third part of the book Seville Commercial Court approved the award assets and liabilities of companies abengoa is in competition with the company Cox Energy. Alicante Enrique Riquelmeafter that reject resources for the popup by Urbas, HSBC A.S. and funds PURPOSE and SignatureAccording to EFE.
In the decision cited by the Chamber, the judge stated that the reasons given by the appellants baselessThe decision taken in mid-April was approved. Valued Cox Energy’s commitment and willingness to provide liquidity in the process of settlement of bankrupt assets.
Specifically, Cox Energy contributed up to 3 million euros to its upgraded bid to buy the generation unit, providing up to 15 million – of which 2.5 million was used as interim financing and another 5.5 million was invested – while committing. with maintain activity and employment productive unit, referring to 9,505 workers.
As a whole, the offer submitted by the firm originating in Alicante, worth 564 million euro. Additionally, the company guarantees a c.3,200 million jobs euros for the next three years as stated by the firm after the first award.
resources
in his appeal, urban -Owner of Alicante construction company icisa– claimed that proposal was “zero” fully authorized to understand what is presented. “Time is up”, He stated that it contains a price distribution contrary to the Enforcement Bankruptcy Law and the prohibition of financial aid.
In his view, his offer was the “best and only offer” that guaranteed the viability of the multinational company in Seville, because – he pointed out in the document – “it kept employment and business because it was a group with a larger projection.” and abilities”.
In this regard, Urbas argued that “from the very beginning, he considered purchasing as a lever to achieve and accelerate growth targets”. opportunistic company In Abengoa they saw a means to position themselves on the business scene”.
Judge now refutes such arguments and Cox Energy nor did it offer improvement of the proposal after the deadline and did not commit “any legal violation”.
At the same time, it is clarified that, according to the regulations, “it is not up to the supplier to distribute the offered price for the proposed production unit”.
dedicated commemoration Allegations of infringement warned by Urbas, It was interpreted that the approved proposal did not assume the obligation of the Water, Energy, Latam and T&I divisions to continue their activities for at least three years.
For Seville Justice, it “lacks ground, because it was clearly stated in the proposal. Undertaking the commitment, obligation and continuity of the production unit to continue its activity for the determined period, complies with the requirements of the standard.
Money
The award was also appealed HSBC PLC and funds AIM. And signatureAbengoa’s creditors who believe various articles of the Bankruptcy Law have been violated.
They actually understood deprived of veto “Relating to Transfer of Mortgaged Assets and Rights Included in Cox’s Offer.”
However, the judge said that the appellants special privileged creditors Although there is a difference in degree, it emphasizes that “to ask for the consent of the person is against the purpose and spirit of the rule”, which determines the choice in payment. does not waive any warranty“.
Therefore, there is no reason to “listen to those unaffected by the sale, as the mortgaged property is not sufficient to cover the primary collateralized loans”.
In short, the allegations made will be ineffective and “can delay and hinder the conclusion of the proposal contrary to the purposes of the rule.”
Award given to Cox Energy, Solvency FundManaged by the State Industrial Subsidiaries Company (Sepi), Refused to give Abengoa the aid he requested.
However, as parent company Abengoa SA went into liquidation, as many as thirty companies were put out to tender so that other companies could submit bids for all or each of them.