3*010 THOUSAND MILLION INTO CAPITAL, IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE COMMISSION ALSO TOOK THE VIEW THAT IT WAS NECESSARY TO INITIATE THE PROCEDURE PROVIDED FOR BY THE FIRST SUBPARAGRAPH OF ARTICLE 93 ( 2 ) OF THE EEC TREATY . DESPITE THE INITIATION OF THAT PROCEDURE THE BELGIAN GOVERNMENT CONVERTED GUARANTEED LOANS OF BFR 2*510 THOUSAND MILLION INTO CAPITAL .
8 THE PROCEDURES WERE BROUGHT TO A CONCLUSION BY THE ADOPTION BY THE COMMISSION OF ITS DECISION OF 4 FEBRUARY 1987 .
9 IN ORDER TO HAVE A FULL VIEW OF THE PROBLEMS RAISED BY THIS APPLICATION FOR THE ADOPTION OF INTERIM MEASURES, IT IS ALSO NECESSARY TO PROVIDE A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PRESENT POSITION OF TUBEMEUSE WITH REGARD TO BELGIAN LAW, THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES OF THAT POSITION AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THOSE CONSEQUENCES FOR THIS CASE .
10 AT THE MOMENT TUBEMEUSE IS SUBJECT TO A SCHEME OF COMPOSITION AS A RESULT OF AN APPLICATION IT MADE TO THAT EFFECT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL DE COMMERCE (( COMMERCIAL COURT )), LIEGE, ON 21 OCTOBER 1986 . AS THAT APPLICATION WAS DECLARED ADMISSIBLE BY JUDGMENT OF 28 OCTOBER 1986 AND AS THE REPORT DRAWN UP BY THE BANKRUPTCY JUDGES APPOINTED BY THE COURT STATED THAT TUBEMEUSE SATISFIED THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SECURING SUCH A SCHEME, THE COMPOSITION PROCEDURE TOOK ITS COURSE AND RESULTED IN THE TRIBUNAL DE COMMERCE, LIEGE, APPROVING THE SCHEME OF COMPOSITION BY JUDGMENT OF 10 MARCH 1987 AFTER ESTABLISHING THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF MISFORTUNE AND GOOD FAITH ON THE PART OF TUBEMEUSE HAD BEEN SATISFIED, THAT 95.4% OF ITS CREDITORS REPRESENTING 82% OF ITS LIABILITIES HAD VOTED IN FAVOUR OF THE SCHEME AND THAT THE SCHEME TOOK ACCOUNT OF THE CREDITORS' INTERESTS . BY THAT JUDGMENT THE TRIBUNAL DE COMMERCE ALSO APPOINTED LIQUIDATORS CHARGED WITH THE SALE OF ITS ASSETS AND THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH SALE . AN APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT APPROVING THE SCHEME WAS BROUGHT BY A NUMBER OF CREDITORS BUT AS THE JUDGMENT WAS PROVISIONALLY ENFORCEABLE THE PROCESS OF WINDING UP TUBEMEUSE NEVERTHELESS BEGAN .
11 AS REGARDS THE LEGAL EFFECTS OF THE SCHEME OF COMPOSITION, IT MUST BE EMPHASIZED THAT SUCH A SCHEME IS A COLLECTIVE WINDING UP OF A COMMERCIAL UNDERTAKING WHEREBY A DEBTOR, THE VICTIM OF MISFORTUNE, PROPOSES IN GOOD FAITH TO HIS CREDITORS THAT HE WILL RENOUNCE ALL HIS PROPERTY IN ORDER THAT THEY MAY BE PAID FROM THE PROCEEDS OF THEIR SALE WHICH IS CARRIED OUT BY LIQUIDATORS APPOINTED BY THE COURT . HOWEVER, THE DEBTOR' S RELEASE IS NOT TOTAL BECAUSE IF HIS CIRCUMSTANCES IMPROVE HE IS OBLIGED TO DISCHARGE THE RESIDUE OF THE AMOUNTS OWED . IF A SCHEME OF COMPOSITION IS SOUGHT AND APPROVED, AS IN THIS CASE, ONLY THOSE CREDITORS WITH SPECIAL PREFERENTIAL RIGHTS, IN THIS CASE THE PLEDGE HOLDERS, THE MORTGAGEES OR THE SPECIAL PREFERENTIAL CREDITORS MAY ENFORCE THEIR PLEDGE, MORTGAGE OR SPECIAL PREFERENTIAL RIGHT . BY CONTRAST, UNSECURED CREDITORS MAY NO LONGER ENFORCE THEIR RIGHTS BECAUSE THE FILING OF THE