Key facts
- Petersen Energia and Eton Park petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate a $16.1 billion judgment against Argentina.
- The petition challenges a March ruling by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that sent the dispute to Argentine courts.
- The dispute centers on Argentina's 2012 nationalization of a controlling stake in YPF.
- Investors allege Argentina violated YPF's bylaws by failing to launch a tender offer to minority shareholders after seizing a 51% stake from Repsol.
- A U.S. district court had previously entered a $16.1 billion judgment, described as the largest commercial award in U.S. history.
Investment firms Petersen Energia and Eton Park have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate a $16.1 billion judgment against Argentina, stemming from the country's 2012 nationalization of YPF. The petition challenges a March decision by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which had overturned a prior U.S. district court judgment and ruled that the dispute should be heard in Argentine courts.
The investors argue that the appeals court ruling improperly allows Argentina to use its own laws to avoid liability in U.S. courts. The core of the dispute involves allegations that Argentina violated YPF's bylaws, established before its 1993 NYSE listing, by failing to conduct a mandatory tender offer to minority shareholders after seizing a 51% stake from Spain's Repsol.
The petition, filed by former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, contends that the 2nd Circuit's decision conflicts with Supreme Court precedent and creates a split among federal appellate courts. It questions whether a foreign sovereign can use its own law to mandate claims be brought domestically despite established U.S. jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, and whether U.S. courts should defer to a sovereign's interpretation of its own law when first advanced on appeal.