The National Chamber of Appeals in Commercialhe of this capital suspended the process of the preventive contest of Correo Argentino SA until the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation defines a series of proposals made by the Macri Group, such as the challenges to a judge and a prosecutor and the competence of the Buenos Aires Justice in the case.
The resolution came in a split verdict broadcast by the chambermaids Matilde Ballerini, María Elsa Uzal and María Guadalupe Vázquez, known through judicial sources.
The legal conflict that led to this measure occurred because the High Court of Justice (TSJC) of the City of Buenos Aires intervened before the proposals made by the company Socma -which included the challenges to the prosecutor Gabriela Boquín and the judge of first instance Marta Cirulli- in the lawsuit for the debt of the firm of the Macri family for the concession of the Post Office.
The National Chamber had considered the objections inadmissible but the TSJC intervened and ordered the opposite, with which unleashed a problem of jurisdiction that is under consideration by the Court.
Judge Ballerini held: “Even when I support the decision regarding the lack of effectiveness of the resolutions issued by the TSJC regarding our resolutions, I cannot ignore that it could be modified as a result of the decision to be issued by the Supreme Court, for which In order to avoid the risk of subsequent annulments, I consider it prudent to grant the request”. This was pronounced before the request of the business group founded by Franco Macri to suspend the bankruptcy process until the Court is issued.
For its part, Judge Vazquez -which had also been challenged- said in the resolution that “the request for suspension of all the proceedings has no legal basis and is based on the filing of local appeals, which were dismissed in preliminary form by this Chamber as long as no They are provided for in the legal system that governs the bankruptcy proceedings that are processed before the National Justice in Commercial Matters.
“In conclusion, I understand that the suspension of the entire unsigned bankruptcy process and its incidents has no legal basis; it contradicts the rules and principles of the Bankruptcy and Bankruptcy Law, in particular the speed of a process that dates back more than of twenty years, and is not based on the certain risk of future and eventual annulments. For this reason, and in order not to unprotect the interests affected by the framework of this collective process, it is appropriate to reject the request of Correo Argentino SA”, he emphasized.
But your colleague Uzal He ended up intervening and said, after the rigorous arguments, such as those put forward by his colleagues, that he is “convinced that the objective guarantees of due process always prevail and must prevail and that due to the nature of the matter raised, it is necessary to avoid the sole possibility of issuing yielding judicial pronouncements that are likely to be reached by potential annulments”.
“This would happen if a situation were adopted that ignores the incidence of what the highest court could resolve, on what this Chamber must decide,” he warned.
Consequently, it ordered: “Using the powers conferred on the judge by art.176 CPCCN (Nation’s Civil and Commercial Procedure Code), I must accompany the decision of suspend the bankruptcy process that is requested, to avoid consequences that could compromise the correct administration of justice and the right of defense in court”.
That article establishes that “the incidents will not suspend the continuation of the main process, unless this Code provides otherwise or the judge decides so when he considers it essential due to the nature of the question raised. The resolution will be unappealable.”
Sources linked to the cause said that the challenges to the prosecutor and the judge were before the bankruptcy was requested and decreed and they warned that “in the event that his challenge is finally admitted, the bankruptcy decree is null and void.”
A debt of almost 300 million
The conflict had its origin in a debt of the Macri Group, which had the concession of Correo Argentino between 1997 and 2003, when the Government of Néstor Kirchner terminated that contract.
From there, a process began for the claim of a debt of almost 300 million pesos/dollars, due to the exchange parity. There were proposals and counterproposals, but a solution was never reached and the case escalated in court.
Socma challenged Boquín, accusing her of “partiality, enmity, prejudgment and animosity”, and did the same with Judge Cirulli, who did not agree to determine the State as a “hostile creditor” when it did not accept the debtor’s offer.
The bankruptcy of Correo Argentino was issued last July, but the presentations of the Macri Group finally led to this instance of virtual suspension of the process, until the Court is issued.
