One of the most significant recent developments in the litigation environment has been the rise of third-party litigation funding. However, as I noted in a recent post, the impact of litigation funding has varied from jurisdiction to jurisdiction based on differences in the local law. In the following guest post, Burkhard Fassbach, a German attorney and D&O Advisor to the Frankfurt-based MRH TROWE Brokerage Group, and Carsten Wettich, a founding partner of Berner Fleck Wettich, a Dusseldorf-based corporate law firm, take a look at litigation funding environment in German and its impact on the D&O claims arena there. I would like to thank Burkhard and Carsten for their willingness to allow me to publish their article as a guest post. 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 Burkhard and Carsten’s guest post. Continue Reading Guest Post: The 101 of Litigation Funding in the German D&O-Claims Arena
When Congress created the SEC Whistleblower program in the Dodd-Frank Act, one of the requirements was that the SEC’s Office of the Whistlblower would provide an annual report to Congress. On November 15, 2016, the SEC released its annual whistleblower report for the 2016 fiscal year (which ended September 30, 2016). The report shows that the agency continues to make substantial awards to whistleblowers, with six of the ten largest awards being made in FY 2016. The report also shows that the volume of whistleblower tips to the agency continues to increase as well. A copy of the agency’s FY 2016 report can be found 
The typical employment practices liability insurance policy will contain an exclusion precluding coverage for loss arising from claims brought under wage and hour laws. The question that arises from time to time is whether a particular claim was in brought under the laws for which coverage is precluded. A recent federal court case in California examined whether the wage and hour exclusion in an employer’s EPL policy precluded coverage for the claimants’ claims alleging the employer had failed to reimburse reasonable business expenses, in violation of a California statutory provision. In a November 14, 2016 decision, Southern District of California Judge Ted Moskowitz, applying California law, held that the policy’s wage and hour exclusion did not preclude coverage for the claimants’ unreimbursed business expenses claims, even though the exclusion did bar coverage for the claimants’ other claims. A copy of Judge Moskowitz’s exclusion can be found 
One of the recurrent governance proposals to remedy corporate excesses has been the idea of clawing back the compensation paid to company officials who presided over corporate scandals. Both the Sarbanes Oxley Act and the Dodd-Frank Act included provisions mandating compensation clawbacks for corporate executives at companies that restate their financial statements. As Columbia Law School Professor John Coffee details in his November 21, 2016 CLS Blue Sky Blog article entitled “Clawbacks in the Age of Trump” (
On October 1, 2014, 
In numerous recent posts, I have noted the global rise of investor collective actions (refer for example 
On November 14, 2016, in an interesting lawsuit that brings together a number of recent securities litigation trends, a noteholder of Samarco Mineração, S.A. filed a purported securities class action lawsuit in the Southern District of New York against the company and its CEO on behalf of investors who purchased the company’s debt securities. Samarco, a joint venture of mining giants Vale, S.A., and BHP Billiton, owned and operated the Fundão tailings dam that collapsed on November 5, 2015, in what has been called Brazil’s worst-ever environmental disaster. There are a number of interesting features to this new lawsuit, beyond just its relationship to the dam collapse disaster. A copy of the plaintiff’s November 14, 2016 complaint can be found 
As I have