17. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

PATENT LICENSE AGREEMENT

On March 29, 2012, the Company, as licensee (the “Licensee”) entered into an exclusive patent license agreement with the Executive Chairman of the Board and Balance Holdings, LLC (an entity controlled by the Executive Chairman) (collectively, the “Licensor”), whereby the Company agreed to pay a royalty of 10% of the gross profits received by the Company from commercial sales and/or use of two provisional patent applications, one relating to an inductive charging parking bumper and one relating to a process which allows multiple EVs to plug into an EV charging station simultaneously and charge as the current becomes available.

On March 11, 2016, the Licensee and the Licensor entered into an agreement related to the March 29, 2012 patent license agreement. The parties acknowledged that the Licensee has paid a total of $8,525 in registration and legal fees for the U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61529016 (the “Patent Application”) (related to the inductive charging parking bumper) to date. Effective March 11, 2016, the patent license agreement, solely with respect to the Patent Application and the parties’ rights and obligations thereto, was terminated. The Executive Chairman of the Board agreed to be solely responsible for all future costs and fees associated with the prosecution of the patent application. In the event the Patent Application is successful, the Executive Chairman of the Board shall grant a credit to the Licensee in the amount of $8,525 to be applied against any outstanding amount(s) owed to him. If the Licensee does not have any outstanding payment obligations to the Executive Chairman of the Board at the time the Patent Application is approved, the Executive Chairman of the Board shall remit the $8,525 to the Licensee within twenty (20) days of the approval. The parties agreed to a mutual release of any claims associated with the patent license agreement. As of December 31, 2020, the Company has not paid nor incurred any royalty fees related to this patent license agreement.

TAXES

During the third quarter of 2019, the Company filed its Federal corporate income tax returns for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018. The Company has sustained losses for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018. The Company has determined that no tax liability, other than required minimums and related interest and penalties, has been incurred. The Company is current with its state and local tax filings in the first calendar quarter of 2020.

LITIGATION AND DISPUTES

In July 2017, the Company was sued by Zwick and Banyai PLLC and Jack Zwick. The case alleges a breach of contract and unjust enrichment for failure to pay invoices in the aggregate amount of $53,069 for services rendered, plus interest and costs. The Company is one of six defendants in the case.

On October 26, 2018, the Company filed amended affirmative defenses. Following that, there was no record activity in the case and on September 20, 2019, the Court entered its Notice of Lack of Prosecution and Order to Appear for Hearing on November 19, 2019. When Plaintiffs failed to appear for the hearing, the Court dismissed the case. A couple of weeks later, Plaintiffs filed a motion to vacate the dismissal, asserting that they had moved offices in June of 2019, and were never provided notice of the hearing at their new address. At the January 23, 2020 hearing on Plaintiffs’ motion to vacate, the Court vacated the dismissal over the objections of counsel and the case is once again pending.

On January 31, 2020, the Company’s new attorney for this matter filed a notice of appearance and took over as defense counsel. On February 11, 2020, Jack Zwick and Zwick & Banyai PLLC each served a Request for Production of Documents on the Company, and Zwick & Banyai PLLC served a set of 14 Interrogatories. On July 20, 2020 the Company settled this case for approximately $48,000. On July 24, 2020, the Company was dropped as a party from the case.

On March 26, 2020, James Christodoulou, the former President and Chief Operating Officer of the Company, filed a Complaint in the Miami-Dade County Court, State of Florida, James Christodoulou vs. Blink Charging Co. et al. The Complaint asserted claims against the Company, as well as Michael Farkas, Aviv Hillo and Yechiel Baron. Mr. Farkas is Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer. Messrs. Hillo and Baron are the Company’s General Counsel and Assistant General Counsel, respectively. The Complaint asserted claims for breach of contract in connection with Mr. Christodoulou’s termination by the Company in March 2020, as well as claims under Florida state law for alleged retaliatory termination and slander. Among other things, Mr. Christodoulou asserted that the Company terminated his employment without cause and in retaliation for his alleged plan to disclose that Company executives had engaged in alleged “questionable business practices.” As previously reported in the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on October 9, 2020, the litigation between the Company and its former President pending in Miami-Dade County Court, State of Florida, James Christodoulou vs. Blink Charging Co. et al., has been settled for an aggregate sum of $400,000, of which $125,000 related to compensation related matters. As a result, the Company has recorded a loss on settlement of $400,000 within operating expenses on its consolidated statements of operations during the year ended December 31, 2020.

Effective October 9, 2020, the Company settled the litigation brought by James Christodoulou, its former President, and Chief Operating Officer. In connection with a review arising from the settlement process, the Company determined that the termination of Mr. Christodoulou should be and has been reclassified as ‘without cause.’ The settlement includes compensation consistent with the reclassification.

On August 24, 2020, a purported securities class action lawsuit, captioned Bush v. Blink Charging Co. et al., Case No. 20-cv-23527, was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against the Company, Michael Farkas (Blink’s Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer), and Michael Rama (Blink’s Chief Financial Officer) (the “Bush Lawsuit”). On September 1, 2020, another purported securities class action lawsuit, captioned Vittoria v. Blink Charging Co. et al., Case No. 20-cv-23643, was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against the same defendants and seeking to recover the same alleged damages (the “Vittoria Lawsuit”). On October 1, 2020, the court consolidated the Vittoria Lawsuit with the Bush Lawsuit and on December 21, 2020 the court appointed Tianyou Wu, Alexander Yu and H. Marc Joseph to serve as the Co-Lead Plaintiffs. The Co-Lead Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint on February 19, 2021. The Amended Complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants made false or misleading statements about the size and functionality of the Blink Network, and asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Amended Complaint does not quantify damages but seeks to recover damages on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Blink’s common stock between March 6, 2020 and August 19, 2020. Currently, the deadline for Blink’s motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint is April 20, 2021; the deadline for the Co-Lead Plaintiffs to file an opposition brief in response to the motion to dismiss is June 21, 2021; and the deadline for Blink to file a reply in support of the motion to dismiss is July 21, 2021. The Company believes that the claim has no merit, and wholly and completely disputes the allegations therein. The Company has retained legal counsel in order to defend the action vigorously. The Company has not recorded an accrual related to this matter as of December 31, 2020 as it determined that any such loss contingency was either not probable or estimable.

On September 15, 2020, a shareholder derivative lawsuit, captioned Klein (derivatively on behalf of Blink Charging Co.) v. Farkas et al., Case No. 20-19815CA01, was filed in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court seeking to pursue claims belonging to the Company against Blink’s Board of Directors and Michael Rama (the “Klein Lawsuit”). Blink is named as a nominal defendant. The Klein Lawsuit asserts that the Director defendants caused Blink to make the statements that are at issue in the securities class action and, as a result, the Company will incur costs defending against the consolidated Bush Lawsuit and other unidentified investigations. The Klein Lawsuit asserts claims against the Director defendants for breach of fiduciary duties and corporate waste and against all of the defendants for unjust enrichment. Klein did not quantify the alleged damages in his complaint, but he seeks damages sustained by the Company as a result of the defendants’ breaches of fiduciary duties, corporate governance changes, restitution, and disgorgement of profits from the defendants and attorneys’ fees and other litigation expenses. The parties agreed to temporarily stay the Klein Lawsuit until there is a ruling on the yet-to-be-filed motion to dismiss in the consolidated Bush Lawsuit. The Company believes that the claim has no merit, and wholly and completely disputes the allegations therein. The Company has retained legal counsel in order to defend the action vigorously. The Company has not recorded an accrual related to this matter as of December 31, 2020 as it determined that any such loss contingency was either not probable or estimable.

On December 22, 2020, JMJ Financial v. Blink Charging Co. was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking to pursue claims for alleged breach of contract and conversion (the “JMJ Lawsuit”). The complaint alleges that JMJ Financial purchased warrants to acquire 147,057 shares of Blink common stock on or about April 9, 2018, which permitted a cashless exercise, and that on November 23, 2020, JMJ Financial delivered a notice of warrant exercise to Blink and that the Company failed to deliver the shares. The claim alleges breach of contract and conversion; the plaintiff requests damages of at least $4.2 million, attorneys’ fees, and specific enforcement requiring delivery of the shares. In January 2021, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with JMJ under which the parties exchanged releases and the litigation was discontinued with prejudice. The Company did not make a cash payment in the settlement, but rather delivered 66,000 shares of stock, representing a modification of the initial warrant exercise. The Company determined that no additional accrual was required to be recorded related to this matter as of December 31, 2020.

On December 23, 2020, another shareholder derivative action, captioned Bhatia (derivatively on behalf of Blink Charging Co.) v. Farkas et al., Case No. 20-27632CA01, was filed in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court against the same defendants sued in the Klein Lawsuit and asserting similar claims, as well as additional claims relating to the Company’s nomination, appointment and hiring of minorities and women and the Company’s decision to retain its outside auditor (the “Bhatia Lawsuit”). On February 17, 2021, the parties agreed to consolidate the Klein and Bhatia actions, which the court consolidated under the caption In re Blink Charging Company Stockholder Derivative Litigation, Lead Case No. 2020-019815-CA-01. The parties also agreed to keep in place the temporary stay. The Company believes that the claim has no merit, and wholly and completely disputes the allegations therein. The Company has retained legal counsel in order to defend the action vigorously. The Company has not recorded an accrual related to this matter as of December 31, 2020 as it determined that any such loss contingency was either not probable or estimable.

On February 12, 2021, another shareholder derivative lawsuit, captioned Wolery (derivatively on behalf of Blink Charging Co.) v. Buffalino et al., Case No. A-21-829395-C, was filed in the Eighth Judicial District Court in Clark County, Nevada seeking to pursue claims belonging to the Company against Blink’s Board of Directors (the “Wolery Lawsuit”). Blink is named as a nominal defendant. The Wolery complaint alleges that the amount of restricted stock awarded to Blink’s outside directors in December 2020 exceeded the amounts permitted by Blink’s incentive compensation plan. The complaint asks the court to rescind the excess restricted stock awards, as well as other relief. The parties agreed that the defendants could have 60 days to respond to the complaint (i.e., until April 22, 2021). The Company believes that the claim has no merit, and wholly and completely disputes the allegations therein. The Company has retained legal counsel in order to defend the action vigorously. The Company has not recorded an accrual related to this matter as of December 31, 2020 as it determined that any such loss contingency was either not probable or estimable.

350 Green, LLC

350 Green lawsuits relate solely to alleged pre-acquisition unpaid debts of 350 Green. Also, there are other unpaid creditors, aside from those noted above, that claim to be owed certain amounts for pre-acquisition work done on behalf of 350 Green solely, that potentially could file lawsuits at some point in the future.

On March 26, 2018, final judgment has been reached relating to the Assignment for the Benefit of the Creditors, whereby all remaining assets of 350 Green are abandoned to their respective property owners where the charging stations have been installed, thus on March 26, 2018, the assignment proceeding has closed. Concurrent with the closing of the public offering, the Company was to pay the former principals of 350 Green LLC $25,000 in installment debt and $50,000 within 60 days thereafter in settlement of a $360,000 debt (inclusive of imputed interest) and the return of 8,065 shares of the Company’s common stock by the former principals of 350 Green LLC, in accordance with a Settlement Agreement between the parties dated August 21, 2015, that would have resulted in a gain of $285,000.

On December 31, 2018, the Company entered into a modification of the Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release dated August 21, 2015 with the former members of 350 Green LLC whereby the members would return to the Company 8,064 common shares and would also cancel the outstanding note (“Note”) issued to the members with a balance of $360,000, both, initially issued in conjunction with the acquisition of 350 Green LLC in exchange for $50,000. The Company paid the $50,000 as of December 31, 2018. The Note and common shares were returned and cancelled in January 2019. The Company recorded a gain of $310,000 during the year ended December 31, 2019 which was included in other income and expense on the consolidated statement of operations.

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENTS

DONALD ENGEL EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

Effective January 9, 2020, Donald Engel, a member of the Company’s Board of Directors, entered into an employment agreement with the Company. The employment agreement with Mr. Engel extends for a term expiring on January 9, 2021, subject to automatic renewal for two additional one-year periods if not otherwise previously terminated by either party. Pursuant to the employment agreement. The employment agreement provides that Mr. Engel will receive a base salary at an annual rate of $175,000 for services rendered in such position. In addition, he will be eligible to earn stock options to purchase up to 700,000 shares of our common stock, in increments of 140,000 options on each occasion that the Company executes an agreement for the sale or deployment of electric vehicle charging stations or ancillary eco-friendly energy products with a customer he has introduced to the Company. The stock options will have an exercise price equal to the closing market price of our common stock immediately prior to the issuance date, expire five years after the issuance date and be subject to the terms of the Company’s 2018 Incentive Compensation Plan. On January 20, 2020, the Company granted immediately vested options to purchase an aggregate of 140,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $2.05 per share to the employee with a grant date fair value of $252,309, which was recognized during the year ended December 31, 2020.

The employment agreement provides for termination by the Company for cause upon conviction of a felony, misconduct resulting in significant economic or reputational harm to the Company, any act of fraud or a material breach of his obligations to us. Upon a change of control of the Company, Mr. Engel’s employment will terminate, and he will be entitled to all unpaid and outstanding salary and expenses due through the termination date. The employment agreement also contains covenants restricting Mr. Engel from engaging in any activities competitive with the Company’s business during the term of the employment agreement and two years thereafter and prohibiting him from disclosure of confidential information regarding us at any time.

MICHAEL P. RAMA EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

In February 2020, the Company entered into an Employment Offer Letter with Michael P. Rama. Pursuant to the Offer Letter, Mr. Rama agreed to devote his full business efforts and time to the Company as its Chief Financial Officer. The Offer Letter extends for a term expiring on February 10, 2022 and is automatically renewable for an additional one-year period. The Offer Letter provides that Mr. Rama is entitled to receive an annual base salary of $300,000, payable in regular installments in accordance with the Company’s general payroll practices. Mr. Rama will be eligible for an annual performance cash bonus of 25% of his base salary based on the satisfaction of certain key performance indicators set with the Board’s Compensation Committee. Mr. Rama will be entitled to receive equity awards under the Company’s 2018 Incentive Compensation Plan with an aggregate annual award value equal to 50% of his base salary in the form of restricted stock and stock options. Mr. Rama also received a $50,000 cash signing bonus.

If Mr. Rama’s employment is terminated by the Company other than for Cause (which includes willful material misconduct and willful failure to materially perform his responsibilities to the Company), he is entitled to receive severance equal to up to 12 months of his base salary. If there is a buy-out or a “change of control,” Mr. Rama will also be entitled to obtain his base salary for a period of 12 months as a severance payment. Mr. Rama is entitled to vacation and other employee benefits in accordance with the Company’s policies.

BRENDAN S. JONES EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

The Company entered into an Employment Offer Letter, dated as of March 29, 2020, with Brendan S. Jones. Pursuant to the Offer Letter, Mr. Jones agreed to devote his full business efforts and time to the Company as its Chief Operating Officer. The Offer Letter extends for a two-year term expiring on April 20, 2022 and is automatically renewable for an additional one-year period unless the Company provides notice of non-renewable prior to the initial termination date. The Offer Letter provides that Mr. Jones is entitled to receive an annual base salary of $350,000, payable in regular installments in accordance with the Company’s general payroll practices. Mr. Jones is eligible for an annual performance cash bonus of 40% of his base salary based on the satisfaction of certain key performance indicators set with the Board’s Compensation Committee. Mr. Jones received a cash signing bonus of $55,000 and an equity signing bonus of $70,000 worth of the Company’s common stock, which vests on April 20, 2021 (provided he is not terminated for Cause).

If Mr. Jones’s employment is terminated by the Company other than for Cause (which includes willful material misconduct and willful failure to materially perform his responsibilities to the Company), he is entitled to receive severance equal to 12 months of his base salary or such lesser number of months actually worked. If there is a buy-out or a “change of control,” Mr. Jones will be entitled to obtain his base salary for a period of 12 months as a severance payment.

Mr. Jones is also entitled to relocation assistance in an amount of up to $35,000, a car allowance of up to $1,000 per month, inclusive of insurance, and other employee benefits in accordance with the Company’s policies.

WARRANTY

The Company estimates an approximate cost of $70,000 to repair deployed chargers, which the Company owns as of December 31, 2020