In 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 The Rise of Collective Shareholder Actions in Europe
Guest Post: Dutch Collective Actions vs. Collective Settlements
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 Guest Post: Dutch Collective Actions vs. Collective Settlements
Investors File U.K. Financial Misrepresentation Claim Against Tesco
A group of 124 institutional investors have joined a claim filed in London’s high court on October 31, 2016 against Tesco seeking damages for the company’s alleged financial misrepresentations. The claim, which seeks over £100 million in alleged damages, was filed on the investors’ behalf by the Stewarts law firm, and is supported by Bentham Europe Limited, an affiliate of Australian group IMF Bentham, a funding litigation firm whose shares are publicly traded on the ASX.
Continue Reading Investors File U.K. Financial Misrepresentation Claim Against Tesco
Guest Post: U.S. Parent Company Enters U.K.-Style Deferred Prosecution Agreement for Bribery
Deferred prosecution agreements have long been a part of the U.S. criminal enforcement environment, but they are relatively new in the United Kingdom. In addition, as the U.K. has begun to adopt the use of deferred prosecution agreements, it has adopted the agreements to its own system and legal requirements. In the following guest post, Francis Kean of Willis Towers Watson takes a look at a recent U.K. deferred prosecution agreement, relating to bribery allegations involving a U.K.-based subsidiary of a U.S. company. Francis notes a number of interesting features of the agreement and discusses its implications. Francis’s article previously appeared on the Willis Towers Watson Wire blog (here). I would like to thank Francis for his willingness to publish his article as a guest post 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 Francis’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: U.S. Parent Company Enters U.K.-Style Deferred Prosecution Agreement for Bribery
Guest Post: “New India”
No doubt like a number of you, I read Kevin’s blog on his recent travels to India with interest. As a first generation British Indian I was as unfamiliar with India as Kevin was, until the age of 13 when I first visited India with my parents, and I too was overwhelmed with the poverty, the amount of people, the traffic, the colours, the spices, the lack of order (which as a Brit totally unnerved me!), yet amazed how with such craziness India still functioned and things got done.
Continue Reading Guest Post: “New India”
Dutch Court Dismisses Collective Investor Action Against BP on Jurisdictional Grounds
As the rise of collective investor actions has gone global, one of the questions that has arisen is whether a country other than the U.S. would become a preferred forum in which investors might pursue their claims, even investors from outside the forum country. Australia is among the countries that have been suggested. Another country that has comes up in this conversation is The Netherlands, which recently was the location of a massive investor settlement. Investors angered by several high profile scandals in other countries have also filed claims in The Netherlands. All of these developments have added to the suggestion that The Netherlands may be becoming a preferred forum for investor actions from around the world.
However, a recent court decision in an investor action filed in the Netherlands against BP and arising out of the Deepwater Horizon platform disaster may suggest that Netherlands collective action procedures may not be available for investors seeking to recover purely financial losses where the alleged wrongdoing took place outside the Netherlands and there are no other factors connecting the case to Netherlands.
Continue Reading Dutch Court Dismisses Collective Investor Action Against BP on Jurisdictional Grounds
The Global Rise in Collective Investor Actions
As I noted in my recent round up of current trends in the world of D&O, one of the most important recent developments in the D&O claims arena has been the rise of collective investor actions outside of the U.S. I amplified on this theme in a Q&A that I also recently published on this site. In a recent blog post, Columbia Law Professor John Coffee underscored the recent significant rise in collective investor actions in Europe and Asia. In a September 19, 2016 post on the CLS Blue Sky Blog entitled “The Globalization of Securities Litigation” (here), Professor Coffee details how entrepreneurial U.S.-based plaintiffs’ law firms have managed to circumvent apparent local obstacles and succeed in pursuing collective investor actions even in otherwise inhospitable legal environments. As I have previously noted and as I discuss further below, the rise of collective investor actions outside the U.S. is one of the most significant recent developments in the global D&O claims arena.
Continue Reading The Global Rise in Collective Investor Actions
D&O Liability: More Litigation Globally against a Broader Range of Defendants
In conjunction with my July 2016 visit to Munich for meetings at Munich Re, I sat down for an interview with Christian Furhmann, Chief Executive Manager at Munich Reinsurance Company. The interview, which Munich Re previously published here, is reprinted below. I would like to thank my friends at Munich Re for their permission to republish the interview on this site.
Continue Reading D&O Liability: More Litigation Globally against a Broader Range of Defendants
Guest Post: Arbitration in India – Is it Now Feasible?
In keeping with my goal of presenting important topics concerning jurisdictions outside the United States, I am pleased to present this guest post by Sakate Khaitan of Khaitan Legal Associates about recent legislative changes in Indian that will impact the availability of arbitration procedures in that country. I would like to thank Sakate for his willingness to publish his article as a guest post 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 Sakate’s guest post.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Arbitration in India – Is it Now Feasible?
Guest Post: Company Directors Who Cannot Read or Understand English Warned by Australian Court
In our increasingly global economy, corporate boards are increasingly diverse, and among the diversities boards increasingly encompass are geographic and cultural diversity. However, while diverse directors may serve for many reasons, they still must be able to discharge their duties to the corporation. In the following guest post, Christopher Smith of the Sydney office of the the Clyde & Co. law firm, take a look at an interesting recent case from an Australian Court, in which the court held that directors who sign corporate documents must be able to read and understand the documents in order to discharge their duties. A copy of the August 11, 2016 Federal Court of Australia ruling to which Chris refers in his guest post can be found here. I would like to thank Chris for allowing me to publish this article as a guest post on this site. Readers interesting in submitting guest posts should contact me directly. Here is Chris’s guest post.
Continue Reading Guest Post: Company Directors Who Cannot Read or Understand English Warned by Australian Court