UK court freezes VietJet assets over debt exceeding $250 mln — AeroTime
The UK Commercial Court has issued a worldwide freezing order against the assets of Vietnamese airline VietJet Aviation. FW Aviation Holdings1 Limited is seeking to recover more than $250 mln from the carrier under court judgments related to the leasing of four Airbus A321 aircraft, AeroTime reports.
Aircraft leasing dispute
The court order is dated October 15, 2026. The court concluded that there is a real risk that VietJet may put assets beyond the reach of creditors while FW Aviation seeks to recover the funds.
The dispute arose from lease agreements for four Airbus A321 aircraft delivered to VietJet in 2018 and 2019 under Japanese Operating Leases with Call Options. After the agreements were terminated in October 2021, FW Aviation went to court. In April 2025, VietJet was ordered to pay around $181.5 mln for the termination of the agreements and unpaid rent. Taking into account interest and costs, the debt later exceeded $250 mln.
More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.
Questions over the transfer of orders
By December 2022, FW Aviation had recovered and removed all four aircraft. At the same time, the return of the aircraft did not settle VietJet's remaining debt. The court also considered agreements between the airline and its affiliated Angelica Holding Limited, under which VietJet transferred to that company almost the entire value of its future aircraft order portfolio as of December 2024.
The court questioned what exactly VietJet was to receive in return, while the judge described the expected payments as entirely illusory. These circumstances, as well as observations regarding some of the evidence submitted by VietJet, influenced the decision to freeze the assets. At the same time, the order does not mean the cancellation of the airline's aircraft orders.
On September 30, 2026, the court separately considered FW Aviation's application for the appointment of receivers over certain VietJet assets. The court found such a measure in relation to assets outside Vietnam acceptable in principle, but left its terms and costs for further consideration.
