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

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Manzo, Alejandro
Data de Publicação: 2018
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista Direito GV
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/77115
Resumo: 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.
id FGV-2_7ec2dfdc5c394b0f5d1590ee13ab372b
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.periodicos.fgv.br:article/77115
network_acronym_str FGV-2
network_name_str Revista Direito GV
repository_id_str
spelling Enforceability of judgments against sovereign States: critical analysis of the NML vs. Argentina injunctionExecutabilidade das sentenças de condenação de Estados soberanos: análise crítica da injunction do caso NML vs. ArgentinaSovereign debtVulture fundsInjunctionSovereign immunityEnforceabilityDívida soberanaFundos oportunistasLinjunctionImunidade soberanaExtraterritorialidadeSentences 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.As sentenças contra Estados soberanos são difíceis de executar judicialmente. O Tribunal de Nova York, no processo NML Capital Ltd. v. Argentina (NML), tentou modificar esta situação por meio de uma injunction, que bloqueou os pagamentos da dívida soberana argentina. A literatura especializada previu teoricamente que esta injunction causaria danos a terceiros inocentes e problemas com outros Estados. Este artigo corrobora empiricamente essas previsões através da análise de um processo derivado do NML: o caso Citibank Argentina. Sua análise confirma a validade das reservas oportunamente apresentadas pela literatura sobre a falta de uma avaliação adequada pelo Tribunal indicado dos requisitos que o sistema jurídico dos Estados Unidos impõe para que seja válida uma injunction que afeta terceiros e opera extraterritorialmente. O artigo também argumenta que existem razões jurídicas de peso para que as autoridades de terceiros países declarem improcedentes os efeitos extraterritoriais de uma injunction, como a obtida pelo NML, quando esses efeitos recaem sobre ativos e agentes localizados na jurisdição dessas autoridades.Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas2018-09-26info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/77115Revista Direito GV; Vol. 14 No. 2 (2018): maio-ago (30); 682-706Revista Direito GV; Vol. 14 Núm. 2 (2018): maio-ago (30); 682-706Revista Direito GV; v. 14 n. 2 (2018): maio-ago (30); 682-7062317-6172reponame:Revista Direito GVinstname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)instacron:FGVenghttps://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/77115/73921Copyright (c) 2018 Revista Direito GVinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessManzo, Alejandro2019-08-06T14:07:55Zoai:ojs.periodicos.fgv.br:article/77115Revistahttps://direitosp.fgv.br/publicacoes/revista/revista-direito-gvPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||revistadireitogv@fgv.br|| catarina.barbieri@fgv.br2317-61721808-2432opendoar:2019-08-06T14:07:55Revista Direito GV - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Enforceability of judgments against sovereign States: critical analysis of the NML vs. Argentina injunction
Executabilidade das sentenças de condenação de Estados soberanos: análise crítica da injunction do caso NML vs. Argentina
title Enforceability of judgments against sovereign States: critical analysis of the NML vs. Argentina injunction
spellingShingle Enforceability of judgments against sovereign States: critical analysis of the NML vs. Argentina injunction
Manzo, Alejandro
Sovereign debt
Vulture funds
Injunction
Sovereign immunity
Enforceability
Dívida soberana
Fundos oportunistas
Linjunction
Imunidade soberana
Extraterritorialidade
title_short Enforceability of judgments against sovereign States: critical analysis of the NML vs. Argentina injunction
title_full Enforceability of judgments against sovereign States: critical analysis of the NML vs. Argentina injunction
title_fullStr Enforceability of judgments against sovereign States: critical analysis of the NML vs. Argentina injunction
title_full_unstemmed Enforceability of judgments against sovereign States: critical analysis of the NML vs. Argentina injunction
title_sort Enforceability of judgments against sovereign States: critical analysis of the NML vs. Argentina injunction
author Manzo, Alejandro
author_facet Manzo, Alejandro
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Manzo, Alejandro
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Sovereign debt
Vulture funds
Injunction
Sovereign immunity
Enforceability
Dívida soberana
Fundos oportunistas
Linjunction
Imunidade soberana
Extraterritorialidade
topic Sovereign debt
Vulture funds
Injunction
Sovereign immunity
Enforceability
Dívida soberana
Fundos oportunistas
Linjunction
Imunidade soberana
Extraterritorialidade
description 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.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-09-26
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/77115
url https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/77115
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/77115/73921
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2018 Revista Direito GV
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2018 Revista Direito GV
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Direito GV; Vol. 14 No. 2 (2018): maio-ago (30); 682-706
Revista Direito GV; Vol. 14 Núm. 2 (2018): maio-ago (30); 682-706
Revista Direito GV; v. 14 n. 2 (2018): maio-ago (30); 682-706
2317-6172
reponame:Revista Direito GV
instname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)
instacron:FGV
instname_str Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)
instacron_str FGV
institution FGV
reponame_str Revista Direito GV
collection Revista Direito GV
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Direito GV - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||revistadireitogv@fgv.br|| catarina.barbieri@fgv.br
_version_ 1798943710194434048