Since 1975
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • Home
  • Japan
  • Court rejects claim of collusion over land prices for Tokyo Olympic village

Court rejects claim of collusion over land prices for Tokyo Olympic village

An archive photo of construction looking at construction of Olympic village in 2018. (ANJP /Pierre Boutier)
An archive photo of construction looking at construction of Olympic village in 2018. (ANJP /Pierre Boutier)
View of the condominium where the athletes of Tokyo Olympic 2020 stayed, and has become public. (ANJP /Pierre Boutier)
View of the condominium where the athletes of Tokyo Olympic 2020 stayed, and has become public. (ANJP /Pierre Boutier)
An achive photo of the plaintiffs, holding a banner in front of Tokyo district court before filling their lawsuit about suspected conflict of interest and suspected agreement to lower price of land to build athletes‘ village, April. 1, 2021. (ANJP /Pierre Boutier)
An achive photo of the plaintiffs, holding a banner in front of Tokyo district court before filling their lawsuit about suspected conflict of interest and suspected agreement to lower price of land to build athletes‘ village, April. 1, 2021. (ANJP /Pierre Boutier)
Short Url:
26 Dec 2021 11:12:30 GMT9
26 Dec 2021 11:12:30 GMT9

Arab News Japan
 
TOKYO: A court in Tokyo has rejected a lawsuit that claimed land for the Olympic Village in the Harumi district of Tokyo changed hands below market prices. The lawsuit was filed against the government of Tokyo.
 
The plaintiffs believed there was a conflict of interest between Mitsui Real Estate and the Tokyo government.
 
The group of companies in charge of the construction of the Olympic Village since 2015 was headed by Mitsui Real Estate. Tokyo handles the administration of the property. The land was purchased for a total of 13 billion yen .
 
The plaintiffs denounced the fact that there was no call for tenders ahead of the contract concluded between the city and the group of companies in charge of the redevelopment of the Harumi site. They said there must have been collusion between the parties.
 
The plaintiffs have said they will appeal against the court decision, which they consider to be prejudicial.
 
The judge in charge of the case concluded that the prices were reasonable.

 

topics
Most Popular
Recommended

return to top