Prospectus - Notowania

• Vanderbilt Financial, LLC (VF), a special purpose vehicle in which PIM US has an
8% holding;
• Pioneer Investment Management USA Inc. (PIM US), a wholly-owned subsidiary
of PGAM;
• PGAM., a wholly-owned subsidiary of UniCredit;
• UniCredit;
• various directors of VCA, VF and PIM US;
• law firms, external auditors, investment banks and State of New Mexico officials.
At present, an assessment on the economic impact that may result from the proceedings is
premature.
The defendants have requested that the plaintiff’s claim be denied. The Court has not yet set a
date for a hearing on said request.
The petition was served to the American companies, including Vanderbilt Capital Advisors and
Pioneer Investment Management USA Inc. (both part of UniCredit Group). Also the natural
persons who are called as defendants have been served the petition.
On September 24, 2009 UniCredit was served the petition. PGAM has not yet been served.
Divania S.r.l.
In the first half of 2007, Divania S.r.l. filed a suit against UniCredit Banca d’Impresa S.p.A.
(now UniCredit Corporate Banking) contesting the violations of the law and regulations
(relevant, amongst other things, to financial products) with reference to the operations in rate
and currency derivative transactions created between January 2000 and May 2005 by Credito
Italiano S.p.A. initially, and subsequently by UniCredit Banca d’Impresa S.p.A. (now
UniCredit Corporate Banking), for a total of 206 contracts. The petition, which requests that the
contracts be declared inexistent, or failing that, null and void or to be cancelled or terminated
and that UniCredit Banca d’Impresa S.p.A. (now UniCredit Corporate Banking) be found liable
to pay a total of €276.6 million as well as legal fees and interest, was served on March 26, 2007
in the Court of Bari as part of the new corporate procedure. An expert witness report was
requested in the fall of 2008. Recently the experts requested an extension of 120 days for
submitting the report that was due at the beginning of March 2010. The suit is still pending as
at the Date of the Prospectus.
UniCredit Corporate Banking considers the claimed amount to be disproportionate to the actual
litigation risk, as the amount claimed was calculated by adding all debit entries made (for an
amount much larger than the actual), without including the credits that drastically reduce the
claimant’s demands. Furthermore, a settlement had been reached, and signed on June 8, 2005,
for the contested transactions, under which Divania S.r.l. stated that it would no longer make
any claim, for any reason, for the transactions now being disputed. The petition calls into
question the validity of the transaction, arguing that the settlement is null and void given the
alleged illegitimacy of the transactions in question. UniCredit Corporate Banking believes that
the maximum amount at risk is approximately €4 million, equivalent to the sum that was
- 346 -