Argentine Supreme Court Rules YPF’s Assets Are Separate from State Property, Bolstering Legal Defense in New York Litigation

A landmark ruling by Argentina’s Supreme Court confirmed the legal and patrimonial independence of YPF S.A. from the National State. This decision strengthens Argentina’s position in ongoing litigation over YPF’s shares in New York courts, where the government faces demands to transfer majority ownership shares following the 2012 expropriation.

The Supreme Court unanimously determined that YPF’s assets are distinct from those of the National State, rejecting claims that federal jurisdiction was required in a local case involving the alleged usurpation of YPF property in Río Negro province. The court declared provincial courts competent due to the absence of a direct impact on State assets. The ruling rests on Law 26.741, which formalized the 2012 expropriation of 51% of YPF’s shares, transferring majority ownership to the National State and provinces belonging to the Federal Organization of Hydrocarbon Producing States. Despite this majority stake, the court emphasized that YPF operates under general corporate laws governing joint-stock companies (Law 19.550) and is not subject to the administrative and managerial controls applicable to state-owned enterprises.

The court substantiated three central legal pillars validating YPF’s separateness: YPF’s distinct legal personality as a corporation; the non-conflation of its assets with State assets in line with Article 143 of Argentina’s Civil and Commercial Code; and the exclusion of YPF’s patrimony from the public sector financial control system (Law 24.156). It explicitly stated that any effects on the State’s patrimony are indirect and arise from its status as a majority shareholder, not as a direct patrimonial entity.

This ruling rejects previous assertions that cases involving alleged wrongdoing against YPF should be resolved in federal courts solely due to State shareholding, affirming federal jurisdiction’s limited and exceptional application only when the Nation is directly involved. It distinguishes this case from earlier precedents where federal property, not corporate assets with State participation, was at issue.

The court’s doctrine directly supports Argentina’s argument in the U.S. litigation, where a New York judge ordered the transfer of shares as partial payment of a $16.1 billion claim stemming from YPF’s expropriation. Argentina’s legal defense asserts YPF’s autonomy and the legal restrictions on the State’s ability to manage the expropriated shares freely. The scheduled oral appeal before the Second Circuit in early March 2026 will incorporate these reinforced national legal principles as integral to Argentina’s defense strategy.