Hard setback for YPF and the government | A courtyard of …

The state and YPF suffered a serious setback in the New York District II Court of Appeals. The dispute, led by a second-generation vulture fund challenging the expropriation of a majority stake in the oil company, has been suspended pending the referral of the US Attorney General to the Supreme Court for his opinion on the case. The New York court however said Thursday that the prosecution was continuing its path in first instance. The decision surprised the government of Mauricio Macri. The Argentine authorities were convinced that the time set by US Attorney General Donald Trump for the prosecutor allowed them to save time, but this strategy has now collapsed.

The lawsuit against the oil company and the country on the expropriation of the majority of the company's shares is being conducted by the British law firm Burford Capital. Unlike the vulture funds, the British did not claim any securities of the oil company in default to take legal action. Burford Capital seized the litigation rights initially held by the Eskenazi Group, a shareholder at the time of the expropriation.

Judge Loretta Preska of the southern district of Mahnattan, who replaced Thomas Griesa after her death, is the original cause. The lawsuit began in April 2015. English lawyers claim that, at the time of the expropriation of YPF's majority stake in the hands of the Spanish company Repsol, Argentina had not proposed any Buy the entire shareholding package, as they established the oil status No compensation definition has yet been provided for this alleged violation, but it is estimated that the claim would be between $ 1,000 and $ 3,000 million.

On July 10, the Court of Appeal confirmed that the trial was to be held in the United States. The government and YPF appealed. The application was rejected and the case had to be referred to the Southern District Federal Court. However, YPF requested a suspension of mandate, which was granted on October 2 for 30 days. On October 31, the oil company appealed to the US Supreme Court of Justice and made a presentation so that the process remains suspended until the court renders its decision on the merits. The "suspension" was extended when the Court requested an opinion on the White House trial. "The Attorney General is invited to present briefs in these cases, expressing the view of the United States," says the request of the highest court of the United States. The chief of lawyers, Noel Francisco, has no date to answer, but it was badumed that his writings would arrive from March. Until now, this presentation has not arrived. Argentinian lawyers hoped that this decision would delay the process, but the situation has now changed.

The second-generation vultures do not ask for it directly. They do this through two Spanish companies that started to control after their bankruptcy: Petersen Energía Inversora and Petersen Energía. The Eskenazi family used these companies to manage up to 25% of YPF. Burford Capital has been involved in the liquidation of companies in Spanish courts for the sole purpose of litigating in US courts. This is why, when the bankruptcy was completed, the Spanish trustee gave the British the right to sue the Argentine state and YPF.

The dispute against Argentina and YPF is not Burford Capital's first attempt to challenge the recovery of a national state badet in court. After the nationalization of Aerolineas Argentinas, the British were in charge of financing the lawsuit brought by Marsans before the arbitration court of the World Bank. When the Spanish conglomerate of tourism and airlines went bankrupt, Burford seized the rights of the case and funded the King & Spalding studio to maintain the claim at ICSID. In 2017, the pair of vultures got a favorable decision – in the meantime – ordering Argentina to pay 320.7 million dollars to Marsan bouncers for the expropriation of the national carrier in 2008 .