Argentinean oil firm nationalization refuted by Irish court, invalidating $17.5 billion claim made against Argentina

In a significant ruling, an Irish court has dismissed a $17 billion dollar plus claim by shareholders of an Argentinian oil firm. The case, described by Justice Eileen Roberts as "the largest claim ever sought to be recognized and enforced by the Irish courts", was brought to the Irish Commercial Court by the shareholders seeking to enforce a judgment against the Argentine Republic.

However, the court's decision came due to the lack of demonstrable "practical benefit" in allowing the enforcement proceedings to be taken in Ireland. As it stands, there are no current assets in Ireland against which enforcement could be taken.

The shareholders had sought to enforce the judgment in multiple jurisdictions, including Ireland, England and Wales, France, Australia, and Canada. They had successfully pursued a case against the Argentine Republic in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York in 2023. However, the judgment in the US case is currently under appeal.

Lisa Carty, a litigation expert with Pinsent Masons in Dublin, commented that the Irish courts will look for a genuine, practical benefit to the plaintiff when determining whether to enforce a foreign judgment. The court was mindful that allowing the action to proceed would divert resources away from cases where the court's intervention would have a real and meaningful practical impact on the outcome of the litigation before it.

Justice Roberts' rejection of the plaintiffs' request for leave to serve Irish enforcement proceedings also highlighted comments made by the plaintiffs' litigation funder in the US proceedings, suggesting that the purpose of the Irish enforcement proceedings may have been to reach a settlement with Argentina, rather than directly enforcing the $17 billion award.

In the Irish courts, it is necessary to first get permission ('leave') from the Irish courts to serve proceedings outside of the jurisdiction. The Argentine Republic brought an application to have the order granting leave set aside in the Irish courts. However, Ms Justice Eileen Roberts set aside the order granting the shareholders leave to serve the Irish enforcement proceedings on the Argentine Republic.

Where there is no evidence of assets in the jurisdiction or a strong Irish connection, the courts may refuse to give leave for service outside the jurisdiction for enforcement purposes. The court's ruling serves as a reminder that enforcement strategies should be grounded in realistic prospects of recovery, rather than in what might be perceived to be tactical advantages.

No relevant information was found in the search results regarding which company has applied for permission to conduct enforcement proceedings against the Argentine Republic in Ireland. The ruling comes as a significant development in the ongoing legal battle between the shareholders and the Argentine Republic, with the focus now shifting towards the appeal process in the US case.

Argentinean oil firm nationalization refuted by Irish court, invalidating $17.5 billion claim made against Argentina