# kaal:claim:2029983-017

**Claim.** 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.

**Type.** mechanism  **Support.** argued

**Holds when.**

- jurisdictions that reject the fraud-on-the-market theory

**Source quote.**

> 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, page 29

**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

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `fde2ff611420eb283cbb49a6b681a2ae8efa2b4603ae71480e2d91483f0295f2` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20and%20Painter%20-%202012%20-%20Forum%20Competition%20and%20Choice%20of%20Law%20Competition%20in%20Securities%20Law%20after%20Morrison%20v.%20National%20Austral.pdf

**Topics.** economics

**Keywords.** reliance, fraud-on-the-market, class-certification, collective-procedures, europe

**Related claims.**

- extends: https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1664809-017

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.