ARGENTINA · ENERGY · COURTS
Key Facts
- —The country Argentina is a major South American oil and gas producer, and its largest energy company, YPF, was brought back under state control in 2012.
- —Why it matters The US$16.1 billion judgment is described in Argentina as the largest ever against a country in US courts, and it has now been voided.
- —Why now A federal judge in New York closed the case on Monday 19 October 2026, and the plaintiffs now wait for the US Supreme Court.
- —What happened Judge Loretta Preska set aside her own 2023 judgment against Argentina, following the appeals court ruling of 27 March 2026.
- —The numbers The judgment was US$16.1 billion and passed US$18 billion with interest, the appeals ruling came on 27 March 2026 and the Supreme Court petition on 30 September.
- —What it means for you US holders of Burford Capital, Argentine bonds and YPF shares watch one last court step, not a payment.
- —Still open Whether the US Supreme Court agrees to hear the plaintiffs’ petition, and when.
- —Power Index Argentina ranks 4th of 14 in The Rio Times Latin America Power Index, with 61.2 points (October 2026 edition).
The YPF case in New York ended at trial level on Monday 19 October 2026, when federal judge Loretta Preska set aside her 2023 judgment ordering Argentina to pay US$16.1 billion over the nationalisation of its biggest oil company. The order closes the case in her court and leaves one door open, a petition to the US Supreme Court.
For US readers the ruling matters because the plaintiffs are backed by Burford Capital, a litigation funder listed on the New York Stock Exchange, and because Infobae calls the judgment the largest ever against a state in US courts. Argentina’s Treasury Attorney’s office told Infobae the order was a procedural step it had expected, since the appeals court had already overturned the verdict in March.
The company at the centre is YPF, Argentina’s state-controlled oil group, and our YPF company profile sets out its business. Earlier rulings in the case are covered in Milei Wins as Appeals Court Kills $16B YPF Award.
What Preska Ordered on 19 October
Preska issued the order on Monday 19 October, according to El Litoral, and it formally vacates the judgment she signed in September 2023 for the plaintiffs. Argentine outlets describe it as the final judgment that carries out the appeals court decision and ends the case in her courtroom.
The plaintiffs had tried to hold the case open until the Supreme Court decides whether to take it, and Clarín says the judge went ahead anyway. Lawyer Sebastián Soler wrote on X that Preska “orders, adjudges and decrees” the earlier judgment void, as quoted by Diario Río Negro.
Journalist Sebastián Maril, who follows the case, noted that the order itself says the Supreme Court remains and that the judge would hear the plaintiffs’ claims again if that court reversed the appeals ruling. We could not open the order itself, so that detail rests on Maril’s account as carried by Diario Río Negro and Clarín.
How the US$16.1 Billion YPF Case Unfolded
Argentina took control of 51% of YPF in 2012 under then-president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, according to El Litoral. The plaintiffs argue that YPF’s bylaws required the state to make a public purchase offer to minority shareholders.
The plaintiffs are Petersen Energía and Petersen Energía Inversora, linked to the Eskenazi family, and the Eton Park fund. Burford Capital finances the case and bought rights tied to the former shareholders’ claims, Infobae and El Litoral explain.
In September 2023 Preska ruled for the plaintiffs and ordered Argentina to pay more than US$16.1 billion, a sum that passed US$18 billion with interest. Infobae calls it the largest court judgment against a state in the history of US courts.
On 27 March 2026 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York reversed that judgment, with judges Denny Chin and Beth Robinson in the majority and José Cabranes dissenting. The majority held that Preska had misread Argentine law, which in its view bars third-party claims that interfere with an expropriation.
The panel also found that a company’s bylaws are not a two-way contract among shareholders that allows damages claims of this kind. On 2 June the full Second Circuit declined to rehear the case, leaving the Supreme Court as the only route in the US, Infobae and MDZ note.
Live Company IntelligenceYPF Sociedad Anonima — the full investor dossier
Wall Street view
Valuation & profitability
Price & risk
$24.0052-wk high
$57.87
Revenue trend · 6y
Ownership
Dividend
What Burford Asked the Supreme Court
Justice Sonia Sotomayor extended the plaintiffs’ deadline from 31 August to 30 September on 17 August, and the petition was filed on 30 September as case No. 26-442, according to the Supreme Court docket. The petition calls the appeals ruling “egregiously wrong, wholly unprecedented, and extremely consequential.”
The plaintiffs argue that the appeals court effectively gave Argentina the immunity from suit that Congress waived in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, by sending their claims to Argentine courts. The petition is a request, called certiorari, and the docket shows Argentina’s response due on 2 November 2026.
Treasury Attorney’s office sources told TN and Infobae that the court receives 7,000 to 8,000 such petitions each session and usually hears about 80 cases. They added that no deadline exists for a decision, so no date can be given, and that the state will keep defending its interests.
The Second Front at the World Bank Tribunal
Infobae adds that Burford has opened a separate action at ICSID, the World Bank’s investment arbitration centre, on behalf of the Petersen companies. We looked at that front in Why Burford’s New YPF Claim Keeps Argentina’s Biggest Legal Risk Alive.
The closure in New York does not end that arbitration, and Argentine outlets give no timetable for it. A Supreme Court refusal would leave the appeals ruling in force in US courts, while the ICSID claim would continue on its own track.
What It Means for You
Holders of Burford Capital shares, which trade in New York and London according to the firm’s website, face a YPF case whose US court route now depends on a single discretionary decision. Investors in Argentine bonds and YPF securities should treat the order as removal of a legal overhang that is not yet fully lifted.
Anyone planning to live, invest or travel in Argentina is affected only indirectly, because the judgment has been reversed on appeal, so Argentina is not facing a payment now. Our guides Argentina Natural Resources Explained 2026 and Who Runs Argentina’s Economy, the Key Players in 2026 explain the role of oil, gas and the leading players in the economy.
For the politics behind the case, see Who Dominates Argentina, Elites and Regions Explained, and for day-to-day life there is our Buenos Aires expat city guide. The background on the company is in our YPF explainer.
What Is Not Known
The text of Preska’s order could not be opened for this article, because the New York district court file was not reachable from our desk, although the Supreme Court docket was. The account of the YPF case here rests on five Argentine outlets that agree on the date, the voiding of the 2023 judgment and the closing of the case.
It is not known when the Supreme Court will act on the petition, whether it will take the case, or how it would rule if it did. The court sets no deadline for such decisions, according to the Treasury Attorney’s office sources.
We did not find a statement from Burford or from the plaintiffs on the order of 19 October, and we did not check how markets reacted. Whether the ICSID action can proceed on the same timetable also remains unclear.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did a judge cancel the US$16.1 billion YPF judgment?
Yes, federal judge Loretta Preska set aside her 2023 judgment on Monday 19 October 2026 and closed the case in her court. She acted because the Second Circuit Court of Appeals had reversed it on 27 March 2026.
Is the YPF case over?
Not entirely, because the plaintiffs filed a petition at the US Supreme Court on 30 September. The justices decide whether to hear it, and no date is set.
Does Argentina have to pay anything now?
No, the judgment is void and the appeals ruling stands unless the Supreme Court reverses it. The Treasury Attorney’s office calls the order a procedural step.
What is Burford Capital’s role in the YPF case?
Burford is a litigation funder that finances the case and holds rights tied to the Petersen and Eton Park claims. It is listed in New York and London according to its website.
How likely is it that the Supreme Court takes the case?
Argentine sources say the court hears about 80 of 7,000 to 8,000 petitions each session. Nobody can say how it will treat this one.
What does the YPF ruling mean for US readers?
It lowers a legal risk for Argentina and raises one for Burford’s investors, with the Supreme Court as the final US step. Sovereign bond holders and YPF investors are watching the same decision.
Sources: Infobae, 20 October 2026; El Litoral, 20 October 2026; Diario Río Negro, 20 October 2026; MDZ Online, 20 October 2026; Infobae, 1 October 2026; TN, 18 August 2026; Clarín, 20 October 2026, as republished by Qpasó; US Supreme Court docket No. 26-442; Petition for certiorari, 30 September 2026; MercoPress, 20 October 2026; Burford Capital.
Editorial responsibility: Matthias Camenzind, Editor-in-Chief · Editorial standards · Report an error
Read More from The Rio Times