Comments on: Is sovereign immunity hurting America?

By: MrRFox

MrRFox — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 08:28:52 +0000

Um … there’s actually a little more going on with this than Felix and Frankie seem to appreciate. It’s a front-burner topic just now because the appellate briefs were filed, and because of YPF/Argentina and the Elliott case.

The lessons –

- Secured loans beat the hell out of unsecured every time. Not news.
- Don’t plan on using pre-judgment attachment against sovereign assets to turn an unsecured loan into a secured one. This is big.
- No kind of contract with a private sector party will help you when you’re facing a sovereign successor-in-interest. This is maybe new, and maybe big or not.
- The US government seems to love foreign dead-beat sovereigns more than it loves anyone who lends good money in good faith to them or their nationals. This is sadly unsurprising.

By: Sal20111

Sal20111 — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:36:11 +0000

The lesson is straightforward. Better to do business in the private sector. Keep the State and commerce separate.

By: AlisonFrankel

AlisonFrankel — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:02:20 +0000

Thanks for the shout-out, Felix. The Economist is way overstating the impact of the Anglo Irish ruling. There’s a commercial activities exception to the FSIA. It didn’t apply here because Fir Tree is Caymans-based. If the Economist really wants to fret over U.S. courts losing jurisdiction over U.S. transactions, it should look at Morrison v. National Australia Bank instead.
–Alison Frankel

By: FifthDecade

FifthDecade — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 18:29:24 +0000

Nice article. I find the Economist can be a little too sensationalist at times, and tells only the part of the story that suits the right wing bias the proprietor of said publication wishes to push. I used to subscribe to them but now just get the occassional issue, solely with this problem.

Now I’ve found your blog Felix, I get a very good overview with lots of meat and can make my own mind up. Keep doing your Sterling work!