If you are talking about the vinmar contracts it is a 3rd party contract that you will never see . Not sure what you mean by hinged to one of the joint venture buyers ? Then say it was guaranteed to the debt ridden shell . But the judge pretty much spelled it out . If one were to read and comprehend his words .
The Vinmar contracts were mainly supply contracts from BioAmber Sarnia's point of view
who was to build three plants to manufacture specific chemical products to be sold among
others to Vinmar who was to finance the construction of those three plants;
Other than the Sarnia plant, two of those three plants were never built;
- Clearly, BioAmber Sarnia is no longer in a position to manufacture the products that it
contractually agreed to supply to Vinmar under those contracts;
- Among the reasons given to the Monitor to justify their state of insolvency, the Petitioners
never raised that Vinmar was in breach of its contractual obligations under the two
contracts that would have caused their financial demise;
Furthermore, most of the assets of the Petitioners have now been sold including the entire
Sarnia plant; BioAmber Sarnia no longer has the means to manufacture any of the
products that it used to in that plant and that were to be supplied to Vinmar under the
contracts;
In the two SISPS, all the supply contracts including the Vinmar contracts were among the
assets offered for sale under the Monitor's supervision; nobody ever offered to acquire
whatever rights the Petitioners may still have in the same;
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
