[ad_1]
This summer, DN revealed that the Swedish meteorological and hydrological institute, SMHI, sold the business that sells forecasts for international shipments to a former head of that particular business. The manager founded the company Gale Force AB in April, the same month he resigned from SMHI, and the company was allowed to buy the business for 5.5 million SEK.
The deal was reported to the Swedish Competition Authority, which decided not to initiate an investigation.
– It was closed because we did not have enough indications that there was something in which we could intervene with the support of the Competition Law. If it is a sale with a possible discount, which we do not know because we have not investigated it, it is the constitutional rules of the EU that will apply and will be investigated by the European Commission, says Martin Bäckström, functions manager of the authority.
How the deal was resolved it’s hard to follow. Former manager Tom Sandberg has told DN that it was SMHI who contacted him, while SMHI’s general counsel claims to DN instead that it was Sandberg’s initiative.
DN has requested documentation on the preparatory work but has been told that it is a decision that has not been “recorded”. So far, DN has not received email correspondence between the parties.
During the sale process, in June, an outsider requested documentation about the deal, but SMHI claimed complete confidentiality and did not reveal anything. When the refusal was appealed to the Jönköping Administrative Court of Appeal, the court concluded that SMHI cannot be considered to have conducted a full examination of the request for documents.
Not even the chamber court has received the full documentation from the authority, the court writes in its decision:
Furthermore, it has resulted in the Court of Appeals, despite the request to do so, not having received all the documents covered by the request and the appealed decision ”.
Competitor Noor Care AB reported the transaction to the Swedish Competition Authority as it was deemed to have been settled without transparency, in the absence of competition and at a discount. Noor Care also reported the matter to the police. After the prosecutor chose not to initiate a preliminary investigation, the company has requested an examination to take the case and the prosecution has not yet made a decision on the matter.
We take the way SMHI has decided to act in relation to the divestment of Sjöfart very seriously. With its actions, SMHI violates a series of legal norms, which are managed by various legal bodies.
The company has also reported the Ombudsman, JO, who deals with the issue and now chooses to report to the European Commission.
– We take very seriously how SMHI has decided to act in relation to the divestment of Sjöfart. Through its actions, SMHI violates a series of legal norms, which are managed by various legal bodies. We chose to report to the European Commission because we want all alleged violations of the law to be investigated and properly investigated by the appropriate legal body, says Noor Care CEO Eleonor Marmefelt.
Also Storm Geo AB tells DN that they would have been absolutely interested in buying Sjöfart if they had the chance. Ten years ago, CEO Johan Groth was himself SMHI’s Marketing and Sales Director. He claims that he and the company received all the information about the sale through the media.
– From our perspective, the sales process has been unusually poor and lacking in transparency.
– It seems that it would not have been perfect if SMHI’s goal was to save as many jobs as possible, while trying to get the highest possible price for the apartment they sold.
The price, 5.5 million crowns., considers, as a representative of Noor Care, too low.
– We do not know all the details, but based on what we can see in the media, we certainly believe that we could have paid a significantly higher amount.
SMHI General Counsel Michael af Sandeberg writes in an email to DN that they do not comment on the report as they have not seen it.
“In the event that the report possibly leads to an investigation, SMHI will, of course, assist the investigation and answer the questions.”
About the case in the Court of Appeal writes af Sandeberg that “there was no reason at the time of the application to devote time and costs to identifying the documents to which the application referred, as the entire case, in SMHI’s opinion, was covered by secrecy absolute”.
When the court learned of the appeal and requested an opinion from the SMHI, it was established that new circumstances had arisen when the sale case was closed, he says. The case was returned to SMHI for renewed processing.
“The documents have been published after a new secret test. Therefore, SMHI has not violated any rules regarding the documentation and disclosure it wishes to claim, “writes Michael af Sandeberg.
Read more: Expensive invoice when SMHI sold the climate-smart shipping service
