Rx for anxiety

8 January 2021 By Anna Szymanski Follow @Three_Guineas

The country used an obscure but widespread legal clause to argue for dismissing part of a lawsuit over GDP-linked warrants. Paul Singer’s fund once helped push Argentina to default with such wordplay. If Buenos Aires’ tactics pay off, other creditors will have to pay attention.

This content is for Subscribers only

Context News

In a brief on Dec. 17, Argentina asked the New York Southern District Court to throw out claims made by investment funds including Adona related to GDP-linked warrants the country issued in 2005 and 2010 as part of previous debt restructurings. The government said the claims should be dismissed in part because a so-called prescription clause in the contract said investors' claims had to be made within five years of when payments were due.

The GDP-linked warrants paid out to investors if Argentina’s GDP and growth rate hit certain targets, subject to caps. The plaintiffs allege that the country changed how GDP was calculated in 2014 in bad faith with the result that it avoided making payments based on 2013 growth that would otherwise have been due.

Aurelius Capital’s similar claims against Argentina were dismissed in January 2020.

Context News

Aurelius Capital’s similar claims against Argentina were dismissed in January 2020.

Email a friend

Please complete the form below.

Required fields *