# Class actions

`kaal:entity:class-actions`

**Status.** derived

This node is assembled mechanically from the 10 claims that carry the concept tag `class-actions`. It is a roster of what the corpus says under this term. It is **not** an adjudicated definition: no single statement here has been ruled canonical, and no first-appearance call has been made. Read the claims and judge for yourself.

## Every claim under this term

10 claims across 3 works, 2010 to 2012.

**2010**

- [1664809-012](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1664809-012) [mechanism/argued] -- The lack of securities class actions in European jurisdictions creates a void that increases the incentives for forum shopping by plaintiffs' lawyers.
  > This void increases incentives for forum shopping by
  Richard W. Painter, Wulf A. Kaal, Extraterritorial Application of US Securities Law – Will the US Become the Default Jurisdiction for (2010). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1664809
- [1664809-017](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1664809-017) [definitional/evidenced] -- In US securities class actions plaintiffs may proceed on the fraud on the market theory rather than proving actual reliance on misleading statements, an approach that has been rejected in most other countries.
  > theory' rather than requiring plaintiffs to prove actual reliance on
  Richard W. Painter, Wulf A. Kaal, Extraterritorial Application of US Securities Law – Will the US Become the Default Jurisdiction for (2010). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1664809
- [1664809-020](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1664809-020) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Section 7216 could have the opposite effect of forcefully exporting US law onto other jurisdictions including Europe, even though it would be preferable for other nations to decide for themselves whether to have a class action litigation system.
  > 7216 could have the opposite effect of forcefully exporting US law
  Richard W. Painter, Wulf A. Kaal, Extraterritorial Application of US Securities Law – Will the US Become the Default Jurisdiction for (2010). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1664809

**2011**

- [1765901-017](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1765901-017) [mechanism/argued] -- Non-U.S. investors have a strong incentive to route foreign trades through U.S. brokers if that preserves a U.S. cause of action, because their home jurisdictions rarely offer the attractive features of the U.S. system such as broad discovery, higher damages, class actions, and no exposure to defendants' costs.
  > Indeed, the home jurisdiction of non-U.S. clients of U.S. brokers is not likely to provide many of the attractive features of the U.S. legal system, such as unparalleled discovery, a tendency towards higher damages and settle- ment amounts, the availability of securities class actions
  Kaal and Painter, The Aftermath of Morrison v. National Australia Bank and Elliott Associates v. Porsche (2011). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1765901
- [1765901-026](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/1765901-026) [condition/argued] -- Foreign-cubed rulings such as Morrison determined the size of the plaintiff class in private suits, but were irrelevant to the SEC's ability to enforce wherever a U.S. securities transaction is connected to the alleged fraud.
  > Morrison and other foreign-cubed cases determined the size of the plaintiff class in private suits, an issue relevant to the compensation of plaintiffs' lawyers, but the rulings in these cases were irrelevant to whether the SEC could pursue enforcement
  Kaal and Painter, The Aftermath of Morrison v. National Australia Bank and Elliott Associates v. Porsche (2011). SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1765901

**2012**

- [2029983-013](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2029983-013) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Because Section 929P did not restore private rights of action, the most powerful weapon in plaintiffs' arsenal, the fraud-on-the-market theory in class actions, is thwarted wherever the transaction took place outside the United States.
  > most powerful weapon in plaintiffs' arsenal, the fraud-on-the- market theory in class actions, is thus thwarted in those in- stances where transactions are outside the United States.
  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
- [2029983-018](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2029983-018) [failure/argued] *(failure mode)* -- Despite signs of movement in that direction, there is as yet no genuine European substitute for the U.S. securities class action brought under the fraud-on-the-market theory.
  > There are some signs that European law could be moving in this direction, although thus far there is no genuine Europe- an substitute for the U.S. securities class action under the fraud-on-the-market theory.
  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
- [2029983-020](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2029983-020) [mechanism/argued] -- The WCAM's requirement that a court evaluate procedural and substantive fairness and the efficiency of the settlement lets the Dutch system avoid blackmail settlements, where a defendant pays simply to escape endless proceedings and reputational loss.
  > The WCAM, thus, avoids black- mail settlements in which a defendant offers a payment to get out of a class action to avoid the prospect of endless proceedings
  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
- [2029983-026](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2029983-026) [predictive/argued] -- Given the Fortis and Converium decisions, it is conceivable that Dutch courts will expand their extraterritorial reach beyond the enforcement of settlements to cases litigated as class actions.
  > Given the developments in the Fortis and Converium decisions, it is conceivable that Dutch courts could expand their exterritorial reach beyond settlements.
  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
- [2029983-030](https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2029983-030) [condition/argued] -- Canada could engage in Forum Competition with the United States if its courts allow suits under Canadian law over all transactions in securities listed for trading in Canada, even transactions executed in the United States, assembling a class of Canadian and U.S. investors that Morrison forbids in U.S. courts.
  > Canada thus has an opportunity to engage in Forum Competition with the United States if its courts assume a different posture and allow suits under Canadian law with respect to all transactions in securities listed for trading in Canada, even if some of those transactions take place in the
  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

Every claim above resolves to a record carrying a verbatim source quote, the sha256 of the source PDF, and a preformatted citation. Nothing here asks to be taken on trust.

    curl -s https://wulfkaal.github.io/entities/class-actions.md | sha256sum

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of this entity node. Its sha256 is the content hash.