Enforceability of judgments against sovereign States: critical analysis of the NML vs. Argentina injunction

Abstract

Sentences against sovereign States are difficult to enforce in courts. The Court of New York, in “NML Capital Ltd. vs. Argentina” (NML), tried to solve this situation with an injunction that blocked the payments of Argentina’s sovereign debt. The specialized literature has theoretically predicted that this injunction would cause harm to third parties and problems with other States. This article empirically corroborates these predictions with the analysis of a trial derived from NML: the “Citibank Argentina” case. The analysis of this case confirms the restraints presented by the literature about the lack of proper consideration of the requirements that the American legal system imposes for the applicability of an injunction that affects third parties and operates extraterritorially. Similarly, this paper argues that there are solid legal reasons for the authorities of third countries to declare inadmissible the extraterritorial effects of an injunction, such as the one obtained by NML, when those effects fall on assets and agents located in these authorities jurisdiction.

Contemporary socio-legal studies empirical and global perspectives

“…From the point of view of judicialization, following notes by Manzo (2018Manzo ( , 2020, it is important to indicate that contractualists consider the discussion of financial issues in any other forum than that of international financial institutions inappropriate, 122 and the IMF did not include the role of jurisdictions in debt collection in its defended model. Undoubtedly, the contractualist regime model that accepts and favors judicialization does not concern itself with the construction of new specialized international organizations that intervene in restructuring processes in light of an international bankruptcy law.…”

Dívidas soberanas e regimes jurídicos na sociedade mundial

“…Portanto, os estatutários entendem que essa confusão na análise do FMI -que trata como agentes semelhantes que essencialmente não são semelhantes e, ao mesmo tempo, reduz o campo da reestruturação à questão econômica que começa e termina no universo analítico de um idealizado, possibilitando inclusive a judicialização desses títulos por aqueles que se aproveitam da dimensão econômica como os fundos de cobertura. Do ponto de vista da judicialização, seguindo apontamentos por Manzo (2018Manzo ( , 2020, é importante indicar que os contratualistas consideram inadequada a discussão de questões financeiras em qualquer outro fórum exceto o das instituições financeiras internacionais 11 , sendo que o FMI não se preocupou em incluir no seu modelo defendido o papel das jurisdições nas cobranças das dívidas.…”

Condiciones institucionales que posibilitan la existencia de los “fondos buitre”: la dilución del principio de inmunidad soberana en el caso NML vs Argentina

“…Estos sub-poemas, explicó NML, tienen "la finalidad de localizar bienes y cuentas, saber cómo Argentina mueve sus bienes a través de Nueva York y alrededor del mundo, e identificar con precisión los lugares y tiempos cuando esos bienes serían susceptibles de ser embargados y ejecutados" 50 . Los bancos, a petición de Argentina, revotaron estos sub-poemas, por lo que NML requirió la intervención de la Corte del MANZO (2018b) De igual modo, en octubre de 2010, NML solicitó que el juez Griesa decretase el incumplimiento de la cláusula contractual pari passu por parte de la Argentina. Esta demanda marcó un punto de inflexión en las estrategias hasta entonces desplegadas por los acreedores litigantes del default 2001: esto es así, porque éstos, a través de ella, en vez de solicitar un remedio de ejecución de tipo patrimonial (vgr.…”