Buenos Aires, April 3, 2023
To the
COMISION NACIONAL DE VALORES
25 de Mayo 175
City of Buenos Aires
MERCADO ABIERTO ELECTRÓNICO S.A.
Maipu 1210
City of Buenos Aires
BOLSAS Y MERCADOS ARGENTINOS S.A.
Sarmiento 299
City of Buenos Aires
Re.: Relevant Information – New York District Court Proceeding
Dear Sirs:
The purpose of this letter is to comply with the
requirements set forth in article 2, Chapter I, Title XII of the Comisión Nacional de Valores Rules (T.O. 2013, as amended and complemented) and the corresponding ByMA and MAE Regulations.
As previously disclosed, on April 14, 2022, the parties to the judicial proceedings initiated by Petersen Energía Inversora, S.A.U. and Petersen
Energía, S.A.U. (collectively, “Petersen”) and Eton Park Capital Management, L.P., Eton Park Master Fund, LTD. and Eton Park Fund, L.P. (collectively, “Eton Park,” and together with Petersen, “Plaintiffs”) filed
briefs in support of cross-motions for summary judgment in the Petersen and Eton Park actions. Plaintiffs argued that the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “District Court”) should grant summary
judgment in their favor on liability and damages as to both YPF S.A. (“YPF”) and the Republic of Argentina (the “Republic,” and together with YPF, the “Defendants”), and each of the Defendants argued that it had no
liability and owed no damages to Plaintiffs, and that the District Court should, therefore, grant summary judgment in its favor and dismiss all remaining claims against it.
In a decision issued on March 31, 2023, the District Court granted YPF’s motion for summary judgment and denied Plaintiffs’ motion for summary
judgment as to YPF in its entirety. The District Court found that YPF has no contractual liability and owes no damages for breach of contract to Plaintiffs, and accordingly dismissed Plaintiffs’ claims against YPF. The District Court denied the
Republic’s motion for summary judgment, and the proceedings will continue as between Plaintiffs and the Republic. Plaintiffs may seek to appeal the District Court’s ruling as to YPF or seek to reassert claims previously dismissed against
YPF, in each case in accordance with applicable procedural rules. If so, YPF will continue to defend itself in accordance with the applicable legal procedures and available defenses.
Yours faithfully,