- Save
- Cite
-
Email this content
Share Link
Copy this link, or click below to email it to a friendEmail this contentor copy the link directly:The link was not copied. Your current browser may not support copying via this button.Link copied successfully
- Share This
Sign in
- Preliminary Material
- Preface
- Table of Contents
- Editors
- Contributors
- Table of Cases
- Table of Legislation
- Main Text
- Part I Collective Redress Mechanisms in a Comparative Perspective
- 1 Class Actions and Collective Actions
- 2 Collective Redress Procedures:
- 3 Collective Action Reform in England and Wales
- 4 Class Actions and Class Settlements Going Global:
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II The Dutch System of Collective Redress
- III Cross-border Mass Disputes—The WCAM Going Global
- IV The Complementary Role of the WCAM
- V Unanticipated Problems with Going Global
- VI Recognition and Enforcement of United States Judgments
- VII Conclusion
- 5 Collective Redress:
- Part II Private International Law and Collective Redress
- 6 A Coherent Approach to European Collective Redress
- 7 The Trouble With Cross-Border Collective Redress:
- 8 Cross-Border Collective Redress and Jurisdiction Under Brussels I:
- 9 Parallel Litigation and Cross-Border Collective Actions Under the Brussels I Framework:
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II Lis Pendens and Related Actions under the Brussels I Regulation
- III Collective Actions and Parallel Proceedings
- IV Proposed Amendments to the Brussels I Regulation
- V Suggestions for Reform
- VI Conclusion
- 10 The Impact of the Brussels I Enforcement and Recognition Rules on Collective Actions
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II The Scheme of Brussels I
- III The Notion of Ordre Public under Brussels I, Article 34(1)
- IV Approach in Individual Member States: Public Policy and Collective Redress
- V Article 34(2): Procedural Issues
- VI Article 34(3): Irreconcilability
- VII Conclusion
- 11 Conflicts of Laws in Multinational Collective Actions—A Judicial Nightmare?
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II Choice of Law and European Mass Litigation
- III Possible Solutions
- IV Conclusion
- 12 Extraterritoriality of evidence gathering in US class action proceedings
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II The Scope of Extraterritoriality of United States Discovery
- III The Conflict between Extraterritorial United States Discovery Rules and Foreign Laws
- IV Conclusion
- 13 The ILA Rio Resolution on Transnational Group Actions
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II The Resolution of the 2008 ILA Rio de Janeiro Conference
- III Factors Determining the Type of Procedure
- IV Analysis of the Resolution
- V Conclusion
- 14 In Defence of the Requirement for Foreign Class Members to Opt in to an English Class Action
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II The Draft Statutory Framework
- III Requiring Non-domiciled Class Members to Opt In: Key Canadian Precedent
- IV Further Support Derived from Some Key United States Decisions
- V Conclusion
- Part III Reception of Foreign Collective Redress and Punitive Damages Decision in National Jurisdictions
- 15 Foreign Punitive Damages Decisions and Class Actions in Italy
- 16 The Perils of Certifying International Class Actions in Canada
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II Traditional Judgment Recognition Rules Are Inadequate for Enforcing Multi-jurisdictional Class Action Judgments
- III Why the ‘Real and Substantial Connection’ Test Should Not Be Applied to Absent Foreign Claimants
- IV The ‘Real and Substantial Connection’ Test—Applied Rigorously
- V Canadian Courts Should Not Certify Multi-jurisdictional Opt-out Classes
- VI Conclusion
- 17 Collective Redress in Spain:
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II Collective Redress in Spain
- General
- The CPA 2000 Regulation
- 17.07
- (a) The Non-existence of Special Court Proceedings for the Protection of Collective Interests
- (b) Interpretation of the Principle of Legal Standing
- (c) The Rules Relating to the Opt-out Process
- (d) The Availability of Publicity in Claims for the Protection of Collective and Diffuse Rights and Interests of Consumers and Users
- (e) Identifying the Individuals Concerned
- (f) Money Judgments
- (g) Res Judicata
- (h) Settlements
- III Recognition and Enforcement in Spain
- IV Conclusion
- Part IV Extraterritoriality and US Law
- 18 Morrison V National Australia Bank :
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II The Facts of Morrison
- Introduction
- The Court’s Analysis of the Facts
- The Case as Presented by the Parties’ Briefs
- The Petitioners’ Strategy in the Briefing
- The Petitioners’ Strategy in Aligning Themselves with the Regulators
- The Respondents’ Briefing before the Court
- The Briefing of the United States as Amicus Curiae before the Court
- The Amicus Briefs before the Court
- The Oral Argument before the Court
- III The Court’s Opinion and the Presumption Against Extraterritoriality
- The Strong Version of the Presumption is Applied
- The ‘Conduct’ Test
- ‘Comity’ Analysis
- The Remedies Section of the Plurality Opinion
- The ‘Effects’ Test is Effectively Abolished
- Refutation of the Solicitor General’s Arguments
- The Attack on Class Actions
- The Concurrences
- The Risk of Addressing Issues not before the Court
- The Next Steps
- The SEC Report
- IV Conclusion
- 19 Morrison V National Australia Bank :
- 20 Morrison V National Australia Bank :
- 21 ‘Bridging the Gap’:
- 22 Transnational Issuer Liability After the Financial Crisis:
- Preliminary Material
- I Introduction
- II International Securities Class Actions
- III Classification of Primary Capital Markets Duties
- IV Current State of the Conflict of Laws Discussion
- V Suggested Solution: Synchronism between Duties and Liability
- VI Implications
- VII Conclusion
- 18 Morrison V National Australia Bank :
- Part I Collective Redress Mechanisms in a Comparative Perspective
- Further Material
- [18.206.92.240]
- 18.206.92.240
