Commitments and Contingencies

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2020

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments and Contingencies

Litigation

The Company is involved in other litigation in addition to those noted below, arising in the normal course of business. Management has made certain estimates for potential litigation costs based upon consultation with legal counsel. Actual results could differ from these estimates; however, in the opinion of management, such litigation and claims will not have a material effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Asian American Entertainment Corporation, Limited v. Venetian Macau Limited, et al.

On February 5, 2007, Asian American Entertainment Corporation, Limited (“AAEC” or “Plaintiff”) brought a claim (the “Prior Action”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada (the “U.S. District Court”) against Las Vegas Sands, Inc. (now known as Las Vegas Sands, LLC (“LVSLLC”)), Venetian Casino Resort, LLC (“VCR”) and Venetian Venture Development, LLC, which are subsidiaries of the Company, and William P. Weidner and David Friedman, who are former executives of the Company. The Prior Action sought damages based on an alleged breach of agreements entered into between AAEC and the aforementioned defendants for their joint presentation of a bid in response to the public tender held by the Macao government for the award of gaming concessions at the end of 2001. The U.S. District Court entered an order dismissing the Prior Action on April 16, 2010.

On January 19, 2012, AAEC filed another claim (the “Macao Action”) with the Macao Judicial Court (Tribunal Judicial de Base) against VML, LVS (Nevada) International Holdings, Inc. (“LVS (Nevada)”), LVSLLC and VCR (collectively, the “Defendants”). The claim was for 3.0 billion patacas (approximately $376 million at exchange rates in effect on March 31, 2020). The Macao Action alleges a breach of agreements entered into between AAEC and LVS (Nevada), LVSLLC and VCR (collectively, the “U.S. Defendants”) for their joint presentation of a bid in response to the public tender held by the Macao government for the award of gaming concessions at the end of 2001. On July 4, 2012, the Defendants filed their defense to the Macao Action with the Macao Judicial Court and amended the defense on January 4, 2013.

On March 24, 2014, the Macao Judicial Court issued a Decision (Despacho Seneador) holding that AAEC’s claim against VML is unfounded and that VML be removed as a party to the proceedings, and the claim should proceed exclusively against the U.S. Defendants. On May 8, 2014, AAEC lodged an appeal against that decision.

On June 5, 2015, the U.S. Defendants applied to the Macao Judicial Court to dismiss the claims against them as res judicata based on the dismissal of the Prior Action. On March 16, 2016, the Macao Judicial Court dismissed the defense of res judicata. An appeal against that decision was lodged by U.S. Defendants on April 7, 2016. As of the end

of December 2016, all appeals (including VML’s dismissal and the res judicata appeals) were being transferred to the Macao Second Instance Court. On May 11, 2017, the Macao Second Instance Court notified the parties of its decision of refusal to deal with the appeals at the present time. The Macao Second Instance Court ordered the court file be transferred back to the Macao Judicial Court. Evidence gathering by the Macao Judicial Court commenced by letters rogatory, which was completed on March 14, 2019, and the trial of this matter was scheduled for September 2019.

On July 15, 2019, AAEC submitted a request to the Macao Judicial Court to increase the amount of its claim to 96.45 billion patacas (approximately $12.08 billion at exchange rates in effect on March 31, 2020), allegedly representing lost profits from 2004 to 2018, and reserving its right to claim for lost profits up to 2022 in due course at the enforcement stage.

On September 2, 2019, the U.S. Defendants moved to revoke the legal aid granted to AAEC, which excuses AAEC from paying its share of court costs. On September 4, 2019, the Macao Judicial Court deferred ruling on the U.S. Defendants’ motion regarding legal aid until the entry of final judgment. The U.S. Defendants appealed that deferral on September 17, 2019. On September 26, 2019, the Macao Judicial Court rejected that appeal on procedural grounds; The U.S. Defendants requested clarification of that order on October 29, 2019. By order dated December 4, 2019, the Macao Judicial Court stated it would reconsider the U.S. Defendants’ motion to revoke legal aid and, as part of that reconsideration, it would reanalyze portions of the record, seek an opinion from the Macao Public Prosecutor regarding the propriety of legal aid and consult with the trial court overseeing AAEC’s separate litigation against Galaxy Entertainment Group Ltd., Galaxy Entertainment Group S.A. and Messrs. Weidner and Friedman, individually. The Macao Judicial Court denied the motion to revoke legal aid on January 14, 2020.

On September 4, 2019, the Macao Judicial Court allowed AAEC’s request to increase the amount of its claim. On September 17, 2019, the U.S. Defendants appealed the decision granting AAEC’s request. On September 26, 2019, the Macao Judicial Court accepted that appeal and it is currently pending before the Macao Second Instance Court. On September 10, 2019, AAEC moved to reschedule the trial of the Macao Action, which had been scheduled to begin on September 12, 2019. The Macao Judicial Court granted that motion and rescheduled the trial to begin on September 16, 2020.

The Macao Action is in a preliminary stage and management has determined that based on proceedings to date, it is currently unable to determine the probability of the outcome of this matter or the range of reasonably possible loss, if any. The Company intends to defend this matter vigorously.