The New York Court dismissed Argentina's appeal in the YPF lawsuit

The Court of Appeal of the Second Circuit of New York rejected today
the call of Argentina and

YPF

to reverse its decision last week, which had rendered a judgment at first instance in the case initiated by the fund Burford Capital, after the purchase of two companies that belonged to the Petersen Group, the oil company.

In this way, the court has ratified
his decision of April 19 in which he had upheld the provisions of the Southern District Court of New York under Loretta Preska, in which it was considered that Argentina violated the terms of the expropriation of the company, has said the Telam agency.

Official sources explained that this measure was not the end of the case, but that Argentina was using the Preska, the House and the US Supreme Court.

"Today, the Argentine Republic and YPF will submit a request for suspension to Judge Loreta Preska (
stay) of the beginning of the trial. The argument is simple: do not start before the definition of certiorari by the Supreme Court, in which Argentina has raised the incompetence of US courts, with the support of Mexico, Chile , Brazil and Colombia. It is worth remembering that Judge Preska and admit this week a similar request, "they said.

"If the suspension request does not succeed, Argentina will have the opportunity to propose new defenses," they badured. The process is in a preliminary phase: what is discussed is a preliminary exception of the jurisdiction.

The cause – which could be the subject of a claim of approximately 3 billion US dollars – was created at the origin of the Burford fund after the accession to litigation rights under Spanish law, in the context of the bankruptcy process Petersen Energía and Petersen Inversora.

The decision of the US Court of Appeals was taken in the context of a pending decision of the Supreme Court of that country on the jurisdiction in which the proceedings should be conducted, a question requested by the United States Supreme Court. # 39; Argentina.

In January, the highest court of the United States asked the government of the president

Donald Trump

your opinion about it