2.4.0.82118100 - Disclosure - Contingenciestruefalsefalse1falsefalsefalseD2013Q4YTDhttp://www.sec.gov/CIK0000067472duration2012-07-01T00:00:002013-06-30T00:00:001true1us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstractus-gaap_truenadurationfalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalse1falsefalsefalse00falsefalsefalsexbrli:stringItemTypestringfalse02false2us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlockus-gaap_truenadurationfalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalsefalseterseLabel1falsefalsefalse00<div style="font-family:Times New Roman;font-size:10pt;"><div style="line-height:120%;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;font-weight:bold;"></font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;font-weight:bold;text-decoration:none;">Contingencies</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">We are currently a party to various legal proceedings, claims and investigations and potentially material contingencies are discussed below.</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;font-style:italic;">Employment and Benefits Litigation</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">In 2009, Molex Automotive SARL (MAS), decided to close a facility it operated in Villemur-sur-Tarn, France. MAS submitted a social plan to MAS’s labor representatives providing for payments to approximately </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">280</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> terminated employees. This social plan was adopted by MAS in 2009 and payments were made to those employees until September 2010. In September 2010, former employees of MAS who were covered under the social plan filed suit against MAS and AGS (a state fund for wage guarantee) in the Toulouse Labor Court, requesting additional compensation. The total amount sought by the former employees is approximately </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">€24.0 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> (</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">$31.2 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">). Molex International initiated liquidation of MAS, and pursuant to a court proceeding, a liquidator was appointed in November 2010. One of the liquidator’s responsibilities is to assess and respond to the lawsuits involving MAS. In June 2011, the former employees of MAS noticed Molex Incorporated (Molex) as a defendant to the Toulouse Labor Court proceedings. In their court submission, the former employees claim that Molex was a co-employer of the former employees and thus jointly liable for any additional compensation the court awards. The former employees also claim that there was no economic justification for their dismissal, that MAS decided to close the facility before it consulted with the employees and their representatives and that MAS did not adequately comply with its obligation to assist the terminated employees in obtaining alternative employment. The liquidator has filed a submission on behalf of MAS and argues that the dismissal was economically justified, that the former employees have not proven the damages they are seeking but nonetheless Molex was co-employer and thus liable for any additional payments that may be awarded to the former employees. AGS filed its submission, adopting essentially the same substantive position as the liquidator on the dismissal of the former employees but arguing that Molex was the employer.</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">Molex filed its briefs in reply on January 6, 2012 arguing the plaintiff’s claims be dismissed. In the reply briefs, Molex argued it was not the co-employer of the plaintiffs and the court should find that it lacks jurisdiction over Molex to hear the dispute. In the alternative, Molex argued there was no breach of the information consultation process with the employees and their representatives, the dismissals were valid and based on economic grounds, MAS complied with its redeployment obligations and requested that the court dismiss the claims for damages. Molex also argued if the court were to award compensation, then any judgment against Molex be several but not jointly with MAS and the amount awarded to plaintiffs not exceed six months’ salary, approximately </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">€2.0 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> (</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">$2.6 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">).</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">On February 24, 2012, the </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">five</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> employees who fall within the executive section submitted a reply brief and requested a postponement of the March 5, 2012 court date. The court granted the request and rescheduled separate court dates for each plaintiff. On June 25, 2012, one plaintiff withdrew his claims against Molex. On June 19, 2013, the Toulouse Labor Court decided it has jurisdiction over Molex with respect to </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">three</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> of the executive section plaintiffs and Molex has decided to appeal that decision. On May 16, 2013, the Toulouse Appellate Court affirmed the Toulouse Labor Court ruling that it has jurisdiction over Molex with respect to the remaining executive section plaintiff and Molex intends to appeal that decision to the French Supreme Court (Court of Cassation).</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">On February 7, 2013, the Toulouse Appellate Court affirmed the Toulouse Labor Court ruling that it has jurisdiction over Molex with respect to the </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">190</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> employees who fall within the industry section. Molex appealed this decision to the Court of Cassation and the court is expected to issue a decision on whether to accept the appeal in the fall of 2013. On July 11, 2013, the Toulouse Labor Court denied Molex’s request to postpone the hearing pending the appeal to the Court of Cassation and the parties presented their arguments regarding the dismissal of the former employees of MAS. The Toulouse Labor Court is expected to issue its decision on December 5, 2013.</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">On March 29, 2012, Molex received notice that the liquidator filed an action against Molex in the Commercial Court of Paris claiming Molex is responsible for the liabilities of MAS that remain as a result of the liquidation. The liquidator alleged that Molex acted as de facto manager of MAS and mismanaged MAS. Although the liabilities are currently estimated at </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">€1.9 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> (</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">$2.5 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">), future liabilities of MAS may also include any amounts successfully awarded to plaintiffs in their lawsuits against MAS (described above). Molex filed a brief opposing the liquidator’s claims and a decision is expected by the end of 2013.</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">Separately, </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">23</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> Villemur employees (Villemur Employees) filed an administrative action against the Ministry of Labor, requesting reversal of the decision of the labor inspector that authorized MAS to dismiss the Villemur Employees. Molex is not a party to this action. The administrative court ruled that the labor inspector erred in allowing MAS to terminate the protected employees, on the grounds that economic justification was lacking. The decision allows the Villemur Employees to seek reinstatement or damages for the period of original dismissal (March 2010) and date of administrative decision (May 2013), which could be approximately </font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">€4.1 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"> (</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;color:#000000;text-decoration:none;">$5.3 million</font><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">). Molex Incorporated is considering whether to intervene as an interested party.</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">We intend to vigorously contest the attempt by the former employees to seek additional compensation from Molex and the liquidator’s attempt to hold Molex responsible for the liabilities of MAS.</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">While it is not feasible to predict the outcome of these proceedings with any certainty, we believe the ultimate disposition should not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:32px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;font-style:italic;">Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Investigation</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:30px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">On April 25, 2011, the SEC informed us they issued a formal order of private investigation in connection with the previously reported unauthorized activities in Molex Japan Co., Ltd. We are fully cooperating with the SEC’s investigation.</font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:30px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;"><br clear="none"/></font></div><div style="line-height:120%;text-align:justify;text-indent:29px;font-size:10pt;"><font style="font-family:inherit;font-size:10pt;">In April 2010, we launched an investigation into unauthorized activities at Molex Japan and learned that an individual working in Molex Japan’s finance group obtained unauthorized loans from third party lenders, that included in at least one instance the attempted unauthorized pledge of Molex Japan facilities as security, in Molex Japan’s name that were used to cover losses resulting from unauthorized trading, including margin trading, in Molex Japan’s name. We also learned that the individual misappropriated funds from Molex Japan’s accounts to cover losses from unauthorized trading. The individual admitted to forging documentation in arranging and concealing the transactions. In the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2010, Molex restated prior period financial statements to record liabilities in the periods in which the unauthorized transactions and potential losses occurred.</font></div></div>falsefalsefalsenonnum:textBlockItemTypenaThe entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name FASB Interpretation (FIN)
-Number 14
-Paragraph 3
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.
Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 210
-SubTopic 10
-Section S99
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.25)
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682
Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 825
-SubTopic 20
-Section 50
-Paragraph 1
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621
Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 460
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 8
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6398077&loc=d3e12565-110249
Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 450
-SubTopic 20
-Section 50
-Paragraph 4
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6952336&loc=d3e14435-108349
Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 440
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 2
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6394976&loc=d3e25287-109308
Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 5
-Paragraph 9, 10, 11, 12
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.
false0falseContingenciesUnKnownUnKnownUnKnownUnKnowntruefalsefalseSheethttp://www.molex.com/role/Contingencies12