Metinvest BV (Applicant)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr. Justice Newey |
| Judgment Date | 08 June 2016 |
| Neutral Citation | [2016] EWHC 1531 (Ch) |
| Court | Chancery Division |
| Date | 08 June 2016 |
| Docket Number | Case No: CR-2016-000129 |
[2016] EWHC 1531 (Ch)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
CHANCERY DIVISION
COMPANIES COURT
IN THE MATTER OF METINVEST BV
AND
IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPANIES ACT 2006
The Rolls Building
7 Rolls Buildings
Fetter Lane
Mr. Justice Newey
Case No: CR-2016-000129
Mr. David Allison QC & Mr. Stephen Robins (instructed by Allen & Overy LLP) for the Applicant.
Judgment Approved
I have before me an application for an order convening a meeting of creditors to consider and approve a scheme of arrangement pursuant to part 26 of The Companies Act 2006.
The company in question is Metinvest BV, which is incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands. It is the principal finance raising company for a group with very substantial mining and steel interests in Ukraine. The company having, for reasons explained in the evidence, got into financial difficulties, it has undertaken negotiations with creditors to facilitate a restructuring. Earlier this year, it sought and obtained a scheme providing for a moratorium. The scheme in question was sanctioned by Mrs. Justice Asplin on the 29 th January 2016. That scheme lasted until 27 th May and, shortly before the expiry of the moratorium, non-binding heads of terms for a restructuring of liabilities were agreed.
The idea lying behind the present application is to obtain, in effect, an extension of the moratorium for which the earlier scheme provided. It is proposed that the moratorium should last until the 30 th September 2016, subject to the possibility of both extension up to the 30 th November and earlier termination in certain circumstances.
The scheme with which I am concerned, like its predecessor, does not encompass all debts of the company. The scheme creditors are rather holders of notes that have been issued by the company. Three series of notes are relevant, expiring in 2016, 2017 and 2018. Between them they have an aggregate outstanding principal amount of some 1.2 billion US dollars.
The company also has liabilities pursuant to facilities referred to as the "PXF Facilities". Those facilities, however, are not encompassed within the proposed scheme. So far as they are concerned, it is anticipated, as I understand it, that matters can be dealt with consensually.
Mr. David Allison QC, who appeared with Mr. Stephen Robins for the company, as well as outlining the background and what is now proposed, has directed my...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Metinvest BV
...Re Metinvest BV, and their neutral citation numbers are as follows [2016] EWHC 79 (Ch), Proudman J; [2016] EWHC 372 (Ch), J Asplin; [2016] EWHC 1531 (Ch), Newey J; [2016] EWHC 1868 (Ch), Arnold J. In those judgments, judgments were given ordering meetings of the class of noteholders and,......