granaThe massive Petrobras bribery scandal has long since spread beyond just the Brazilian petroleum company itself to encompass a number of different other companies. As I have previously noted on this blog, many of the Brazilian companies caught up in these investigations have been hit with securities class action lawsuits in the U.S. Among the companies caught up in the growing anti-corruption scandal is the Brazilian-based multinational construction company, Odebrecht. Investigations based on the Odebrecht scandal having now spread to companies in other Latin American countries, including, among others, Peru. As discussed below, plaintiffs’ lawyers have now filed a U.S. securities class action lawsuit against one of the Peruvian companies caught up in the Odebrecht scandal, showing that the potential fallout from the corruption investigation that began in Brazil now represents a significant liability risk exposure for companies and their executives throughout Latin America.
Continue Reading

canadian flagAs I have previously detailed (here), 2016 was a record year for securities class action litigation in the U.S. The number of class action lawsuits filed in Canada more than doubled in 2016 compared to the year before, but the filing pace during the year was still below the pace during the period from 2010 to 2014, according to a new report from NERA Economic Consulting. The February 22, 2017 report, entitled “Trends in Canadian Securities Class Actions: 2016 Update,” which sets out a comprehensive overview of Canadian securities class action filing and case resolution trends, can be found here. NERA’s February 22, 2017 press release about the report can be found here.
Continue Reading

Mark Sutton1
Mark Sutton
Karen Boto
Karen Boto

On January 17, 2017, the U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office announced that it had entered into a significant Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with Rolls-Royce PLC following its approval by Sir Brian Leveson. The agreement followed an extensive investigation of alleged bribery involving the company’s operations in a number of different countries. The full text of the deferred prosecution agreement can be found here.  In the following guest post, Mark Sutton and Karen Boto of the Clyde & Co law firm take a look at the agreement and examine the agreement’s D&O insurance implications. I would like to thank Mark and Karen for their willingness to publish their article on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this site’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Mark and Karen’s guest post.
Continue Reading

umesh-pratapa-270x270
Umesh Pratapa

In the Companies Act 2013, India’s parliament incorporated a provision allowing for the “compounding” of offenses. “Compounding” is a way for an accused violator to avoid litigation. It is a settlement process by which the accused pays a fee instead of undergoing prosecution. In the following guest post, Umesh Pratapa takes a look at the Companies Act’s compounding provisions, and examines the question of the availability of D&O for amounts paid in a compounding process. I would like to thank Umesh for his willingness to allow me to publish his article here. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Umesh’s guest post.
Continue Reading

Richa Shukla
Nilam Sharma
Joel Pridmore
Joel Pridmore

As readers of this blog know well, liability claims against corporate directors and officers is an increasingly global phenomenon. A number of different factors are contributing to the globalization of D&O liability, including legislative changes, changes in regulatory enforcement activity, and the rise of litigation financing. In the following guest post, Richa Shukla of Khaitan Legal Associates, Nilam Sharma of Nilam Sharma Ltd., and Joel Pridmore from Munich Re, Australia, examine the changing environment for D&O liability in India. I would like to thank Richa, Nilam, and Joel for allowing me to publish their article on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Richa, Nilam, and Joel’s guest post.
Continue Reading

australiaClass actions have been a big deal in the U.S. for a long time now, but what is really interesting is that class actions (and other forms of collective action) are now becoming a big deal outside of the U.S. One place in particular where class actions have become a very big deal indeed is in Australia. As detailed in a recent study, class actions have in recent years become a well-established part of Australia’s litigation landscape. Recent judicial developments seem likely to make Australia an even more attractive jurisdiction for class action litigation.
Continue Reading

RBSIn the latest signal of the increasing significance of collective investor actions outside of the U.S., on December 5, 2016, Royal Bank of Scotland agreed to pay £800 million ($1 billion) in a settlement with three of the five investor claimant groups that had sued the bank in the U.K. for alleged misrepresentations in connection with its £12 billion pound fundraising effort just months before the British government bailed out the bank. The case will go forward as to the remaining claimant groups, with whom the bank will now attempt to reach a settlement. If the bank is unable to settle with the remaining claimant groups, the case could proceed to trial in March 2017. The partial settlement is by far the largest collective investor action recovery in the U.K. RBS’s December 5, 2016 SEC filing to which its press release announcing the partial settlement is attached can be found here. A December 5, 2016 Reuters article describing the settlement can be found here.
Continue Reading

france1On October 1, 2014, new statutory provisions went into effect in France allowing consumers the means to seek and obtain relief on a class–wide basis. Though these provisions have been in force for over two years now, the use of the class action mechanism has not really caught on. Because the class action procedures have not yet been widely taken up, there have already been at least two revisions of the original provisions adopted that expanded the scope of the original class action model, and further revisions seem likely. In a November 17, 2016 memo entitled “The Implications of the Expanded Scope of the French Class Action System on Potential Liability and Insurance Coverage for Companies Domiciled in and Doing Business in France” (here), Kevin Dreher and Laura Ferry of the Reed Smith law firm take a look at the modified French class action mechanism and examine the mechanism’s implications for companies doing business in France.
Continue Reading

Europe-Countries-MapIn numerous recent posts, I have noted the global rise of investor collective actions (refer for example here). These lawsuits, which take a variety of different forms according to the applicable forum laws, have been filed in a number of different countries. Among other regions that have seen a recent rise in this type of litigation is Europe. In an interesting November 16, 2016 publication entitled “Rise of European Shareholder Class Action? (here), AIG Europe takes a look at the recent rise of collective investor actions, noting among other things that these types of actions are “on the rise in Europe” as a result of “a number of converging factors.”
Continue Reading

jonthan richman
Jonathan Richman

As collective investor actions have become an increasingly global phenomenon, a recurring question has been whether another jurisdiction will emerge as the preferred forum for aggrieved investors to pursue their claims. Among the countries often mentioned in this context it the Netherlands, owing to the country’s collective settlement procedures. In a recent post, I noted a September 2016 decision from the Amsterdam District Court and suggested that the court’s jurisdictional ruling could diminish the usefulness and appeal of the Dutch collective settlement procedures. In the following guest post, Jonathan Richman of the Proskauer Rose law firm clarifies that the Dutch court’s ruling pertained to the country’s collective action procedures, not the separate collective settlement procedures, and that, contrary to my blog post’s suggestion, the court’s jurisdictional ruling arguably does not diminish the collective settlement procedures’ utility. I would like to thank Jonathan for his willingness to publish his article on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Jonathan’s guest post.
Continue Reading