NBU wins refinancing loans lawsuits with Kolomoisky affiliated companies
The National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) and PrivatBank have won lawsuits with companies affiliated with former co-owner of the bank Ihor Kolomoisky, where the latter sought to lift liabilities on refinancing loans, the press service of the NBU has told Interfax-Ukraine.
"On May 14, 2019, the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court put an end to cases No. 910/16744/17, 910/16979/17 launched under claims of property guarantors related to the former owners of PrivatBank, regarding refinancing loans, against the NBU and PrivatBank about the obligations of the regulator to write off funds from the correspondent accounts of the bank to repay debt on refinancing and obligations of PrivatBank to repay the debt to the NBU," a spokesman of the central bank said.
According to court materials, the NBU and PrivatBank won a lawsuit under the claims of Nikopol Ferroalloy Plant (NFZ) and the Cyprian company Trovelko Holdings Limited, which sought to release them from the refinancing obligations that the NBU issued to PrivatBank in the amount of UAH 2.6 billion and UAH 143 million, respectively.
According to the spokesman for the central bank, the purpose of these lawsuits, of which about 30 were filed, is to discharge not only legal entities associated with the former owners of the bank who transferred their property as collateral to the National Bank, but also the financial guarantor Kolomoisky from the debts. This category of cases was heard by the courts of all instances, starting in 2017. The Kyiv business court and the Kyiv business court of appeals initially satisfied all these claims and only after the Supreme Court of Cassation expressed the legal position in support of the NBU and PrivatBank and overturned previous court decisions, the Pivnichny business court of appeals also sided with the regulator.
After that, the property guarantors, taking into account the legal positions of the appellate and cassation courts, tried to appeal the relevant decision by appealing to the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court. However, the Grand Chamber also refused to satisfy cassation complaints of the property guarantors associated with the former owners of the bank.
The representative of the press service of the NBU added that, taking into account the provisions of the economic procedural law, the legal positions of the Supreme Court are mandatory for courts of all instances in such disputes.