7/6/2022 - economy-and-finance

The Argentina Legal Strategy in the case by the expropriation of YPF after the change in Economics

By sebastian maril

The Argentina Legal Strategy in the case by the expropriation of YPF after the change in Economics

The changes in progress in Argentina in the Ministry of Economy do not change anything for those who have economic interests in the case of expropriation of YPF. The government still has more pressing priorities than the demands of Petersen and Eton and sees the failure (if it is adverse) as an event that will not resolve without the recommendation of its New York lawyers.
Argentina and YPF have already lost four major failures in this case (September 2016, April 2019, June 2019 and June 2020) without a single important victory since April 2015 when complaints were presented (small events). In this sense, if the sovereign and YPF lose again and choose to appeal the sentence to the Second Circuit, we do not see how a different result would be. In any case, it is very unlikely that the legal strategy of the Republic will change as a result of the events this weekend and we hope that the government will prolong the matter and seek the opinion of three judges in the appeal court.
We also did not rule out the possibility of the order of Judge Preska to be partial, which means that he could put himself on the side of the complainants in some matters, but send the dispute of economic damages at trial. We believe that the calculation of a monetary award to Petersen and Eton Park Capital companies needs more expert opinions and it is possible that it is not decided in the next decision.
The judge could also fail completely in favor of both accused, something that has not yet happened in this trial, or against Argentina and in favor of YPF.
In any case, we have already taken 13 days since the parties presented the last set of writings and, although the judge may request oral allegations, we believe that both the complainants and the defendants are preparing for a decision. In its first decision in this case (9 September 2016), Judge Preska took 51 days since the last presentation/audience in publishing his Opinion and order. In its second judgment (June 5, 20), the judge took 119 days.

Do you want to validate this article?

By validating, you are certifying that the published information is correct, helping us fight against misinformation.

Validated by 0 users
sebastian maril

sebastian maril

Hi, it's Sebastian. Specialist in sovereign, provincial and corporate debt issued in international markets. Expert in U.S. policy, economy and legal. MBA from Thunderbird Business School, Arizona.

Linkedin

Total Views: 3

Comments