Benchmark prior transactions, bonds, loans or company profiles using over 300 credit metrics.

Comparables

AI transcripts & instant analysis, making earnings season easier than ever.

Earnings

A full suite of ESG data and analysis. Built for your workflow

Spot undervalued credits and potential future restructurings with our purpose-built tools.

Distressed and Restructuring

Full Financial profiles with 3 statements, KPIs, segment splits & credit metrics. All traced to source documents.

Financials

New deal analysis and covenant comparison tools, understand key risks in seconds not days.

Covenants

Say goodbye to CTRL + F with our powerful search. Thousands of documents text searchable for any keyword or phrase.

Search

We've successfully predicted more than 65 price sensitive events - before they happened.

Deal predictions

We use AI to aggregate newsflow from 2,000 sources, and deliver it to your inbox quicker than anyone else.

News

Track high yield deals from issuance through to maturity, with integrated legal, credit and ESG analysis.

High Yield Bonds

Shine a light on private markets with 9fin's news and legal analysis of syndicated loans

Leveraged Loans

21st century tech and expert analysis to help CLO teams make informed decisions faster.

Structured Credit 

Find information others can't see in one of the fastest growing corners of finance

Private Credit 

Alessia Argentieri

Don’t miss out on news you won’t find anywhere else — get The Memo US and The Memo Europe in your inbox every two weeks.

A group of minority creditors has challenged Selecta’s contested restructuring plan by filing new claims in the US, according to 9fin sources and documents obtained by 9fin.

The filing, as 9fin anticipated last week, was submitted by creditors Deltroit, Algebris and Fineco Asset Management, CQS and Mercer, and Faros Point before the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. Faegre Drinker is advising the minority creditors.

The filing targets a broad range of defendants including Selecta Group B.V. — the Dutch parent company — and its affiliates as well as several Selecta directors, including Nicole Charrière, Ruud Gabriels, Robert Plooij, Bob Rajan, and Jason Clarke — who allegedly facilitated or approved the restructuring.

The suit also names four global investment firms part of the ad hoc group (AHG) of majority holders — Invesco, Man Group, Strategic Value Partners (SVP), and Diameter Capital Partners — as the primary “favoured holders,” alleged to have colluded with Selecta in structuring its recapitalisation to their exclusive benefit.

Read 9fin analysis of the restructuring here. Note, this is only accessible to 9fin clients. For access, request a trial.

Together, these defendants are accused of orchestrating and executing “a concerted, anticompetitive, and clandestine” restructuring scheme that subordinated minority noteholders and transferred control of Selecta to the favoured creditor group.

The plaintiffs claim that the scheme violated both US federal and New York State antitrust laws, specifically Section 1 of the Sherman Act (federal antitrust law) and the Donnelly Act (the state-level antitrust law).

According to the complaint, the defendants conspired through a cooperation agreement to exclude minority investors from restructuring negotiations, fix the terms of Selecta’s first lien debt, and consolidate control over the company and its assets.

The filing says that the cooperation agreement constituted an anticompetitive collusion under Section 1 of the Sherman Act and New York’s Donnelly Act, as it excluded minority noteholders from fair participation in restructuring and artificially manipulated debt pricing.

Beyond antitrust violations, the plaintiffs also claim multiple breaches of the governing 1L indenture and intercreditor agreement. They argue that Selecta and its trustee failed to treat all noteholders equally, improperly subordinated their securities, and distributed recoveries on a non-ratable basis.

They also allege fraud and misrepresentation, claiming that Selecta, its trustee Kroll, and the favoured holders deliberately concealed critical information from minority creditors and the Dutch court overseeing the foreclosure proceedings.

According to the complaint, this lack of disclosure and the presentation of misleading information were intended to manipulate the process and prevent investors from raising timely objections to the restructuring.

The lawsuit seeks compensatory and treble damages, repayment of principal and interest, attorneys’ fees, and statutory penalties, contending that the restructuring unlawfully expropriated the minority creditors’ value and rights.

The dispute centers on Selecta’s restructuring, a complex, cross-border transaction that ultimately shifted control of the company to a group of majority creditors.

According to the complaint, in late 2024 Selecta began confidential negotiations with the AHG of large noteholders. This group — described as the “favoured holders” — allegedly entered into a co-op that excluded minority investors and required its members to vote as a bloc, preventing support for any alternative restructuring plan.

Acting together, the “favoured holders” and Selecta directed Kroll Trustee Services, acting as security agent, to enforce a Dutch-law share pledge over Selecta’s equity.

The foreclosure, approved by the Netherlands Commercial Court (NCC) in May, transferred ownership of Selecta to a newly formed Jersey vehicle, Seagull Bidco Limited, which is allegedly controlled by the AHG. The enforcement was executed for the nominal price of one euro, a move the plaintiffs say failed to maximise value for all creditors.

Under the Dutch court-sanctioned plan, all pari passu first-lien noteholders initially received an equal 85% allocation of new “third-out” (3O) notes.

A second step followed on 17 June, when Selecta launched a public exchange offer allowing non-AHG creditors to swap their 3O notes for “first-out” (1O) notes at par — effectively restoring principal but at a cost. To participate, noteholders had to waive legal claims and key investor protections, known as “sacred rights.” The new 1O notes could also be amended by a simple majority within the first year, a power controlled by the AHG.

This structure left non-AHG creditors facing a stark dilemma: remain in deeply subordinated 3O instruments with limited recovery and equity, or exchange into 1O notes that could later be amended against their interests.

According to the New York filing, the Favoured Holders’ 1O notes now trade near 75 cents on the euro, while the plaintiffs’ subordinated securities trade at just 15-20 cents on the euro, reflecting the steep value gap created by the restructuring.

Meanwhile, minority creditors including Deltroit and others have also appealed the Dutch ruling before the NCC Court of Appeal, arguing that the foreclosure was a “heavily engineered cross-border financial restructuring” designed to enrich the AHG. They contend that the enforcement breached Dutch statutory duties by failing to maximise proceeds and by transferring Selecta’s shares to the AHG’s vehicle, Seagull Bidco, on terms that favoured the majority group.

Selecta, Algebris, CQS, Deltroit, Diameter, Fineco, Faros, Invesco, and Mercer did not respond to immediate requests for comment. Faegre Drinker, Man Group, and SVP declined to comment.

🍪 Our Cookies

Minority creditors file suit against Selecta and AHG in New York

Read all our public content for free

Recently Published

Excess Spread — Heading south, flight risk

Funding AI’s trillion-dollar bill — Tech bond issuance soars to bankroll data center spend

SOUP season is here — US community banks combine SBA loans for securitization

Buyout, IPO, or new investor? Investors weigh SP Group's exit scenarios

What are you waiting for?