Judicial superyacht sales: Three cases, three fault lines - Alfa Nero Yacht Sale

When execution succeeds but certainty fails

Part I: The Sale of the yacht Alfa Nero & the Case

Several superyachts seized or immobilised since 2022 have now been sold. Buyers exist, even for vessels with a complicated past. Whether those sales hold over time, in other jurisdictions and against later challenges is a separate question.

This series looks at three of them: Alfa Nero, Axioma and Amadea. All three were sold, and none offers a model that can simply be reused. Read together, they show a market that completes sales more easily than it secures them.

The three did not follow the same procedure. Axioma was sold by order of a court at the request of a secured creditor, Amadea after civil forfeiture proceedings in the United States. Alfa Nero was sold by the government of Antigua and Barbuda under a port law amended for the purpose. The word "judicial" covers all three only loosely, and the differences matter.

Alfa Nero: a sale that did not close the case

Of the three, Alfa Nero is the case where the public account is hardest to follow. The yacht was sold, yet the litigation went on. After the first buyer withdrew in 2023, the questions shifted from whether a sale could be completed to whether the title was sound, how the process was run and where the money went.

From sanctions to sale

Alfa Nero has been in Falmouth Harbour, Antigua and Barbuda, since February 2022, when she was held while the authorities checked whether her ultimate owner was subject to sanctions. The US Treasury identified the Russian businessman Andrey Guryev as the owner, which he denies.

In early 2023, Antigua and Barbuda amended its Port Authority Act to allow vessels to be declared abandoned or hazardous, then taken and sold by the state. Alfa Nero was declared abandoned in March 2023 and the government took ownership in April. The US Treasury lifted the sanctions on the vessel to allow her sale.

At the auction held on 16 June 2023, Eric Schmidt made the highest bid, about $67.6 million. Warren Halle came second, with $66 million.

The first sale collapses

The sale was never completed. Schmidt withdrew within weeks, as the sale became the subject of litigation. Several reports attributed his decision to the impossibility of obtaining a secure title.

Two challenges were under way. Yulia Guryeva-Motlokhov, Andrey Guryev's daughter, claimed ownership through the structures that held the yacht, contested the declaration of abandonment and challenged the constitutionality of the 2023 amendment. Warren Halle sued the government, arguing that under the auction rules the yacht should have passed to him once Schmidt failed to pay within the time allowed, and claimed about $5.7 million in damages.

The second sale

In July 2024, the government sold Alfa Nero by private treaty for about $40 million. Northrop & Johnson represented the buyer, later reported to be the Turkish businessman Ali Riza Yildirim.

The sale ended a costly layup for Antigua and allowed the crew's outstanding wages to be paid.

According to the government, the proceeds were also to cover other debts linked to the yacht and part of the country's budget shortfall.

The yacht has since been refitted and returned to the charter market.

Litigation since the sale

In Antigua, the High Court has heard the constitutional challenge to the 2023 amendment. As of spring 2026, judgment had not been delivered.

In the United States, Ms Guryeva-Motlokhov has relied on 28 U.S.C. § 1782, which allows discovery in support of foreign proceedings, to seek banking records that she says would show how the sale proceeds were used.

On 30 March 2026, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the quashing of subpoenas served on two US financial institutions, finding the intended use of the evidence too speculative. The court did not rule on the allegations themselves. A separate application has since been granted in Florida, where the proceedings are still open.

The Antiguan government and the officials concerned contest these allegations. No court has found any wrongdoing.

Three fault lines

The first concerns title. Ownership is still contested, and the constitutionality of the law under which the yacht was taken has yet to be decided.

The second concerns price. The difference between $67.6 million and $40 million is often read as the cost of legal uncertainty. Other factors played a part: another year of layup, maintenance costs, and a seller under pressure. The buyer's broker said himself that the yacht was worth more and that the government needed to sell.

The third concerns the proceeds. Their use has been questioned in the US filings. These are allegations, and they have not been tested on the merits.

The legal questions that remain

Anyone contesting the sale has several possible arguments. The yacht may not have been genuinely abandoned, in which case the seizure itself is open to question.

The 2023 amendment may be found unconstitutional, which could raise further questions about the legal basis of the seizure and sale.

The gap between the two prices may be used to argue that the sale did not achieve fair value. And the lack of a detailed public account of the proceeds may be used to question how the process was managed.

None of these arguments has so far led to a ruling against the sale. As long as they are pending, the case stays open.

What Alfa Nero shows

A sale can be completed without giving the market the legal certainty it expects. Alfa Nero has changed hands and is working again.

The questions raised in 2023 are still before the courts. Their outcome may have implications for the legal assessment of the original seizure and sale, although the consequences for the current owner remain uncertain.

What was missing was a framework recognised beyond Antigua, able to secure the transfer and limit challenges after the sale. The Beijing Convention on the international effects of judicial sales of ships, in force since February 2026, sets out to provide one. Antigua and Barbuda is not a party.

And a sale by private treaty without the approval of a court, as in July 2024, would not have met the Convention's definition of a judicial sale in any case.

The same weakness appears in other cases, in other forms. With Axioma, it bears less on title than on how the price was formed. That is the subject of the second part of this series.

Contact

Emmanuelle VOTAT – Judicial Yacht Asset Manager (France) - Specialist in Seized Maritime Assets ev@yachting-legal-auction.com

This article is based on publicly available facts, verifiable data, and an independent legal and strategic analysis. It does not, under any circumstances, constitute a definitive statement regarding the guilt or innocence of the individuals or legal entities mentioned, but rather forms part of a general-interest reflection on the management of frozen or seized assets in a complex geopolitical context. Any correction or right of reply may be submitted through the appropriate official channels and will be given due consideration. The author acts in full independence and in compliance with the right to information and the duty of professional restraint.