Developments in Global Securities Litigation

November 20, 2017

By David H. Kistenbroker, Joni S. Jacobsen and Angela M. Liu

As securities markets become increasingly interconnected, multi-national public corporations continue to be a part of a significant sea change in the globalization of securities fraud litigation—a change that began with the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 decision Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd. In Morrison's wake, foreign and American investors are largely foreclosed from accessing American courts to litigate claims against foreign issuers whose shares do not trade on a U.S. exchange.

Further, access to American courts was extinguished for "F-cubed" cases (foreign investors, suing a foreign issuer, traded on foreign exchanges). As such, shareholder plaintiffs barred from U.S. courts are looking to courts in foreign jurisdictions to provide the best forum to litigate alleged securities fraud and seek redress. To understand and prepare for this sea change, multi-national defendants facing securities litigation around the globe should be aware of jurisdictions in which they could be sued, as well as those in which they may be able to obtain global relief.

While class actions are commonplace in U.S. securities litigation, jurisprudence in several countries is developing to respond to these emerging issues. However, each country is developing a slightly different approach to the structure of a potential class or collective action, the type of claimants with ability to sue, and the scope of claims subject to redress and settlement.

Read the full article here. 

This report was originally published in November 2017 but was updated in February 2018.