NCC granted permission for transfer of shares in parent company Lycra Group

This is a print of a page on Look for the most up-to-date information on ( This page is printed on 01-01-1970.

Skip Navigation LinksNCC > News > NCC granted permission for transfer of shares in parent company Lycra Group
Amsterdam, 24 June 2022

The Netherlands Commercial Court (NCC) - Court in Summary Proceedings - granted permission yesterday for the transfer of the shares in Eagle Super Global Holding BV, a holding company of a group of subsidiairies of the Lycra Group. The shares were pledged to Eagle Ultimate Global Holding BV (the pledgor). Pursuant to article 3:251(1) of the Dutch Civil Code (DCC), Credit Suisse (Singapore Branch) sought an order permitting the sale of the shares to the secured creditors in a private transaction.

Enforcement of the pledge

The judge and the clerk dealing with the case

Under Dutch law, where a debtor is in default on his payment obligations, the pledgee is entitled to enforce the pledge securing these obligations, and sell the collateral in a public auction. But to sell the collateral (here: pledged shares) in a private sale permission from the Court is required (article 3:251(1) DCC). In these proceedings Credit Suisse requested the Court to grant such permission.

No violation of article 1 First Protocol ECHR

The Court ruled that a sale of pledged shares under article 3:251 DCC does not constitute a violation of article 1 First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. Article 3:251 DCC satisfies the requirement of lawfulness: it is sufficiently accessible, precise, foreseeable in its application, and compatible with the rule of law, as it strikes a fair balance between the interests at stake. The interference also pursues a legitimate aim: it serves to protect the rights of the creditors.

In default

The debtor (the parent company of the pledgor) is in default under the Facilities Agreement. The default is also ‘continuing’. There is no evidence that Credit Suisse waived the default in writing or that it waived the non-waiver clause in the Facilities Agreement. Therefore, the Court assumes that the Estoppel defence, raised in proceedings pending in Hong Kong, will fail. This brings the Court to the conclusion that there is not a sufficient reason to stay these proceedings and to await the outcome of the Hong Kong proceedings.

Maximum value

The Court ruled that the proposed private sale would deliver maximum value for the pledged shares and granted the permission requested.