31.2 Other related parties
The Group has normal but non-material business relations with companies in which members of the VINCI Board of Directors are senior executives or directors. Financial information on companies accounted for under the equity method is given in Note E.10.2, “Aggregated financial information”.
32. Statutory Auditors’ fees
This table includes only fees paid by fully consolidated companies.
M. Note on litigation
The companies comprising the VINCI Group are sometimes involved in litigation arising from their activities. The related risks are assessed by VINCI and the subsidiaries involved on the basis of their knowledge of the cases, and provisions are taken in consequence as appropriate.
The main legal, administrative or arbitration proceedings that were in progress at 31 December 2025 were as follows:
-
Région Île-de-France (the regional authority for the Greater Paris area) commenced proceedings against various contractors in the construction sector, seeking compensation for the harm it purportedly suffered because of the anti-competitive practices penalised by the Conseil de la Concurrence (now known as the Autorité de la Concurrence) on 9 May 2007 in relation to the programme to refurbish schools in the Greater Paris area between 1989 and 1996. After the Paris Regional Court ruled in 2013 that those proceedings were time-barred and inadmissible, the Tribunal des Conflits (jurisdiction court) declared in 2015 that the ordinary courts were not competent to decide the dispute. In 2017, the regional authority made 88 applications to the Paris Administrative Court relating to an equal number of school refurbishment contracts, claiming €293 million of damages (around 17% of the payments made by Région Île-de-France under those contracts) from 14 companies – including several Group companies – and 11 individuals. In 2019, the Paris Administrative Court dismissed Région Île-de-France’s claims. The regional authority appealed against that decision. On 19 February 2021, in its judgments in two of the 88 sets of proceedings, the Paris Administrative Court of Appeal took the view that Région Île-de-France’s action was not time-barred, that the regional authority would therefore have grounds to ask the court to find the defendants jointly and severally liable, but that its wrongdoing reduced the defendants’ liability by one-third, and ordered an expert opinion to determine any harm suffered by Région Île-de-France. In judgments dated 9 and 17 May 2023, the Conseil d’État dismissed the defendants’ appeals. On 14 December 2023 and 22 January 2025, the expert witness appointed by the Paris Administrative Court of Appeal filed reports regarding two schools, which concluded that no harm had occurred. Through judgments handed down on 5 December 2025, however, the Paris Administrative Court of Appeal ordered the defendants, in eight of the 88 sets of proceedings, to pay two-thirds of 2% of the ex-VAT amount of the contracts concerned, plus interest. If the same percentage were applied to the other 80 claims still pending, the defendants would have to pay an aggregate amount of around €23 million, with the Group companies concerned having to pay around €9 million. In view of its current status, the Group considers that this dispute will not have a material effect on its financial situation.
- In August 2019, after the French government notified its intention to terminate early the concession contract relating to the Notre-Dame-des-Landes, Nantes Atlantique and Saint-Nazaire Montoir airports, Aéroports du Grand Ouest (AGO) twice sought to commence the conciliation procedure provided for in Article 94 of the concession contract. The government refused to comply and, through an order dated 24 October 2019, declared that the concession contract had been terminated for public interest reasons. On 5 December 2019, to safeguard its right to compensation, AGO sent to the government an initial compensation request and, on 6 December 2019, it filed an application to the Nantes Administrative Court to challenge the termination order. In its application, AGO reiterated that, as an alternative, it was prepared to commence a mediation procedure under Article L.213-7 of the French Code of Administrative Justice to try to reach a balanced agreement that would resolve the dispute. On 3 June 2021, AGO received the government’s defence, sent by the Nantes Administrative Court. On 30 June 2021, the President of the Nantes Administrative Court proposed a mediation procedure to the parties, pursuant to Article L.213-7 of the French Code of Administrative Justice. AGO accepted this proposed mediation, but the latter was not able to take place due to the government’s refusal to implement the procedure. The Administrative Court handed down its judgment on 10 April 2024, finding that AGO’s application was admissible and recognising AGO’s right to be compensated for the harm it suffered from the termination of the concession contract, although it reserved judgment regarding the amount of compensation due on the date the termination took effect. However, since the Administrative Court rejected AGO’s claims relating in particular to compensation for harm suffered during the performance of the concession contract, AGO filed an appeal against that part of the judgment with the Nantes Administrative Court of Appeal in August 2025. The dispute is therefore still ongoing before the administrative courts. As the matter currently stands, the Group is not able to assess the impact of this situation.
- The Czech Republic’s roads and motorways department (RSD) has made several claims against Eurovia CZ, a VINCI Construction subsidiary based in the Czech Republic, as well as other non-Group companies. These claims concern works carried out between 2003 and 2007 in building the D47 motorway. Since late 2012, the RSD has brought several sets of arbitration and legal proceedings, mainly to seek damages for what the RSD alleges was defective work affecting the roads and engineering structures. Six arbitration awards have been made in addition to a judgment handed down in civil proceedings, all involving amounts substantially lower than the those sought by the RSD, and the repairs ordered are either under way or completed. On 22 September 2025, an arbitration decision was made in response to a final claim made by RSD for 1.9 billion Czech koruna, relating mainly to defects on a section of road and only involving Eurovia CZ, ordering partial compensation. Both parties have appealed against that decision, and have begun negotiations with the aim of reaching a final out-of-court settlement in relation to this dispute. In view of its current status and its latest developments, the Group considers that this dispute will not have a material effect on its financial situation.
- On 6 November 2019, the Metropolitan Municipality of Lima (Peru) commenced arbitration proceedings against Lima Expresa, the concession holder of the Línea Amarilla expressway, before the International Arbitration Chamber of Paris. The Metropolitan Municipality of Lima’s main claim, as concession grantor, relates to the termination of the 12 November 2009 concession contract and to the series of supplementary agreements. Lima Expresa is contesting the Metropolitan Municipality of Lima’s claims based on allegations of bribery prior to the Group’s acquisition of Lima Expresa in 2016, and has filed a counterclaim. In a partial arbitration award dated 9 January 2024, the arbitral tribunal rejected the Metropolitan Municipality of Lima’s claim for termination of the concession contract and its supplementary agreements. The counterclaims were found partly admissible, and in a final award made on 9 April 2025 the arbitral tribunal found that as compensation for those counterclaims, Lima Expresa is entitled to have the concession term extended by almost six years, and also ordered the Metropolitan Municipality of Lima to pay part of the costs incurred by Lima Expresa in connection with the proceedings. The Metropolitan Municipality of Lima has filed applications with the Paris Court of Appeal to have these two arbitration awards set aside. In addition, in proceedings against a former public official of the Metropolitan Municipality of Lima, the first instance decision ordering Lima Expresa to pay civil compensation amounting to around 25 million Peruvian soles was set aside at second instance in November 2024 and referred back to the court of first instance. In three other sets of criminal proceedings currently taking place against two former mayors of Lima, the public prosecutors have requested that Lima Expresa’s civil liability be invoked. Lima Expresa is disputing these requests in each set of proceedings. In view of the current situation, the Group considers that this dispute will not have a material effect on its financial situation.
- On 12 May 2015, VINCI Construction Grands Projets formed a non-incorporated joint venture with Italian company Astaldi. The entity was created for the purpose of carrying out construction works on the new Santiago airport in Chile under an engineering, procurement and construction contract formed on 18 November 2015 with the concession holder Sociedad Concesionaria Nuevo Pudahuel. VINCI Construction Grands Projets and Astaldi have equal interests in the joint venture. A dispute has arisen between VINCI Construction Grands Projets and Astaldi regarding (i) allegations of mismanagement made by Astaldi against VINCI Construction Grands Projets, which VINCI Construction Grands Projets rejects entirely, and (ii) VINCI Construction Grands Projets’ exclusion of Astaldi from the joint venture’s governance because of misconduct by Astaldi, which is disputed by Astaldi. Astaldi commenced arbitration proceedings against VINCI Construction Grands Projets on 14 December 2020 before the International Chamber of Commerce. In a letter dated 28 December 2020, Astaldi stated that the amount it was claiming was around €150 million. VINCI Construction Grands Projets entirely disputes the compensation sought by Astaldi and has made a counterclaim aimed at (i) forcing Astaldi to pay its share of the loss suffered by the consortium at the time of its exclusion and (ii) forcing Astaldi to reimburse its share of the calls for funds made during the works, which total €59.6 million. An initial arbitral tribunal, the seat of which is in Geneva, was constituted on 14 June 2021. Subsequently, following Astaldi’s acquisition by Webuild, on 25 November 2021 VINCI Construction Grands Projets commenced new arbitration proceedings against Webuild, without abandoning its counterclaim against Astaldi. VINCI Construction Grands Projets’ view is that since the date of the aforementioned acquisition (1 August 2021), Webuild became liable for the compensation it is claiming from Astaldi in relation to the airport construction work. This is disputed by Webuild. Subsequently, on 11 March 2022, the International Chamber of Commerce’s International Court of Arbitration joined the two existing sets of proceedings into a new set of proceedings. The arbitral tribunal then resigned and on 3 June 2022 the same International Court of Arbitration, noting that the parties had not agreed on the appointment of new arbitrators, appointed them itself in order to form a new arbitral tribunal, which has since been in charge of the new tripartite proceedings. As part of those proceedings, VINCI Construction Grands Projets has filed its submissions in support of its claim against Webuild and Astaldi, seeking an award forcing them to (i) pay their share of the loss suffered by the consortium at the time of Astaldi’s exclusion and (ii) reimburse their share of the calls for funds made during the works, which total €59.6 million. These tripartite proceedings were closed by the arbitral tribunal on 21 November 2024. The arbitration award was made on 5 February 2025. In its decision, the arbitral tribunal (i) found that it had no jurisdiction with respect to Webuild, (ii) ordered Astaldi to pay VINCI Construction Grands Projets €37.1 million plus €17.5 million interest as of the date of the award, (iii) found that Astaldi’s debt to VINCI Construction Grands Projets was unsecured, and (iv) rejected in their entirety the claims brought by Astaldi against VINCI Construction Grands Projets on the basis of alleged mismanagement, which were all denied. VINCI Construction Grands Projets filed an appeal against the award before the Swiss Federal Tribunal, asking for it to be set aside and asking the Swiss Federal Tribunal to declare that the arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to make a ruling on the merits regarding VINCI Construction Grands Projets’ claims against Webuild. These proceedings remain ongoing. In view of its current status, the Group considers that this dispute will not have a material effect on its financial situation.
- Pursuant to the statement of objections sent to Nuvia Process (as the alleged infringing party) and to Soletanche Freyssinet and VINCI (as parent companies) on 23 June 2022, the Autorité de la Concurrence, in a decision dated 7 September 2023, handed down a financial penalty of €13,911,000 to the aforementioned companies for breaching the provisions of Article L.420-1 of the French Commercial Code and Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. An appeal has been lodged with the Paris Court of Appeal. The hearing took place on 20 November 2025 and the Paris Court of Appeal is scheduled to hand down its judgment on 10 September 2026. In view of its current status, the Group considers that this dispute will not have a material effect on its financial situation.
