The Emirati company, Drake & Scull, said that it is facing the fate of bankruptcy, due to the circumstances surrounding the restructuring procedures, reservations, and judicial implementations that drain its financial resources.
Drake & Scull indicated, in a statement to the Dubai Financial Market, that it had filed an appeal before the Court of Cassation, which temporarily suspended the implementation of the Court of Appeal ruling, and the company is awaiting pleadings on March 14, 2023.
And Drake & Scull added that, with reference to the previous disclosure dated November 24, 2022, as the company had previously submitted a request to open restructuring procedures for Drake & Scull International and its subsidiaries with Dubai Courts, and as the Dubai Court of Appeal had previously issued its ruling on November 23, 2022 accepting the opening of procedures. Drake & Scull and its subsidiaries, appointing the former expert delegated by the court as a bankruptcy trustee to carry out the task entrusted to him by the court in accordance with the issued judgment.
In its disclosure to the Dubai Financial Market, Drake & Scull management provided a statement of the subsequent developments that followed the issuance of the court ruling, according to the following:
(1) Appointment of the expert
After the court decided to appoint the previous expert as a trustee in the bankruptcy, the appointed expert submitted a request for an apology for the task assigned to him, followed by the appointment of another subsequent expert from among the role’s experts, who in turn also apologized for that task. As a result, Drake & Scull submitted a request to appoint an expert who has previous experience and knowledge of the subject, so that he would be named by the company as permitted by law, but the esteemed Court of Appeal rejected the request, and therefore the court decided to appoint a new expert from among the accredited experts according to the role schedule.
And after one of the role experts was named, who in turn carried out the task assigned to him, and the company found that there was a conflict of interest between the company and the named expert, as a result, the company submitted a request to dismiss the expert and transfer the matter to the Committee of Experts, and as a result, the court decided to suspend the expert from the task until the completion of the investigation before the Committee experts.
In addition, the company had previously submitted a request to stop the judicial procedures and executions against the company in accordance with what was stipulated in the bankruptcy law, as this request was rejected by the esteemed court as well.
(2) The fate of the company
For the aforementioned conditions and reasons, and since Drake & Scull's goal is to complete the restructuring procedures at the lowest possible time and cost, given the difficult financial conditions the company is going through, and the seizures and judicial implementations that drain its financial resources day after day. And since this matter will not be achieved except through the acceptance of the court to open the restructuring procedures in accordance with the circumstances of the emergency financial crisis and the acceptance of the previous procedures that were completed through the Financial Regulatory Committee, otherwise the fate of the company will be bankruptcy.
(3) An appeal against the verdict
Whereas the decision to open restructuring procedures in accordance with the previous court ruling will not enable the company to complete the procedures in the required time, and may require a longer period for the purposes of completing the procedures. Drake & Scull decided to file an appeal against the judgment issued by the Court of Appeal, requesting the court's acceptance of opening restructuring procedures in accordance with the circumstances of the emergency financial crisis, and as a result, the approval of the previous procedures that were carried out through the Financial Regulatory Committee.
Accordingly, on February 21, 2023, the first counseling session was held in the aforementioned appeal, during which the Court of Cassation issued its decision to temporarily suspend the implementation of the Court of Appeal ruling, and as a result the case was postponed to the next March 14; to plead. The company will announce any developments in a timely manner, as the company adopts a policy of disclosure and transparency.