A credit institution appealed the ruling that approved the agreement claiming that the creditors meeting had allowed the presence and vote by a city council that, in its opinion, did not have such right because it was the holder of 100% of the share capital of the insolvent party.

The court indicated that there was no infraction in terms of the configuration and holding of the meeting. The credit of the city government entitling it to appear as the holder of an ordinary insolvency credit was the result of certain real estate transfers from the city council to the insolvent party. Although the city council was a specially related person (PER) with respect to the insolvent party, insofar as its credit did not stem from a loan or an "act of a similar nature," it fell under the exception of article 92.5 LC.12