RE: Even More Interesting Read7 Dec 2021 09:58
YPF's position, on the other hand, is that "the resulting damages estimates would be 14.4 billion pesos (excluding interest and some accessory claims) or 14 billion pesos (excluding interest and some accessory claims)", as the company also explains to the CNV. If converted at the exchange rate on September 24, when the initial experts' reports were exchanged, the amount would be between $ 146 million or $ 142 million.
The oil company also explained that the range of “US $ 3,500 and US $ 5,200 million is only in the event that the court, among other things, (i) declares the defendants liable, (ii) decides to award damages in favour of the plaintiffs and (iii) reject several of the corrections to the damages methodology made by the defendants' expert, and accept dates of notification of the public offer of May 7 and April 16, 2012 ?.
YPF today has a market valuation of US $ 1,585 million, according to its listing on the New York Stock Exchange. Each share costs US $ 4,030, of which 51% is in the hands of the Argentine State, after being expropriated in 2012, when the Minister of Economy was the current Buenos Aires governor, Axel Kicillof . In 2014, Argentina paid the Spanish oil company Repsol a compensation of US $ 5 billion for the nationalization of 51% of the shares.
Sources close to Vice President Cristina Kirchner point out that this result "is the consequence of a bad decision in the judicial strategy of the previous government." The Treasury Department, headed by Carlos Zannini, did not comment on the matter.
The lawsuit against YPF and the Argentine Republic began in April 2015 in the Southern District Court of New York and is being handled by Judge Loretta Preska , heir to the cases of the late Thomas Griesa. Burford and Eton (the other fund that initiated a similar lawsuit and Preska decided to unify both claims) are asking for economic compensation because, at the time of the expropriation, the then government of Cristina Kirchner did not launch a public acquisition offer on the total of the actions, it only did it on 51%. The plaintiffs say the company should have made a takeover bid (OPA) to the rest of the shareholders, according to YPF's bylaws and the public offering prospectus that the company filed with the United States Securities Commission in 1993.
When the expropriation took place, the Petersen companies went bankrupt in Spain, and accused that they could not pay their commitments, since the price of the shares had collapsed and the new majority shareholder, Argentina, had prohibited the distribution of profits.
YPF and the Argentine State, for their part, tried to convince the judge that the right of expropriation is above any business statute and that the process should also be carried out in the Argentine courts . The judge rejected this request in June last year , after three US courts - including the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court - ruled against adjudicating the trial in Argentine jurisdiction.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
