RE: Fair play18 Apr 2024 08:16
note 2 & note 14
in respect of the contested sureties claim mentioned above, no enforcement procedures have commenced as at the date of the approval of these consolidated financial statements. furthermore, on 1 april 2024 the supreme court suspended the possible enforcement of the decision of the ukrainian court of appeal, so that such enforcement procedures cannot be initiated by the claimant until a final decision is made by the supreme court, or the supreme court's suspension order is otherwise lifted. as at the date of the approval of these consolidated financial statements, no decision has been made by the supreme court in the contested sureties claim and the next hearing is scheduled for 27 may 2024. the
commencement of the enforcement procedures could potentially have a material negative impact on the group’s business activities and its ability to continue as a going concern. see note 14 commitments, contingencies and legal disputes for further information, which should be read in conjunction with this note.
if the ukrainian anti-corruption court concludes that a judge received a bribe for the favourable decision in the share dispute case, and such verdict of the anti-corruption court remains valid after any potential appeal, then the claimants may apply to the supreme court to review the decision of the grand chamber of the supreme court given on 19 april 2023 due to exceptional circumstances. in february 2024, all four claimants were dissolved according to the records at the uk companies house. as at the date of the approval of these consolidated financial statements, no allegations have been made against the group in connection with the alleged bribery and it is currently not possible to anticipate future developments in this case with any certainty.
if the case were to be reviewed by the grand chamber of the supreme court once again, management remains of the view that *** has compelling legal arguments to defend its position. based on the legal considerations and arguments in the case and taking into account the advice received from the group’s ukrainian legal advisors, management remains of the view that the decision should be in favour of the group, but there is a risk that the independence of the judicial system and its immunity from economic and political influences in ukraine is not upheld. a hypothetical reversal of the decision by the grand chamber of the supreme court would result in the loss of a significant proportion of the shareholding in the group’s main operating subsidiary in ukraine, which holds approximately 65% of the group’s non-current operating assets, and would have a material adverse impact on the shareholders’ equity attributable to the shareholders of ferrexpo plc. due to the uncertainties, it is currently not possible to reasonably estimate the financial impact, but it could be material. a negative decision could also have an impact on potential future dividends from fpm to *** and, as resu
Sign In
Follow the stocks
