Hannoveraner Verband

Information about "Dario".

Dear Hanoverian breeders,

the "Dario" case has received a new public perception through the current media reports. This is a complex matter, for which an information and discussion meeting of the board was called even without yesterday's report in the "Z├╝chterforum" (the date set for tomorrow was postponed for a few days at short notice). Therefore it is not so easy to choose the right time for a publication by the Verband. In this respect, your questions here in the forum have given rise to the decision to make an initial statement.

1) There is the accusation that the chairman, Mr von der Decken, did not correctly inform the board about his knowledge of the shivering results of the stallion Dario. Here you will find the statement of Hans Henning von der Decken

This statement had been prepared by Mr von der Decken as preliminary information for the entire board in relation to the above-mentioned information meeting. A public statement was planned for after the information meeting in order to present possible results of the meeting at the same time. 

2) The Dario case involves several ongoing court proceedings in which different aspects of the case and identical aspects are being heard in different countries. We ask for your understanding that we cannot report on the ongoing proceedings. The conduct of the Hannoveraner Verband is based on appropriate legal advice. The result of the Danish Arbitration Court, which decided on the legality of a "joint venture contract" concluded after the stallion complaint (Dario was originally complained about due to the shivering findings published before the auction), has already become public. This contract was not implemented and is being contested by the Hannoveraner Verband. However, the Hannoveraner Verband already considered the jurisdiction of the Danish Arbitration Court to be non-existent at the time of the Danish opening of proceedings (corresponding proceedings should be conducted in Germany).
The compulsory auction of the stallion at the State Stud did not directly have anything to do with our court proceedings, but was a commercial decision of the head of the State Stud, who must ultimately justify the lack of income to the taxpayer and handle it in his interest.

3) The trial before the labour court with Dr Schade is about the use of a facsimile signature of the chairman on the instructions of Dr Schade.  This is not related to the Chairman's statement on the Dario case. For this it is not relevant when the chairman was informed about the shivering finding, because the time of the use of the facsimile signature was of course only after the above mentioned complaint.

4) The question of reserves can be answered to the extent that the 2019 annual accounts were audited and confirmed by the auditors. The annual accounts will be presented at the delegates' meeting on 24 August. The need for reserves is discussed by the auditors.  In addition to information from the administrative office, information is obtained in particular from the lawyers involved. While a reserve was set aside for the "Dr Schade" labour court case, risks from auction transactions were only allocated at a standard percentage of total turnover (thus no individual reserve) for "Dario".

5) The handling of shivering in relation to the licensing remains difficult. Currently, no stallions suffering from shivering are admitted to the main licensing. However, this decision is based on arguments of marketing and not (yet) of breeding. This topic will continue to accompany the breeding committee and also the federal level.