Judge Closes $16 Billion YPF Case Against Argentina
A federal judge vacated the massive judgment after an appeals court ruling determined claims were legally precluded.
Updated on Oct. 20, 2026 in Public Companies
Live Poll
Should international investors be allowed to sue foreign governments in U.S. courts for expropriation?
Judge Loretta Preska has formally closed the high-profile YPF litigation case at the first instance level. The decision follows a Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that overturned the original $16 billion judgment against Argentina.
Why it matters
The appeals court determined that Argentine expropriation law precludes the plaintiffs' claims and that corporate bylaws do not function as contracts for damages. This legal shift effectively voids the order for Argentina to surrender YPF shares.
The vacated judgment originally totaled $16 billion, which would have reached approximately $18 billion including interest. Argentina expropriated 51% of YPF shares in 2012, triggering the long-standing legal battle.
The players
Loretta Preska
She is a United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York who oversaw the litigation.
Burford Capital
This is a global finance firm that specializes in legal and litigation funding.
Argentina
This is the sovereign state involved as the defendant in the YPF expropriation litigation.
United States Supreme Court
This is the highest federal court in the United States, which the plaintiff is now petitioning for review.
The details
Burford Capital, which acquired the rights of former shareholders Petersen and Eton Park, is now seeking a review by the United States Supreme Court. While the case is closed in the federal district court, Burford continues to pursue separate proceedings before the World Bank's International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes.
Timeline
2012: Argentina expropriated 51% of YPF shares.
March 27, 2026: The Second Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the original judgment.
June 2026: The full appeals court declined to rehear the case.
Early October 2026: Burford Capital filed a request for Supreme Court review.
October 20, 2026: Judge Loretta Preska vacated the judgment and closed the case.
Market Landscape
The litigation's future depends on the Supreme Court's annual docket limit, which restricts review to only about 80 cases out of thousands of petitions per term. This case illustrates the significant risks and extended timelines inherent in international legal claims funded by third-party capital firms.
For investors tracking the case, the vacating of the judgment removes a major liability for Argentina's assets. The potential Supreme Court review process could continue to influence valuation volatility for stakeholders involved in the litigation for months or years to come.
The takeaway
Legal outcomes in high-stakes international disputes are subject to lengthy appeals that can fundamentally change the financial landscape of a judgment. Investors should note that even significant court rulings can be reversed or vacated, highlighting the necessity of assessing litigation risk.
Further reading
For broader context on corporate litigation and financial disputes, visit our Public Companies section.
Live Poll
Should international investors be allowed to sue foreign governments in U.S. courts for expropriation?
