Saturday, July 27, 2013

Argentina Debt The French Strategy

I think France saw a great opportunity to step up helping Argentina some weeks ago when it seemed that both the United States Executive Branch and the French-led IMF would file "Argentina´s best friend" briefs with the U.S. Supreme Court. Wanting to play a role in international finance matters, France would also be present in the "lawsuit of the century" in debt restructurings. Leadership issues involved. And also the "carrot" to Argentina because of the debt with the Paris Club. Besides, it would also show that France understands debt crises and therefore it would have more authority in the probably upcoming European debt restructurings. A three-fold great strategy for France. International leader along with the U.S. and the IMF, helping Argentina (to have Argentina in Paris) and become an authority in Europe.

Without the U.S. and the IMF, the French friend brief is left alone, for the moment. Therefore its firepower is reduced, but unless it is in the game, and may use it with Argentina at the Paris Club and in Europe for the debt restructurings of some of its members. Of course, it would be better if the U.S. Supreme Court pays attention to its brief. Without the U.S. and the IMF I would be pessimistic for now. However, we still have the next round of cert petitions regarding the upcoming ruling from the Second Circuit on the payment formula and the injunctions on the Bank of New York and other financial institutions. Which is another opportunity for France to step as is it for the U.S. Executive Branch and the IMF. The Supreme Court would then pay more attention.

Eugenio A Bruno
eab@garridolawfirm.com

Friday, July 26, 2013

Disputes between the United States and Argentina governments?

I dont think there is a dispute between these two governments, unless there is one, in which case the situation may be very difficult. Probably the IMF spokeman misexplained the real situation meaning that there was a discrepancy between the U.S. and other members regarding the IMF eventual brief. Not a dispute between the U.S. and Argentina. The existing dispute is between Argentina and certain private creditors, who are litigating against Argentina before the U.S. courts. Eventually there could be a dispute between Argentina and the U.S. Courts down the road. But not now.

I also understand that informally the U.S. government has indicated that nothing has changed and they would be ready to step up if the U.S. Supreme Court asks its opinion. They probably would also file an UNINVITED brief in the upcoming appeal regarding the injunction against the Bank of New York Mellon if the ruling from the Second Circuit is negative to Argentina.

Of course, an eventual amicus brief from the U.S. government helps a lot, but obviously the ultimate decision comes from the Supreme Court on (i) granting or denying the certiorari petitions, (ii) staying the decisions from the Second Circuit, (iii) asking Argentina a bond as a condition for the granting the cert petitions, and (iv) deciding the legal issues.

Eugenio A Bruno
eab@garridolawfirm.com

Thursday, July 25, 2013

What to make of the latest

The United States decided not to participate now in favor of Argentina as an UNINVITED amicus. This negative affected the decision from the IMF not to file a brief as announced.

Questions for the near future:

1) Will the Supreme Court ask the U.S. to file an INVITED brief?

2) If so, what the U.S. government will?

3) After the upcoming ruling from the Court of Appeals, Argentina will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court if the ruling is negative (not decided yet particularly on the attachments of the Bank of New York). In this case, the interest to the U.S. government may be more important as the payment system of New York may be affected. In this case, the U.S. government may decide to file an UNINVITED amicus brief, but this remain to be seen.

4) Of course, if no amicus brief from the U.S. government, the situation with the Supreme Court will be difficult. What will the Court do absence U.S. help?

5) If the Supreme Court accepts the appeal (either the existing one or the upcoming), will it be with Stay of Execution of the rulings from the Court of Appeals?

Eugenio A Bruno
eab@garridolawfirm.com
 

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

IMF, France, the United States, Argentina and the U.S. Supreme Court

In this frency of Amici, I think what could affect the United States courts, particularly the U.S. Supreme Court in accepting to take the Argentina´s cert petition is a filing from the United States executive power.

IMF without the U.S. filing? Value to be seen.

IMF with the U.S.? More important.

France without the U.S.? For your newspapers and French-Argentine relationship only.

It is key to have the U.S. filing, either uninvited these days, or after an eventual petition from the U.S. Supreme Court, to boost the chances for the U.S. Supreme Court to accept the cert petition. 

Eugenio A Bruno
eab@garridolawfirm.com

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

Argentina Debt - Decision from the Belgian Court

The decision from the Belgian court because it may open the door to attach the flow of payments intended to Argentine bonds in Euros, payable in Europe through the BNY Brussels and Euroclear.

Eugenio A Bruno
eab@garridolawfirm

Monday, July 1, 2013

Argentina Debt: European Injunctions v New York Injunctions

The International Game of Injunctions














Lawyers for holders of Argentine bonds issued in Euros sent a letter to the NY Court of Appeals letting said court know that they had filed a petition before Belgian courts to ask for a "European injunction" against the possible "NY injunction" that may be issued by judge Thomas Griesa with respect to the flow of payments of those bonds. The purpose of the petition is to protect Bank of New York Brussels and Euroclear, from where the money goes through.

The Belgian court rejected such petition on the ground that said petition was "premature" as there is enough time, according to the court, to analyze the "merits" of the case.

A new hearing was scheduled for September, where the Belgian court will discuss the "merits" of the petition.

Eugenio A Bruno
Garrido Law Firm
eab@garridolawfirm.com