The requirement that each plaintiff show individual reliance, followed in most jurisdictions outside the United States, is not merely a substantive difference: it undermines collective litigation because class procedures work only when plaintiffs share common questions of law and fact.
Source quote, verbatim
This difference in substantive law has an impact on procedural issues because class action lit- igation and collective procedures are easier if plaintiffs in the class share common questions of law and fact.
From
Wulf A. Kaal, Richard W. Painter, Forum Competition and Choice of Law Competition in Securities Law after Morrison v. National Austral (2012), II.A. The Proliferation of European Collective Procedures, p. 29 https://ssrn.com/abstract=2029983 · source PDF
Cite as
Wulf A. Kaal, Richard W. Painter, Forum Competition and Choice of Law Competition in Securities Law after Morrison v. National Austral (2012). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2029983
Holds when
jurisdictions that reject the fraud-on-the-market theory
Classification
mechanismsupport: arguedeconomics
Related claims
extendskaal:claim:1664809-017 In US securities class actions plaintiffs may proceed on the fraud on the market theory rather than proving ac...
Verify
The quote above is an exact substring of the source PDF, whose sha256 is fde2ff611420eb283cbb49a6b681a2ae8efa2b4603ae71480e2d91483f0295f2. Extraction method: pdf-text-layer. Attestation record: colloquium/attestations/9f9b6f27667fc749...json Verify the binding yourself: curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2029983-017.md | sha256sum