Obbligazioni in default Ristrutturazione SolarWorld 6,125% 2016 (XS0641270045) 6,375% 2017 (XS0478864225)

Mi è arrivata oggi una spiegazione più particolareggiata sulla vicenda di qualche giorno fa per la quale avevo chiesto spiegazioni. Ve la allego (a chi interessa).

As to your question, I would like to point out that SolarWorld is currently not in danger of a default. Since 2013, our subsidiary SolarWorld Industries Sachsen GmbH (formerly Deutsche Solar GmbH) is the defendant in a litigation with the silicon producer Hemlock Semiconductor Corp. The subject of the court proceedings is the non-acceptance of silicon from long-term silicon contracts concluded with this silicon supplier. Due to the non-acceptance, Hemlock claims a total of USD 676 million on the basis of the “take or pay” obligation and in damages. On the basis of external legal opinions, the company believes that among other defenses the silicon contracts in question violate European antitrust law, which could mean that the purchase obligation as well as the contracts per
se might be null and void.

The District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, in which the case is unfolding, ordered on October 28, 2015, to deny illegality under European antitrust law as a line of defense in the proceedings. This relates to one of several defenses of equal value against the complaint; all other lines of defense remain allowed. The partial decision of the court is of technical nature and is no assessment that the underlying agreements do not violate EU antitrust law. The proceedings are still in the “discovery” stage at the first instance. The trial stage has not begun yet. Moreover, there is a possibility that the defense of illegality under EU antitrust law can be reconsidered at a court of appeal. In addition, a potential U.S. ruling has to comply with the essential principles of the German law in order to be recognized and enforced in Germany. Thus, a German court would have to evaluate a potential ruling again. At the latest at this stage, the illegality of the underlying agreements due to infringement of EU antitrust law would become relevant again. Therefore, SolarWorld continues to rate the probability of enforcement of such ruling as low. In the meantime, SolarWorld intends to reach an agreement with the silicon supplier to continue delivery.
 
iguanito ha scritto:
Mi è arrivata oggi una spiegazione più particolareggiata sulla vicenda di qualche giorno fa per la quale avevo chiesto spiegazioni. Ve la allego (a chi interessa).

As to your question, I would like to point out that SolarWorld is currently not in danger of a default. Since 2013, our subsidiary SolarWorld Industries Sachsen GmbH (formerly Deutsche Solar GmbH) is the defendant in a litigation with the silicon producer Hemlock Semiconductor Corp. The subject of the court proceedings is the non-acceptance of silicon from long-term silicon contracts concluded with this silicon supplier. Due to the non-acceptance, Hemlock claims a total of USD 676 million on the basis of the “take or pay” obligation and in damages. On the basis of external legal opinions, the company believes that among other defenses the silicon contracts in question violate European antitrust law, which could mean that the purchase obligation as well as the contracts per
se might be null and void.

The District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, in which the case is unfolding, ordered on October 28, 2015, to deny illegality under European antitrust law as a line of defense in the proceedings. This relates to one of several defenses of equal value against the complaint; all other lines of defense remain allowed. The partial decision of the court is of technical nature and is no assessment that the underlying agreements do not violate EU antitrust law. The proceedings are still in the “discovery” stage at the first instance. The trial stage has not begun yet. Moreover, there is a possibility that the defense of illegality under EU antitrust law can be reconsidered at a court of appeal. In addition, a potential U.S. ruling has to comply with the essential principles of the German law in order to be recognized and enforced in Germany. Thus, a German court would have to evaluate a potential ruling again. At the latest at this stage, the illegality of the underlying agreements due to infringement of EU antitrust law would become relevant again. Therefore, SolarWorld continues to rate the probability of enforcement of such ruling as low. In the meantime, SolarWorld intends to reach an agreement with the silicon supplier to continue delivery.
Clicca per allargare...

D. posso chiederti un tuo parere da professionista a riguardo?? :bow:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Alto