Chevron has received a major boost in Argentina as an appeals court in the country rejected attempts to implement a $9.5bn Ecuadorian judgment against the company.
A three-judge panel of the appeals court dismissed the action against Chevron, citing a lack of jurisdiction.
Discover B2B Marketing That Performs
Combine business intelligence and editorial excellence to reach engaged professionals across 36 leading media platforms.
The panel ruled that the company does not have legal presence or assets in Argentina, thereby dismissing the enforcement of the Ecuadorian judgment against Chevron Argentina and other local subsidiaries as they are not connected to the case.
The judgement of the Chamber of Appeals comes after the US Supreme Court refused to review the judgement given by a US federal court in 2014 that turned away appeals by American lawyer Steven Donziger and other plaintiffs to enforce the judgement given by an Ecuadorian court.
Courts in Canada also ruled in favour of Chevron in connection with the case, backing findings given by the US courts that the Ecuadorian judgment was obtained through racketeering and corruption.
Concurring with the reasoning of the lower court judge’s decision, the Chamber of Appeals in Buenos Aires said: “The local courts lack international jurisdiction to hear the main claim because there is no reasonable point of connection between the case and the forum.”
US Tariffs are shifting - will you react or anticipate?
Don’t let policy changes catch you off guard. Stay proactive with real-time data and expert analysis.
By GlobalDataThe court noted that without the presence of this point of connection, Argentinean courts cannot recognise or enforce the Ecuadorian judgment.
Chevron vice-president and general counsel Hewitt Pate said: “Just weeks after favourable court decisions in Brazil, Canada, and Gibraltar, the extortion scheme against Chevron continues to collapse.”
It all started when a court in Lago Agrio, Ecuador rendered an $18bn judgment, which was later reduced to $9.5bn, in February 2011 against Chevron after petitioners alleged that the company was responsible for contamination resulting from crude oil production in the Amazon region.
