The ongoing dispute between the Carinthian investment management and Lilihill about Klagenfurt Airport is entering the next round: the state-owned company is suing against the lease agreements that were concluded with sister companies of the airport.

The management of Klagenfurt Airport, which is majority-owned by the Lilihill Group, concluded lease agreements with sister companies in the spring of this year. Plots that Lilihill says are not required for operations are to be leased for around 20 years. The Supervisory Board gave its approval for this transaction.

The Carinthian investment management, on the other hand, obtained two Injunctions, but these were lifted after the opening of the proceedings. The corresponding lawsuits were decided to the detriment of the national company. However, the latter has the option of going to court again and suing directly against the contracts.

That's exactly what you're doing now, because the KBV announced on Monday evening that you'll be suing directly against the contracts. It is claimed that the state of Carinthia and the city of Klagenfurt, as minority shareholders, were not involved. However, both the KBV and the city have representatives on the supervisory board, i.e. the body that gave the green light for the lease.

In the run-up to filing the new lawsuit, the state-owned company asked Lilihill that the leases should be "unconditionally terminated on its own initiative". According to the KBV, the private majority owner of Klagenfurt Airport should not have responded.

“The lawsuit therefore also aims to ensure that airport land can only be leased in the future with the consent of the airport general assembly. We represent the interests of the public sector. If an investor does not comply with applicable contracts, then we must ultimately protect these public interests in court. Unfortunately, the investor gave us no other choice," says KBV board member Martin Payer. “The court clearly stated that the rescission of the injunction is not justified in terms of content, but because the contract was already signed at the time of the injunction and an injunction can therefore no longer prevent the conclusion of a contract. Since Lilihill has not agreed to terminate the contract, we must now take direct legal action against the lease."