judgment AMSTERDAM DISTRICT COURT Netherlands Commercial Court NCC District Court – Court in Summary Proceedings Case number: NCC 23/005 (C/13/730710) Judgment 12 April 2023 Applicant: MADISON PACIFIC TRUST LIMITED, Hong Kong, represented by J.W. Volkers and S.A.J. van Rossum, lawyers Interested parties:
(1)of the Brussels Regulation (recast) (1215/2012), and the NCC Court in Summary Proceedings is the appropriate chamber to deal with the application. 4.3. The Company’s statutory seat is in the Netherlands and Dutch law therefore provides the rules on property law in respect of the Shares. Hence Dutch law will be applied. The parties to the 2022 Share Pledge (the Pledgor, the Company and the Pledgee) also explicitly chose Dutch law as the applicable law (article 9.1 of the 2022 Share Pledge). Enforcement of the pledge 4.4. Article 3:251 Dutch Civil Code (DCC) governs the enforcement of the pledge. Article 3:250 DCC provides that an enforcement sale is to be held in public, i.e. by way of a public auction. Article 3:251 DCC offers an alternative: Article 3:251 Alternative way to accomplish a sale by foreclosure - 1. […] the provisional relief judge of the District Court may, upon the request of the pledgee or pledgor, order that the pledged asset is sold by foreclosure in a different way than the one meant in the previous Article […]. 4.5. All interested parties waived their right to be heard on the application. 4.6. No one disputes that the Company is in default (verzuim) under the Trust Deed, which in turn constitutes a default under the Secured Obligations as defined in the 2022 Share Pledge. Therefore, Madison has the right to enforce the pledge. 4.7. When the right to enforcement arises, a pledgee has the right to decide if and when to proceed with enforcement. The Court on its own initiative has to examine whether, at the time the application was made, the requested alternative to a public auction (in this case: the Amended Proposed Sale) would realise the maximum possible value. This examination is done in the interest of the pledgor, other secured creditors and other creditors in general. The interest of the company whose shares are being sold do not prevail over the interest of the pledgee and creditors to realise the maximum possible value (reference is made to: Amsterdam District Court, 23 September 2009, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2009:BJ8848). 4.8. The Amended Proposed Sale will have the following result:
- i)the Bridge Notes in an aggregate principal amount of EUR 55 million will be repaid in full,
- ii)the distribution of the EUR 150 million Reinstated Notes will discharge part of the EUR 260 million Senior Secured Notes, iii) the remaining undischarged part of the Senior Secured Notes (EUR 110 million, plus accrued interest approximately EUR 12.5 million) will be transferred to (or at the direction
- of)New TopCo in exchange for 95% of the shares in New TopCo to be issued to the SSN Holders in proportion to the holdings of the Senior Secured Notes. The residual Senior Secured Notes Claim will be converted into equity immediately after the transfer of the Shares as contemplated by the Amended Proposed Sale, resulting in a reduction of the Group’s debt obligations in an amount of EUR 110 million (plus accrued interest of approximately EUR 12.5 million), and
- iv)the Frigoglass Group will be provided with additional funding in an amount of approximately EUR 20 million (gross) as a result of the issuance of the New Notes. All these elements, together with the cash payment of EUR 1 in consideration for the transfer of the Shares, are to be considered as the value of the Amended Proposed Sale, the consideration offered for the Pledged Shares. 4.9. The Court finds, as Madison argues, that it is not likely that a public sale will result in a higher value than a private sale. 4.10. There are also no indications that any private sale, other than the Amended Proposed Sale, would realise more value. This is based on the following reasoning. 4.11. First, the market is aware of the financial difficulties of the Frigoglass Group due to its exposure in the media. The Frigoglass Group finds itself confronted with negative publicity about its future, which impacts its Senior Secured Notes prices and its credit rating. The Group's relationship with customers, suppliers, regulators and local financiers may also be at risk, which may become even more acute if these parties also become aware of the Event of Default under the Bridge Notes. Despite all this public information, no other potential buyer made itself known to the Pledgee, let alone - as Madison argues - that such a potential investor would be willing to make a better bid. 4.12. Second, the cash and non-cash consideration of EUR 205 million is based on the valuation report made by [the valuator] on 2 January 2023. The consideration for the Shares in the Amended Proposed Sale substantially exceeds the enterprise value of the Frigoglass Group in a liquidation and in a distressed sale scenario, as determined by [the valuator], and is in the range of the enterprise value in a non-distressed sale scenario. If the Group’s Russian subsidiary’s assets are not taken into account, in view of the international sanctions imposed following the Russian invasion in Ukraine, the consideration is even at the top end of the estimated enterprise value in a non-distressed sale scenario. 4.13. Third, the outstanding debt (EUR 315 million) far outweighs the value of the Group in a non-distressed sale scenario. This means that it can be validly assumed that the economic value of the Shares is negative. The negative economic value is reflected in the proposed payment of EUR 1 as cash consideration for the transfer of the Shares. 4.14. This leads to the conclusion that the Amended Proposed Sale will deliver maximum value for the Shares. 4.15. That means that the Court will grant the permission requested. Costs 4.16. Madison asks the Court to determine and award costs. Based on Article 289 Dutch Code of Civil Procedure, the Court can award costs. However, as these proceedings were necessitated by law (Article 3:251 DCC) and the permission requested is granted, the Court sees insufficient grounds for a cost award. 5Conclusion and order THE COURT IN SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS: 5.1. Permission is granted for the Shares to be sold and transferred by Madison to the Purchaser under the conditions described in the Amended SPA. 5.2. No costs are awarded. 5.3. This judgment is enforceable notwithstanding appeal. Done by R.A. Dudok van Heel, Judge, assisted by W.A. Visser, Clerk of the Court. Issued in public on 12 April 2023. APPROVED FOR DISTRIBUTION IN eNCC