Giustiniani, Rub\u00e9n H\u00e9ctor c. YPFSA (10 novembre 2015)
\nCour supr\u00eame d'Argentine <\/p>\n
La Cour supr\u00eame argentine a ordonn\u00e9 \u00e0 YPF (une compagnie p\u00e9troli\u00e8re contr\u00f4l\u00e9e par l'\u00c9tat) de divulguer un accord d'investissement qu'elle a sign\u00e9 avec la soci\u00e9t\u00e9 Chevron concernant l'extraction d'hydrocarbures non conventionnels. YPF a affirm\u00e9 que l'accord \u00e9tait prot\u00e9g\u00e9 contre toute divulgation publique. La Cour supr\u00eame a jug\u00e9 que, bien qu'elle soit l\u00e9galement exempt\u00e9e des exigences du droit administratif afin de faciliter ses op\u00e9rations, YPF exerce des activit\u00e9s d'int\u00e9r\u00eat public et ne peut donc pas refuser les demandes d'informations \u00e0 moins qu'elle ne d\u00e9montre de mani\u00e8re suffisamment d\u00e9taill\u00e9e les raisons pour lesquelles la divulgation des informations demand\u00e9es porterait atteinte \u00e0 un int\u00e9r\u00eat l\u00e9galement prot\u00e9g\u00e9. <\/p>\n
YPF a affirm\u00e9 que la divulgation nuirait \u00e0 ses int\u00e9r\u00eats l\u00e9galement prot\u00e9g\u00e9s en mati\u00e8re de secrets industriels, mais la Cour supr\u00eame a d\u00e9termin\u00e9 qu'YPF n'avait pas suffisamment d\u00e9montr\u00e9 les raisons pour lesquelles la divulgation des informations demand\u00e9es nuirait \u00e0 ses int\u00e9r\u00eats en mati\u00e8re de secrets industriels. <\/p>\n
Sp\u00e9cifiquement en ce qui concerne l'exception \u00e0 la divulgation publique du secret industriel\/commercial, la Cour supr\u00eame a d\u00e9clar\u00e9 que \u00ab\u00a0le secret ne peut \u00eatre justifi\u00e9 que pour prot\u00e9ger tout int\u00e9r\u00eat \u00e9galement public\u00a0; par cons\u00e9quent, la non-divulgation n'est autoris\u00e9e que pour \u00ab garantir le respect du le droit \u00e0 la r\u00e9putation d'autrui \u00bb ou \u00ab la protection de la s\u00e9curit\u00e9 nationale, de l'ordre public, de la sant\u00e9 ou de la moralit\u00e9 publiques \u00bb. \u00bb Para. 25 (citant Claude Reyes y otros c. Chili, Cour interam\u00e9ricaine des droits de l'homme (19 septembre 2006)).<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Giustiniani, Rub\u00e9n H\u00e9ctor v. Y.P.F. S.A (November 10, 2015) Supreme Court of Argentina The Argentine Supreme Court ordered YPF (a state-controlled oil company) to disclose an investment agreement it signed with the Chevron Corporation related to extraction of unconventional hydrocarbons. YPF claimed the agreement was protected from public disclosure. The Supreme Court found that despite being […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","resource-topic":[34,91],"resource-type":[528],"resource-category":[30097],"content-for-websites":[30103],"region":[667,541],"class_list":["post-12331","resource","type-resource","status-publish","hentry","resource-topic-access-to-information","resource-topic-oil-gas","resource-type-cases","resource-category-legal","content-for-websites-notable-cases","region-argentina","region-south-america"],"blocksy_meta":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource\/12331","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/resource"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12331"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12331"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"resource-topic","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource-topic?post=12331"},{"taxonomy":"resource-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource-type?post=12331"},{"taxonomy":"resource-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/resource-category?post=12331"},{"taxonomy":"content-for-websites","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/content-for-websites?post=12331"},{"taxonomy":"region","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/elaw.org\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/region?post=12331"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}