The Irish ruling
Meanwhile, the ruling from The High Court Commercial of Ireland, signed by Judge Eileen Roberts and spanning 77 pages, began in April of last year at the request of two of the plaintiffs, Petersen and Eton Park.
Roberts based her decision on the fact that neither the Republic of Argentina nor YPF have assets in Ireland that could be seized, except for diplomatic and consular assets, which are protected by their nature. The judge also emphasized that there is no indication that the Argentine State will have assets in the country in the short or medium term, so allowing enforcement would only result in unnecessary use of judicial resources without any real impact for the parties.
The ruling thoroughly examined local case law on the recognition of foreign judgments and concluded that, although the immediate existence of assets is not essential, there must be a reasonable expectation of obtaining a practical benefit. In this case, the lack of assets and the duplication of proceedings in other jurisdictions led the court to dismiss any concrete usefulness of the action in Ireland.
The judge also considered that the plaintiffs already have mechanisms for investigation and enforcement in the United States and other countries, so replicating those processes in Ireland would be redundant.
