2

(2)

-

Other provisions for risks

34

7

(21)

(1)

19

TOTAL PROVISIONS FOR LOSSES AND CONTINGENCIES

37

7

(21)

(1)

22

Provision relating to the disposal of businesses, notably the former Cathode Ray Tubes activity. (1) Mainly concerns provisions for litigation (see note 11.2). (2) Contingencies 11.2 TAOYUAN COUNTY FORM RCA EMPLOYEES’ SOLICITUDE ASSOCIATION Technicolor, certain of its subsidiaries and General Electric are being sued by an association of former employees (or heirs of former employees) at a former manufacturing facility in Taiwan (TCETVT). They allege exposure to various contaminants while living or working at the facility, which allegedly caused them to suffer various diseases, including cancer, or caused emotional distress from fear that living and working at the facility increased their risk of contracting diseases. After a first ruling of the Taiwan court and an appeal before the Taiwan High Court (first appeals court), the Taiwan Supreme Court, in August 2018: confirmed the Taiwan High Court decision of awarding (i) NTD518 million ( c. €15 million at the exchange rate as of December 31, 2020) in damages to 260 claimants; and remanded the claims of 246 claimants for further proceedings (ii) at the High Court. General Electric paid to the Court the full amount of the decision in December 2019. On March 5, 2020, the Taiwan High Court ruled on the 246 remanded claims and awarded NTD54.7 million (€1.6 million) in damages plus interest. This ruling is on appeal to the Taiwan Supreme Court. In 2016, the association brought a second lawsuit against Technicolor and certain of its subsidiaries and General Electric on behalf of additional former workers making virtually identical allegations as were made in the first lawsuit. The Taipei District Court announced its ruling on December 27, 2019 and awarded approximately NTD2.3 billion ( c. €66.8 million at the exchange rate as of December 31, 2020) plus interest. Technicolor and General Electric were held jointly and severally liable. Technicolor filed its appeal of this decision to the Taiwan High Court in January 2020.

Technicolor and its subsidiaries claim, among other reasons, that TCETVT operated for less than four years after its purchase from General Electric, while General Electric and its predecessor-in-interest RCA Corporation, ultimately owned TCETVT for approximately twenty years of operations. Should the Group or any of the subsidiaries ultimately be held liable or settle the claims, the amounts of any such liability or settlement could be high. There are currently too many uncertainties to assess the extent of any liability that Technicolor or its subsidiaries may incur asa consequence of this lawsuit. Technicolor also has various avenues to mitigate any risk, including contractual indemnities owed to it by General Electric and others. Between 2014 and 2017, Technicolor settled with all plaintiffs in the legal actions that Technicolor had been defending in the United States pertaining to alleged anticompetitive conduct in the Cathode Ray Tubes (“CRT”) industry. However, the U.S. District Court decision approving Technicolor’s June 2015 settlement with a class of indirect purchasers of CRT for $14 million was remanded in February 2019 to the District Court by the Court of Appeals so that the District Court could reconsider its approval of the settlement. As part of the remand process, the indirect purchasers’ settlement agreements with defendants were amended by agreement of the parties in September 2019, which resulted in a small part of the settlement amounts being returned to the defendants, including Technicolor, and plaintiffs from nine U.S. states being excluded from the settlements. The amended settlement agreements were approved by the District Court and the order granting that approval has now been appealed to the Court of Appeals. In September 2019, motions to intervene were filed by consumers from those nine states, but the District Court denied them. The orders denying the motions to intervene have been appealed to the Court of Appeals. Technicolor believes that its exposure is limited in size and that it has valid means of defense. CATHODE RAY TUBES CASES United States

TECHNICOLOR UNIVERSAL REGISTRATION DOCUMENT 2020 302