首页> 外文OA文献 >The Australian Alternative: A View from Abroad of Recent Developments in Securities Class Actions
【2h】

The Australian Alternative: A View from Abroad of Recent Developments in Securities Class Actions

机译:澳大利亚选择:国外对证券集体诉讼近期发展的看法

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

The United States, which has long been the primary destination for global securities litigation, has begun restricting access to its courts, along with their discovery rules, threat of jury trial, and attorney compensation structures that are very favorable to plaintiffs. After the Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, so-called “f-cubed” cases—involving foreign plaintiffs and foreign issuers of stock that are traded on foreign exchanges—are increasingly unwelcome in the United States. Furthermore, lower courts have responded enthusiastically to Morrison’s holding, further limiting foreign actors’ access to American courts. Effective regulation of securities in jurisdictions outside of the United States will, therefore, have to occur in the courts of those jurisdictions.For various reasons, Australia has recently experienced substantial growth the number and scope of class actions. As the Australian class action regime takes center stage, it becomes more important to identify its problems and discover innovative solutions that will increase access to justice in an efficient and administrable way. The simple fact is that the chief downside to bringing class actions in Australia is the difficulty of funding the litigation given the loser-pays system and the prohibition on contingency fees. Third party funding is doubtlessly an innovative response, but creates its own set of concerns. Plaintiffs still do not have access to courts for several important types of claims where the profit is too slim or damages too small and diffuse. Furthermore, this system has imposed new sets of costs: Defendants are significantly less likely to settle with closed classes when second, third, and fourth classes might be right on their heels; courts must expend resources trying to manage these repetitive lawsuits; and third party funders command hefty portions of damage awards and settlements away from those who were injured and their representatives. Wrestling with these issues will become increasingly important as the fallout from Morrison continues to push foreign litigants into foreign courts, and as the Australian courts and plaintiffs’ bar continue to create new, innovative ways to improve the Australian class action system.
机译:长期以来一直是全球证券诉讼的主要目的地的美国,已经开始限制其诉诸法院的机会,以及其发现规则,陪审团的威胁和对原告非常有利的律师补偿结构。在最高法院在Morrison诉澳大利亚国民银行(National Australia Bank)案中作出裁决后,在美国越来越不受欢迎的是所谓的“ F-cubed”案,涉及外国原告和外国在股票交易所买卖的股票发行人。此外,下级法院对莫里森的这一举动做出了积极回应,进一步限制了外国演员进入美国法院的渠道。因此,必须在这些司法管辖区的法院中对美国境外司法管辖区的证券进行有效监管。出于各种原因,澳大利亚最近集体诉讼的数量和范围有了大幅增长。随着澳大利亚集体诉讼制度的中心地位,确定其问题并发现创新的解决方案以有效和可管理的方式增加诉诸司法的机会变得越来越重要。一个简单的事实是,考虑到败诉者付费制度和禁止应急费用,在澳大利亚提起集体诉讼的主要弊端是难以为诉讼提供资金。无疑,第三方资助是一种创新的对策,但会引起一系列关注。在利润太少或损害赔偿金太小且分散的情况下,原告仍无法诉诸几种重要类型的索赔。此外,该系统还增加了新的成本:当第二,第三和第四等阶级紧随其后时,被告人不太可能选择封闭阶级;法院必须花费资源来处理这些重复性诉讼;第三方出资者要求赔偿金和赔偿金的高额部分远离受伤者及其代表。随着莫里森的影响继续将外国诉讼人推向外国法院,以及随着澳大利亚法院和原告律师事务所的不断创新,以改善澳大利亚集体诉讼制度,与这些问题进行斗争将变得越来越重要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号