On 28 July 2025 Mr Justice Bright made, what in legal terms, is known as “an order by way of consent” in the UK High Court of Justice case between EMIS, on the one side, and ICU Trading Ltd (“ICU”) and two companies of the GLAS group on the other. The order is based on the demands of EMIS to stop the procedure initiated by ICU in respect of Series 26 and 31 LPNs issued by EMIS. The parties were able to reach a provisional understanding, and the “order” reflects it.
To put the event into a context, EMIS provides here its view on the case in general.
ICU was seeking to install GLAS as a new trustee, in breach of the contractual documentation related to the LPNs. This cannot be done without consent of EMIS, and it is for EMIS to make the appointment of the trustee.
While EMIS does not oppose the removal of the initial trustee, BNY Mellon (by reason of its inactivity in breach of contractual obligations), EMIS firmly objects to the purported appointment of GLAS through ICU’s aggressively pursued actions which also raises serious questions as to the nature of the relationship between ICU and GLAS.
The unlawful appointment of GLAS would not only affect the bondholders in Series 26 and 31 Notes –several of whom have already expressed concerns about the actions of ICU – but would also potentially prejudice LPN holders in other series that have already been restructured in accordance with EMIS’s strategy. EMIS’s strategy is focused on achieving an orderly, realistic, and maximised recovery for all bondholders. EMIS considers that ICU’s unlawful actions are inconsistent with this strategy and would harm LPN holders. EMIS considers that both its demands as well as strategy for bondholders are lawful, reasonable, and intended solely to protect and advance the interests of all bondholders.
Accordingly, on 25 July 2025, EMIS issued court proceedings in the English High Court and applied for an urgent interim injunction to suspend the actions contemplated by the ICU proposal. The hearing of EMIS’s injunction application was listed for 28 July 2025. The proposed injunction is but a prelude to full determination of the claim, including examination of ICU’s schemes.
Following EMIS’s urgent application for an interim injunction, ICU and GLAS ultimately stepped back, undertaking to refrain from taking any further action for the time being. The undertakings will remain in force until 7 September 2025. It is expected that the rescheduled injunction hearing will take place at the end of August.
To sum up, rather than persist, ICU has, at this stage, opted to collaborate. It has agreed to submit (in this case) to the jurisdiction of the English Court and to refrain, for the time being, from taking further steps in relation to a change of Trustee or any action by a purported new Trustee. While this development remains preliminary in nature, it is nonetheless a positive one, allowing EMIS to approach the matter with cautious optimism.
