YPF judgment: Argentina seeks to prove that Petersen's entry into the company was "fraudulent"

Argentina will seek to block the vulture Burford vulture's request for the nationalization of YPF arguing that the Petersen company's entry into the oil company, from 2008, through the l & # 39; buying 25% of the stock package, was an act of "zero legality"because he's from one"fraudulent procedure"

This is read in the brief that the country has filed in New York court which is in charge of the case for which the vulture fund of Burford Capital claims u $ 3 billion compensation in the Argentine State and YPF.

The legal representatives of Argentina and YPF will be presented this Thursday in front of the court of South Yok Circuit South, Loretta Preska, facing the plaintiffs' fund. Burford acquired the judgment rights of the companies Petersen Energía and Petersen Inversora, located in Spain, before the Spanish courts.

At the hearing, Burford will insist – he asked in writing last week – to ask the summary judgment the case when the authority of the case is judged and a new meeting between the parties is scheduled to decide the quantification of damages and amounts to be paid by Argentina.

The country rejected the closure of the case because it had understood that it "lacked legal basis and that it is premature" to understand that it should be given to him. Opportunity to present "the many and substantial arguments", and even to propose a process of prior research, a resource for requesting information. and documentation of all parties.

The first move of the country will be to insist on the exclusive jurisdiction of the Argentine courts with respect to Petersen's claims under local law, which Argentina intended to define by the Supreme Court of justice, which ultimately dismissed the appeal.

In the event that Preska reaffirms that the trial would continue in court and would not lead to domestic courts, the strategy was to "prove the fraudulent procedure" for the purchase of 25% of the Petersen Group's shares between 2008 and 2011 .

As he had anticipated in recent days ahead of Preska, Argentina will seek to demonstrate that "Petersen, a fictional Spanish company incorporated and controlled by Argentine citizens, has entered into a very dubious set of agreements manifestly false with respect to the acquisition of its YPF shares ".

In 2008, the Petersen companies acquired from Repsol 15% of the shares of the company and 10% additional in 2011, for an amount of 3,500 million US dollars, but "without paying a dime", since it was authorized to "use the future dividends of YPF to buy their own shares," said in a letter.

At that time, Petersen was controlled by the Eskenazi family, who landed in the company as part of a process of nationalization.

"Given the inappropriate nature, these agreements are void ab initio, depriving Petersen of being able to demand "of Argentina and YPF in case of breach of contract," says the report.

If necessary, the country will claim to address "many legal grounds" among those who evoke "the doctrine of forum non conveniens, the legal principles of the international community; and the absence of direct contractual demands between shareholders until lack of legitimacy.

It will also be possible to report, in case of allegations, the inability of Petersen to sue as he was no longer a shareholder of YPF during the nationalization of the shares in 2012; and the fact that the anticipated breach of the contract and the breach of the implicit obligation of good faith and fair dealing do not constitute recognizable claims in Argentine law.

The Burford fund acquired Petersen's trial rights for $ 15 million from a Spanish bankruptcy court. Two weeks ago, he said he sold 10% of the debt for $ 100 million, which is a significant gain.

In 2012, the government of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner advanced with the nationalization of 51% of YPF, owned by Repsol and Petersen. When the Eskenazi family paid the debt contracted to enter the company with the dividends of the company itself, the shares were transferred to a pool of banks since the new board of directors, controlled by the company, was transferred to a pool of banks. State, interrupted the distribution of profits.

In 2015, the executive agreed to compensate Repsol in the amount of 5900 million US dollars. This motivated the claim of vulture funds made under the control of Petersen. The main argument is that, in accordance with the articles of badociation of the company, which is listed on Wall Street, the state should have extended this offer to minority shareholders, through a public tender offer. acquisition (OPA) of shares.

By attempting to invalidate the original transaction – the transfer of Repsol's shares to the Eskenazi family -, the Argentine representation claims the nullity of any claim subsequent to this transaction. If Petersen had no rights over YPF, the vulture fund that now pleads on his behalf – and another fund, Eton, which he also claims – would have no rights to the company.

The defense of Argentina is jointly established by the Treasury Prosecutor, headed by Bernardo Saravia Frías, and the New York law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. Another law firm, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, represents YPF.

The Argentine representation and lawyers vulture funds seek to involve in the trial the former Minister of the Economy, Axel Kicillof, who was at the time opposed to the extension from the offer to minority shareholders.