In a new chapter in the history of the state bailout of Plus Ultra, the Court of Instruction number 15 of Madrid agreed to unblock the 34 million Euros that it had frozen as part of the precautionary measure promoted by the case filed for alleged irregularities in the concession made by the Board of Directors of SEPI.
According to what was reported by the spanish newspaper ABC, the court allowed the appeal filed by the airline because it understands that keeping the delivery of these funds suspended “may entail the risk of definitive insolvency of Plus Ultra, forcing it to stop operating and creating damage to passengers who have paid in advance.’
At this stage of the rescue plan, the courts had issued a request to suspend the disbursement of money because, on the one hand, the need for the aid had not been proven and, on the other, the guarantees for the return of the 53 million euros allocated to the rescue they were (more than one will say they are) meager.
Plus Ultra then had to justify these 34 million “as the only way to maintain the viability of the company.” The airline presented an expert report in which it confirmed the need for this disbursement, and although the report commissioned by the court is missing, it was evaluated and established that the delivery of funds allows the company to continue being viable, which in the long run will It will allow the return of what was delivered, as opposed to denying these 34 million, force Plus Ultra’s bankruptcy and therefore risking the 19 million already disbursed to be permanently lost.
Plus Ultra indicated that the judicial decision is “a fundamental step in the path that we are following to demonstrate all the manipulation, falsehoods and attacks that we are suffering, not only the company but also our employees, partners and shareholders, whom we love. We thank their enormous dedication and commitment in these difficult moments”, said Fernando García Manso, President of the company.
Manso adds that it will be important that “we stop being used in a political battle with which we have nothing to do, and which is causing very serious and unfair damage to the reputation of the company, its employees and some of its members. and/or shareholders.”
