The Barabás brothers, i.e. the owners of Hell Energy, are suing the Forbes publisher because we included them in the list of the largest family companies. There is an ongoing lawsuit about the case, which Forbes won for the most part in the first instance, and in our legal opinion, this allows us to write down the names of the owners again.
The September 2024 issue of Forbes – this is what the Barabás brothers want to withdraw because we wrote their names.
Forbes learned from the news (Blikk, TV2, Index and Origo) that the owners of Hell Energy are again filing a lawsuit against the publisher. The owners are also initiating the recall of the magazine, as they believe that we wrote down their names illegally. They last filed a lawsuit against us four years ago, at the beginning of 2020, and then they successfully recalled the magazine, although the goal of keeping the identity of the owners a secret was not completely achieved, since the case is still under investigation. a New York Times also articled.
Hell’s announcement states, among other things, that
- “In 2019, the court (in the framework of a temporary measure – ed.) prohibited the publisher of Forbes magazine from any kind of data management in relation to the private individuals concerned, including any press release”;
- “the civil trial has been going on for years, in February 2024 it only reached the birth of the first instance, non-final verdict”;
- “according to Hell’s legal position, the temporary measure is in effect until the final adjudication of the lawsuit”;
- “the article contains many statements that do not correspond to reality”;
- “it was highlighted that HELL Energy Magyarország Kft. has invested HUF 118.1 billion since its establishment, of which a total of 10.04 percent was state aid”.
- it was thought important to note that the data of the owners According to them, they appeared “in a weak tabloid style, complete with personal commentary” (you can read here if this is really the case).
Hell Energy’s 2023 supplementary appendix on the state subsidies received by the group.
As we previously reported, and this is an important development from the point of view of the case, in the lawsuit initiated in 2019, a first-instance verdict was reached after four years, in which
the court largely ruled in favor of the publisher of Forbes.
According to our legal point of view, the effect of the previously adopted temporary measure, which practically resulted in censorship in recent years, has ended. In legal matters, the Society for Freedom Rights (TASZ) represents Forbes.
The stakes of the legal dispute
Years ago, in accordance with the guidelines of the National Data Protection and Freedom of Information Authority (NAIH), Forbes developed the already very complicated and burdensome procedure for the editors, within the framework of which it contacts the stakeholders on the list (part of this is the so-called interest assessment, which based on which data management is carried out).
In the case of Hell Energy, the editorial staff of Forbes acted in the same way as in the case of all other actors, both in the preliminary legal consultation, in the valuation and in the preparation of the content. We worked from publicly available sources of information, such as the company’s – and publicly available – financial profit and loss statements, balance sheets and supplementary appendices.
According to the editors of Forbes, the general public is rightfully interested in how the enterprises that receive state support operate. The estimates prepared by Forbes – with the involvement of experienced and recognized company valuation experts – can be interpreted as indicators of this.
The amount of state support a large employer receives and the investment it makes are not mutually exclusive, and in fact, the investment itself is often a condition for the support. In Hell Energy’s statement, it does not mention funds from the MNB’s bond programs, although the company was able to develop capacities, among other things, by accessing very substantial public funds.
In our opinion, the stakes of the years-long legal dispute between the publisher of Forbes and the owners of Hell Energy are whether or not journalism is practically impossible.
The case goes far beyond whether or not the names of the owners of a group of companies receiving state aid can be written off. If Hell’s interpretation of the law wins in court, who not Can you stop your name from being written in a newspaper? Who wouldn’t, if the owners of a company that sells energy drinks, soft drinks, and coffee to an entire country, who also receive state support, can do all this?
Forbes sent its legal response to the company group when they indicated that our legal interpretation differs in relation to the first-instance verdict. Hell then indicated that they would send their legal position to us – paradoxically, the owners who wanted to hide instead turned to a part of the press first.
The Battle for Transparency: Hell Energy Owners Sue Forbes Publisher over Family Business Listing
In a shocking turn of events, the Barabás brothers, owners of the popular energy drink brand Hell Energy, have filed a lawsuit against the publisher of Forbes magazine, citing the inclusion of their names in the list of largest family companies as the reason for the legal action. This move has sparked a heated debate about the rights of journalists and the importance of transparency in business dealings.
The Background of the Case
In 2019, Forbes published an article that listed the Barabás brothers as the owners of Hell Energy, which led to the brothers filing a lawsuit against the publisher. The court initially ruled in favor of the brothers, prohibiting Forbes from publishing any information about them. However, after four years of legal battles, the court finally reached a verdict in February 2024, largely ruling in favor of the publisher.
The Stakes of the Legal Dispute
The case has significant implications for journalism and freedom of expression. The owners of Hell Energy argue that the publication of their names is an invasion of their privacy, while Forbes maintains that the public has a right to know about the owners of companies that receive state aid. The magazine’s editorial staff used publicly available sources of information, including financial reports and balance sheets, to compile the list.
The dispute has sparked concerns about the limits of journalistic freedom and the ability of businesses to operate transparently. The Society for Freedom Rights (TASZ) has stepped in to represent Forbes in the legal battle, highlighting the importance of defending freedom of expression and the public’s right to information.
The Investments and State Aid
At the heart of the dispute is the issue of state aid and investments made by Hell Energy. The company has received significant funding from the Hungarian government, which has helped it expand its operations and develop new capacities. However, the owners of Hell Energy argue that the publication of this information is misleading and does not provide a complete picture of the company’s financial situation.
Forbes, on the other hand, maintains that the public has a right to know about the investments and state aid received by companies, particularly those that operate in the public sphere. The magazine’s estimates of the company’s value are based on publicly available information and are intended to provide a transparent picture of the company’s financial situation.
The Consequences of the Legal Dispute
The outcome of this legal battle will have far-reaching consequences for journalism and freedom of expression. If the owners of Hell Energy are successful in their lawsuit, it could set a dangerous precedent for businesses to operate in secret, without accountability to the public. On the other hand, if Forbes is successful, it will reinforce the importance of transparency and accountability in business dealings.
Ultimately, the case highlights the importance of balancing individual privacy rights with the public’s right to information. As the legal battle continues, it remains to be seen how the courts will weigh these competing interests and what implications this will have for journalists, businesses, and the public at large.
Keyword Optimization
Hell Energy
Barabás brothers
Forbes magazine
Journalistic freedom
Transparency in business
State aid
Investments
Privacy rights
Public’s right to information
META Tags
Title: The Battle for Transparency: Hell Energy Owners Sue Forbes Publisher over Family Business Listing
Description: The owners of Hell Energy are suing Forbes magazine over the publication of their names in the list of largest family companies. The case has sparked a heated debate about journalistic freedom and transparency in business dealings.
Keywords: Hell Energy, Forbes magazine, journalistic freedom, transparency in business, state aid, investments, privacy rights, public’s right to information.
