New setback in the lawsuit against YPF in the United States: what will be the new strategy of Argentina

This is a question that occupies and worries the government of Cambiemos. Although in a context of dollar and country risk and market volatility, this question remains in the background, the tension on the state and YPF lawsuit taking place in the courts of southern Manhattan, where everything on Wall Street is settled, is permanent. This is not for less: there are continuous movements within the courts, many interests at stake, doubts and an economic claim born after Cristina Kirchner The oil company will be nationalized and could reach 3,000 million USD.

Last week and unexpectedly, the New York Court of Appeal again sent the case file to Judge Loretta Preska, magistrate of first instance who replaced the deceased. Thomas Griesa. Something that Argentine lawyers have interpreted as a sign that judicial time could be much accelerated against the country. They presented two measures: a kind of revocation in the House to review its own decision, and at the same time a stay Preska to wait for the decision of the court of appeal.

But today, the House has upheld its decision and the trial will be in the hands of Preska, who could open the investigation, beyond what the US Supreme Court says: who asked the prosecutor's opinion Donald Trump about whether the case should be handled in this country or Argentina, as the company and the local government say.

The team of state lawyers and the company are headed by Bernardo Saravia Frías, treasurer and Fabián "Pepín" Rodríguez Simón, director of YPF and direct interlocutor of the president Mauricio Macri and specialist in judicial matters of Cambiemos. In addition to the important studies that follow the subject in the United States and Spain. It is precisely in this last country that the new strategy focuses: to demonstrate that the whole request is invalid.

"After years on the defensive, we attacked, now we will try to seize ourselves"he says Infobae a source very close to the cause. Hermeticism and out of record they are characteristic of this case which began in 2012 with the renationalization of Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales.

The claim motorizes Burford Capital, a London-based company specializing in litigation. He alleges an alleged violation of the Argentine state at the time of the nationalization of YPF, which was approved by Congress. Then the country agreed with Repsol, the majority shareholder (51%), and paid more than 5 billion USD in bonds. The plaintiff states that Argentina should have made a public takeover bid (OPA) and equated the offer with the other shareholders. This was not the case and Burford added that YPF was listed on Wall Street.

Burford, which is often compared to a "vulture fund" for its global strategy of badet acquisition in trouble, negotiated in 2013 with the Spanish courts the right to litigate against two equally bankrupt companies (Petersen Energía and Petersen Inversora, who did not belong to the local Petersen group at the time). Then Burford also participated in the lawsuit of Eton Park, another minority shareholder. All of these issues are settled in a complex court setting in the courts of the Southern District of New York and even in the United States Supreme Court.

Argentinian lawyers believe that they have seen a small glimmer of hope across the Atlantic in Spain. At the end of February, state and company officials launched two similar prosecutions against Burford in Madrid. They intend to prove that the financing contract which was concluded with justice by the Spanish Petersen is "an badignment of credits". In other words, the fund does not finance bankrupt companies, but bought the lawsuit.

"They say that they are funding and for us, they are hiding the real deal, that is, they have bought the test," sources said.

What impact would this have on the trial in the United States? "Huge," they say near YPF. The covers of the records against the state are bankrupt companies, which would be correct if Burford finances the judgment, but not he? S buying it. In this case, the request should be made directly by Burford and, since that did not happen, it would not exist in the United States – still according to the argument of Argentine lawyers – what is called "active legitimation" ". This is to say that the lawsuit would have been initiated by a person who does not have the right to do so. And the lawsuit could fall.

The national state has no doubt that it was a sale, but it acknowledges that it will not be so easy to have it go to a Spanish court.

The other question is why Burford, one of the most important companies in the world in this field, has committed this "mess". "First, because under Spanish law, before the badignment of a disputed credit, the debtor, in this case Argentina, can match the offer. For example, if Argentina sold 10 million dollars, Argentina could do the same and close the file.. In addition, New York has the law of ownershipwhich prevents these sales only from pleading and attempts to discourage speculation. Burford saw these risks and that's why they used this argument, "says another source close to the judicial conspiracy out of the record.

In Spain, YPF has hired two prestigious studios that work together, Fernando Bautista and Baker Mckenzie, of José María Alonso, Dean of the Madrid Bar.

The US court and Trump's opinion

"Argentina already loses two to zero in this case in US courts", details in terms of football Sebastián Maril, from Fingurú. It refers to two adverse judgments, one of the judge Preska and another of the Court of Appeal.

In this context, state lawyers have appealed to the Supreme Court of this country: they argue that as a sovereign country, Argentina can expropriate a society, which the legislation of that country is considering. But they reserve the right to intervene if there are commercial problems in the middle. And the sale of shares or damages to the company's shareholders who are listed on Wall Street are commercial issues.

"It had already happened with the links in the hands of the holdoutsand we lost. The Court asked the United States Government to comment on the case. It had already happened: the government of this country had voted in favor of Argentina, but the same court had always failed. Now, we hope that the General Counsel (or lawyer) of Trump, then the Supreme Court will decide whether to accept the case. If you take it, it will be solved next year. If he does not take it, the lawsuit returns to the bar of Preska, where we have already lost. Whatever it is, there will be calls and it will be for a long time. It's missing a lot, "said Maril.

Maril thinks Burford has about $ 1,600 million for selling a good deal of the lawsuit to third parties with profits greater than 100%. "There is a lot of interest in Wall Street to buy the profits from this lawsuit, which is a bad sign: the market believes that Argentina will lose," said the badyst. Now, with the decision today, Preska could order that the instruction begin.

It seems to be part of the series script as Billions and Costumesbut it's not a fiction. The outlook does not look better for the country and the economic consequences can have a significant local impact.