Almaty
Recently, several media outlets have published materials concerning the court proceedings around the Ken Dala business center building. The public foundation "Tagdyr" accused JSC "Nurbank" of raiding, claiming that the Bank is taking all actions "...with the aim of seizing assets" belonging to the Joint Stock Company "Investment Holding Company" (hereinafter referred to as JSC "IHC"), which owns the aforementioned business center.
Unfortunately, the information presented during the press conference of the public foundation "Tagdyr" was delivered—intentionally or not—one-sidedly and, to put it mildly, incorrectly, resulting in the publication of distorted information about the ongoing court process. JSC "Nurbank" would like to inform the public of the full picture surrounding the Ken Dala business center as of today.
First and foremost, it should be recalled that, in accordance with the decision of the Specialized Interdistrict Economic Court of Almaty on August 5, 2008, the sale and purchase agreement of the Ken Dala business center building, previously concluded between JSC "IHC" and JSC "Alma Tur", was deemed invalid, and the building was returned to JSC "IHC". The court case revealed no objections from JSC "Nurbank" regarding this fact. However—and this is significant—the issue concerning the return of funds amounting to 4.3 billion tenge received by JSC "IHC" from JSC "Alma Tur" was not resolved judicially. According to the decision, the Ken Dala business center building was returned to the ownership of JSC "IHC" with no refund for the amounts previously paid by JSC "Alma Tur". However, JSC "IHC" did not express a willingness to return them voluntarily to JSC "Alma Tur", although such an obligation is directly stipulated in Article 157 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (consequences of bilateral restitution). Currently, JSC "IHC" simultaneously owns both the Ken Dala business center and the monetary funds subject to return to JSC "Alma Tur", which contradicts the requirements of the current civil legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan. However, JSC "IHC" modestly remains silent about this.
The loan previously received by JSC "Alma Tur" from JSC "Nurbank" has also not been serviced since last year. As a result, the Bank was forced to demand full repayment of the debt from JSC "Alma Tur", but since JSC "Alma Tur" is undergoing liquidation and cannot fulfill its credit obligations, the Bank accepted JSC "Alma Tur"'s proposal to transfer the right of monetary claim against JSC "IHC" by concluding an assignment agreement. This practice is fairly common in business transactions and does not violate current legislation (Article 339 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan).
On February 13, 2009, JSC "Nurbank" sent a Notification to JSC "IHC" about the conclusion of an assignment agreement between JSC "Nurbank" and JSC "Alma Tur", in which JSC "IHC" was offered to return the money amounting to 3,177,071,136 tenge (the sum of the monetary claim actually assigned by JSC "Alma Tur" in favor of JSC "Nurbank") and transfer it to the account of JSC "Nurbank". However, JSC "IHC" refused to return these funds voluntarily, prompting the Bank to take the demand to court.
In the lawsuit filed, the Bank requested measures for securing claims, including seizing the defendant's property. This right is provided by the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (and does not involve any breaches of applicable law in this case). Moreover, the arrest was imposed on the funds subject to return to JSC "Nurbank" under the assignment agreement, as well as on the business center building, which in itself cannot "paralyze" the company's operations, as stated by representatives of JSC "IHC", since the arrests on funds in accounts of JSC "IHC" in other second-level banks were not imposed and the seizure of the building does not hinder its normal use and income generation. The civil case was heard for 3 months, as provided by the Civil Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, and the statement by JSC "IHC" representatives that the Bank's claims are considered in record time is not true.
Furthermore, representatives of JSC "IHC" circulated a message claiming that "as a result of the assignment agreement, the business center building was unlawfully pledged, and Nurbank was the pledgee. How this could happen is unclear to them."
This message is also untrue, as it was known to JSC "IHC" since 2008 that the Ken Dala business center building was pledged to the Bank when JSC "IHC" requested the court to restore its credit relationship with the Bank. It should be noted that the court, granting these demands of JSC "IHC", also satisfied the Bank's demands to reinstate the pledge agreement, as restoring credit relations should also restore security for fulfilling these obligations. In this case, the pledge was the Ken Dala business center building. Since the restoration of the credit agreements, over nine months have passed, and JSC "IHC" has not made a single payment to repay the principal debt and reward according to the credit agreements restored by the court decision. Moreover, JSC "IHC" did not take any steps to settle the terms of the restored credit agreements.
Again, the questionable good faith of JSC "IHC" is evident, as it deliberately misleads the public and tries to sway public opinion against JSC "Nurbank", while the Bank simply defends its rights and legitimate property interests. JSC "IHC", having received the Ken Dala business center building, first, must repay the money received for this building to the Bank, according to the assignment, and second, ensure the timely repayment of its own loan obtained from the Bank back in 2005.
All of the above statements made by representatives of the public foundation "Tagdyr" and JSC "IHC" are viewed as manipulation of public opinion, which can result in a reputational blow to JSC "Nurbank". We understand that any rumors about a financial organization result in dissatisfaction and public concern, especially during this difficult period for our banking system. The allegations against the Bank of raiding are all the more unacceptable to us. Therefore, we considered it necessary to make a statement in which we did not reflect JSC "Nurbank's" viewpoint but simply stated the facts which representatives of JSC "IHC" chose to ignore.
In conclusion, we want to emphasize that we have long regarded the conflict surrounding the Ken Dala business center as an internal matter solely within the purview of the Bank's and JSC "IHC's" interests, avoiding public disclosure of the court proceedings' details. However, faced with an apparent attempt to discredit the Bank, manipulation of public opinion, and misleading the public by concealing facts, we cannot remain silent any longer. Understanding that allegations of unlawful asset seizure against us today could resonate throughout the entire banking system of Kazakhstan tomorrow obligates us to make this statement. Please allow us to also express hope that reticence, rumor mongering, and fact distortion do not become a common practice in our Republic's information space.
For additional information, please contact:
press service of JSC "Nurbank"
+7 (727) 259-97-10
pr@nurbank.kz