Staff View
Extraterritoriality of Securities Law Redux: Litigation Five Years After Morrison v. National Australia Bank

Descriptive

TypeOfResource
Text
TitleInfo
Title
Extraterritoriality of Securities Law Redux: Litigation Five Years After Morrison v. National Australia Bank
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Guseva
NamePart (type = given)
Yuliya
Affiliation
Dean's Office (School of Law-Newark), Rutgers University
Role
RoleTerm (authority = marcrt); (type = text)
author
Name (authority = RutgersOrg-Department); (type = corporate)
NamePart
Dean's Office (School of Law-Newark)
Name (authority = RutgersOrg-School); (type = corporate)
NamePart
School of Law-Newark
Genre (authority = RULIB-FS)
Article, Refereed
Genre (authority = NISO JAV)
Version of Record (VoR)
Genre (authority = ExL-Esploro)
Journal Article
Note (type = peerReview)
Peer reviewed
OriginInfo
DateIssued (encoding = w3cdtf); (keyDate = yes)
2017
Abstract (type = Abstract)
In the famous Morrison v. National Australia Bank case, Justice Scalia mounted an attack on plaintiffs with tenuous connection to U.S. capital markets and attempted to rein in class actions against international corporations. Despite Morrison’s broad implications, there is no consensus on its ultimate impact. This Article contributes to this discussion by examining the risk of litigation faced by foreign firms before and after Morrison. The research reviews securities class actions between 2005 and 2015. The timeframe of the reported filings is from January 2005 through December 2015, i.e., about five years before and five years after Morrison. The Article reports data obtained from the filings and related court decisions, updated as of November 30, Extraterritoriality of Securities Law Redux: Litigation Five Years After Morrison v. National Australia Bank 2016. The Article concludes that, first, the actual risk of litigation has become more ascertainable and slightly lower than before Morrison. Second, Morrison affected the composition of the plaintiffs’ class. Based on mean and median settlement values, Morrison may be associated with lower litigation costs. Third, the results suggest that when firms select a cross-listing mode (i.e., an exchange listing or OTC trading), they effectively choose their level of commitment to U.S. markets through not only the ex-ante known reporting costs, but also projected litigation costs. Fourth, the research reviews the timing of settlements and dismissals vis-à-vis the types of cross-listing programs. Although more research is needed in this area, Morrison may have enabled foreign firms to rule out inflated assessments of the risk of litigation and to more precisely determine the expected value of their cross-listing programs net of litigation.
Language
LanguageTerm (authority = ISO 639-3:2007); (type = text)
English
PhysicalDescription
InternetMediaType
application/pdf
Extent
81 pages
Subject (authority = local)
Topic
Securities litigation
Subject (authority = local)
Topic
Morrison v. National Australia Bank
Subject (authority = local)
Topic
Foreign issuers
Subject (authority = local)
Topic
Class actions
Subject (authority = local)
Topic
Cross-listings
Subject (authority = local)
Topic
Extraterritoriality
Subject (authority = local)
Topic
10b-5
Extension
DescriptiveEvent
Type
Citation
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf)
2017
AssociatedObject
Name
Columbia Business Law Review
Type
Journal
Relationship
Has part
Detail
199-279
Identifier (type = volume and issue)
1
Reference (type = url)
https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/CBLR/article/view/1713
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Guseva, Yuliya
Identifier (type = local)
rucore30258300001
Location
PhysicalLocation (authority = marcorg); (displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
NjNbRU
Identifier (type = doi)
doi:10.7282/T3KD22J8
Back to the top

Rights

RightsDeclaration (AUTHORITY = FS); (TYPE = [FS] statement #1); (ID = rulibRdec0004)
Copyright for scholarly resources published in RUcore is retained by the copyright holder. By virtue of its appearance in this open access medium, you are free to use this resource, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings. Other uses, such as reproduction or republication, may require the permission of the copyright holder.
Copyright
Status
Copyright protected
Availability
Status
Open
Reason
Permission or license
RightsEvent
Type
Permission or license
AssociatedObject
Type
License
Name
Sole author license v. 1
Detail
I hereby grant to Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (Rutgers) the non-exclusive right to retain, reproduce, and distribute the deposited work (Work) in whole or in part, in and from its electronic format, without fee. This agreement does not represent a transfer of copyright to Rutgers.Rutgers may make and keep more than one copy of the Work for purposes of security, backup, preservation, and access and may migrate the Work to any medium or format for the purpose of preservation and access in the future. Rutgers will not make any alteration, other than as allowed by this agreement, to the Work.I represent and warrant to Rutgers that the Work is my original work. I also represent that the Work does not, to the best of my knowledge, infringe or violate any rights of others.I further represent and warrant that I have obtained all necessary rights to permit Rutgers to reproduce and distribute the Work and that any third-party owned content is clearly identified and acknowledged within the Work.By granting this license, I acknowledge that I have read and agreed to the terms of this agreement and all related RUcore and Rutgers policies.
Back to the top

Technical

RULTechMD (ID = TECHNICAL1)
ContentModel
Document
CreatingApplication
Version
1.4
ApplicationName
Mac OS X 10.11.6 Quartz PDFContext
DateCreated (point = end); (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact)
2017-06-06T06:33:01
DateCreated (point = end); (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact)
2017-06-06T06:33:01
Back to the top
Version 8.3.13
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2020