Handelsbanken's nomination committee announced today that it has rescinded its
proposal, ahead of the Annual General Meeting on March 26, that the bank grant
an indemnity undertaking to each of its board members.

The reason why Industrivärden has given its support to the nomination
committee's decision to rescind the proposal is that the legislation on this
matter has been delayed (even though it is expected to take force on July 1),
and that no legislative proposal will be ready to take a position on at the
time of the bank's Annual General Meeting.

Industrivärden, which had taken the initiative for the proposal for the
indemnity undertaking, did so against the background of a Swedish investigative
proposal* to formulate rules on the handling of so-called administrative
penalties imposed on individual members of a bank's board. Such administrative
penalties for an individual person can be substantial - up to SEK 45 M (or
more). According to the proposal, the penalties can be imposed even if the
person has not been careless (i.e., even if the person has not done anything
wrong). According to the proposal, the penalties shall be imposed by a
regulatory authority.

It is thus not the administrative penalties as such that Industrivärden is
criticizing, but rather the lack of consideration for the rule of order in the
Swedish investigative proposal with respect to the handling of these penalties
for physical persons.

With respect to such a dramatic sanction - penalties (or "fines") of up to SEK
45 M for an individual board member - it is an imperative matter of law and
order that the matter be tried by a general court of law and not by staff
members of a regulatory authority. This view is also supported by leading
jurisprudence. In a state governed by the rule of law, it is not acceptable for
an authority to serve as both an investigator, prosecutor and judge on legal
matters that could have dramatic consequences for an individual. Such an
arrangement, it appears, would also be in violation of the European Convention.

The proposal for an indemnity undertaking was made in the interest of the
legitimate need of the bank's shareholders to be able to recruit and retain top
talent on the bank's board. The Swedish investigative proposal's formulation of
the rules on administrative penalties, it appears, would also be counter to the
purposes of the EU's directive, namely, to raise the quality of bank boards.

The investigative proposal that Industrivärden criticizes, and which gave rise
to the proposal for the indemnity undertaking, will result in legislation later
in the spring. We will subsequently gain clarity on how the legislators choose
to handle this important matter regarding the rule of law. For the bank's
shareholders, it is imperative to closely follow how this issue - and its
compatibility with the European Convention - is solved by the legislators.

Stockholm, March 24, 2014

AB INDUSTRIVÄRDEN (publ)

For further information, please contact:

Anders Nyberg, Executive Vice President and General Counsel, tel. +46-8-666 64
00

*SOU 2013:65 - Stronger capital adequacy regulations, which aim to implement
the European Parliament's and Council's directive 2013/36/EU, referred to as
CRD 4, into Swedish law.

Released for publication at 10 a.m. (CET) on March 24, 2014.


Indu_release_140324_eng.pdf
distributed by