The National Securities Market Commission announced Friday the opening of a sanctioning proceeding to Telepizza "for the possible commission of a very serious infringement typified in article 282.7 of the Securities Market Law". It refers to the supply to the stock market regulator of possible misleading information about the resignation of his former independent director Marcos de Quinto, former Coca-Cola executive and member of the restoration company until May 18.
Although the statement does not name De Quinto, the CNMV notes that the file is related to a relevant event published on May 18, 2018 "in which the market was informed about the resignation of one of its independent directors and the reasons for the resignation".
Then, Telepizza attributed the resignation of De Quinto, former president of Coca-Cola in Spain among other charges, to "personal reasons", but later the executive clarified that his departure from Telepizza's highest management body was due to another reason: his rejection to the agreement that the group announced in May to integrate with Pizza Hut its brands and launch a commercial alliance that was communicated to the market on May 16, two days before the resignation of De Quinto.
In an interview in El Mundo a few weeks after his resignation, De Quinto criticized the "unbalanced" terms of the alliance: "One OPA [oferta pública de adquisición] it could have contributed more value to the shareholder and simplified this complex operation. But I think that for Pizza Hut the current agreement was much more advantageous. "
The executive also denied that his departure was related to his interest in preserving the pension plan provided by Coca-Cola, given that Pizza Hut is a company traditionally linked to rival Pepsi. De Quinto joined Telepizza in May 2017, two months after ending a 35-year career in the sugar-sweetened beverage giant.
It is the first time that the regulator announces the opening of a sanctioning file. Until now, only sanctions were published in the BOE when a fine was imposed.
The regulator reminds that the opening of the file "does not prejudge the final result of the sanctioning process, in which the expedited has all the means that the legal order confers on him for the defense of his rights".