CL-2022-000456 - [2025] EWHC 1938 (Comm)

In the light of my conclusion that the Assignment has no effect, because there are and can be no proceeds under the Bonds, this is academic.

If that were not the case, Article 2(2) would not prevent payment to EuroChem AG. This follows from the fact that the SECO – as the NCA where EuroChem AG is incorporated – has approved EuroChem AG’s firewall. This determination has been noted and expressly followed in France, by the DGT, as well as in other countries such as Cyprus and the Netherlands.

The position of the CSF in Italy in relation to the firewall has not been expressly stated, because the CSF’s message of 28 April 2025 focusses solely on the fact that the premise of this hypothesis is invalid. That message simply confirms that the Bonds are frozen, being part of EuroChem NW2’s funds/economic resources; which means that the Assignment has no effect.

Thus far, the CSF has not said clearly whether it accepts EuroChem AG’s firewall measures. I suspect that this is because the CSF, rightly, considers that to be a determination to be made by the SECO.

In any event, I accept the Claimants’ evidence as to the firewall. This means (among other things) that the presumption that would otherwise arise under Article 2(2) is displaced, as regards EuroChem AG.