China Sunergy reaches final settlement with REC Wafer

NANJING, CHINA: China Sunergy Co. Ltd, a specialized solar cell and module manufacturer, has agreed to settle all disputes with REC Wafer Norway AS ("REC Wafer") and that REC Wafer has released the US$50 million bank guarantees. The amount held in escrow by the banks has been released to China Sunergy.

The company entered into a settlement agreement with REC Wafer on October 17, 2011, and on October 28, 2011, the company made a settlement payment to REC Wafer. The settlement amount is not being disclosed, yet it has very limited impact on China Sunergy's profitability. On the date of this announcement, November 4, 2011, China Sunergy has confirmed that it has received the $50 million bank guarantees that have been released by REC Wafer.

Stephen Cai, CEO of China Sunergy, commented: "We are glad to put this dispute with REC Wafer behind us, and China Sunergy is satisfied with the settlement terms. The released $50 million bank guarantees go straight back into our working capital and will strengthen the company's ability to weather the current tough solar market."

In 2009, China Sunergy served a writ upon REC Wafer, claiming REC Wafer is not a party to the contract between China Sunergy and the dissolved REC SiTech AS. In July 2010 the Salten District Court in Norway ruled against China Sunergy in the case. The Company appealed the ruling in August 2010. The appeal hearing, originally scheduled for March 2011, was held in June 2011.

In parallel to the main dispute China Sunergy was granted an injunction with regard to a US$50 million bank guarantee raised according to the contract between China Sunergy and the dissolved REC SiTech AS. The Court of Appeal decided that the injunction was to remain in force until the Court of Appeal passed the judgment on the main case in June 2011.

On June 30, 2011, the Halogaland Court of Appeal ruled in favor of China Sunergy and determined that REC Wafer was not, and had never been a party to the contract. As of a result of this, there was no need for a further injunction with regard to a US$50 million bank guarantee.