Search

The paper discusses the procedural features of concluding a settlement in the claim involving a corporation-participant for compensation of losses caused by the bodies of a legal entity, and aimed at recognizing as invalid a transaction made by a corporation and applying the consequences of its invalidity on appropriate corporate grounds. The author critically evaluates the procedural order applied to the peaceful settlement of a dispute in an indirect claim, provided for under paragraph 32 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 23 June 2015 No. 25, in terms of the possibility of an independent conclusion of a settlement by a corporation-participant. The author justifies the necessity of obtaining the consent of the corporation for the legal entity participant to conclude a settlement. Particular attention is paid to considering the specifics of concluding a settlement in the event that other members of the corporation join an indirect claim. The paper demonstrates the procedural features of concluding an amicable settlement when considering an indirect claim according to the rules of the class proceedings. To conclude the study, the author dwells on the issue of the need for corporate approval of a settlement containing signs of a major transaction and (or) an interested party transaction concluded within the framework of an indirect claim.

This special issue on class action litigation in the South African Journal on Human Rights was initiated by a call for papers that was drafted by South African lawyer Carina du Toit. It was indeed ...

Many transnational corporations (TNCs) that conducted business in South Africa during apartheid had deemed it profitable and desirable, despite the country’s systemic human rights violations against its majority black population. In the aftermath of the 1960 Sharpeville Massacre and 1976 student uprising, various United Nations and other international resolutions condemned TNCs for their incestuous relationship with apartheid South Africa and called for international sanctions against the regime. The demise of apartheid in 1994 brought about a new democratic, constitutional dispensation based on respect for human rights. However, attempts at holding TNCs liable for aiding and abetting the apartheid regime were fraught with obstacles and proved unsuccessful. Yet, the pursuit of strategic, class action litigation in areas as diverse as collusive conduct in bread manufacturing to occupational lung disease in South Africa’s goldmining industry have proven to be more successful in developing legal remedies against corporate harm. Areas impacted are extended legal standing under the common law, development of new causes of action and generous application of contingence fees arrangement.

The article analyses the peculiarities of the regulation of Class Action institution in the civil proceedings of Lithuania and Poland. Due to its limited scope, this article investigates the civil proceedings in the first instance courts only. The authors draw a special focus on the comparative analysis and the analysis of the effectiveness of the procedure in the current regulation by investigating both the doctrine and the available limited case law. The subject of considerations are problems relating both to the admissibility of filing a class action, as well as the course of court proceedings in cases concerning group proceedings, with particular emphasis on their differences from other procedural structures in Poland and Lithuania.

This study aims analyze the KPPU's decision as the basis for class action in court in demanding compensation for violations of unfair business competition, and the juridical obstacles in examining group claims based on the KPPU's decision. This is normative legal research using statutory and case approach. The results shows that the KPPU's decision can be used as the basis for a class action lawsuit in court in the context of demanding compensation for consumer losses caused by violations of business competition as long as the KPPU's deliberations and decisions include preliminary evidence of public (consumer) loss and meet the general requirements for a class action lawsuit. The juridical obstacles really depend on the level of understanding of the judges and also the documents and / or case files from the KPPU as evidence of consideration of consumer losses. Abstrak Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis putusan KPPU sebagai dasar gugatan kelompok ( class action ) di pengadilan dalam menuntut ganti rugi akibat pelanggaran persaingan usaha tidak sehat, serta hambatan yuridis dalam pemeriksaan gugatan perwakilan kelompok yang didasarkan pada putusan KPPU. Penelitian hukum normatif ini menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan kasus. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa putusan KPPU dapat dijadikan dasar gugatan class action di Pengadilan dalam rangka menuntut ganti rugi atas kerugian konsumen yang disebabkan oleh pelanggaran persaingan usaha sepanjang dalam pertimbangan dan putusan KPPU mencantumkan adanya bukti awal adanya kerugian masyarakat (konsumen secara luas) dan memenuhi persyaratan umum untuk dilakukan gugatan perwakilan ( class action ). Hambatan yuridis yang dialami pengadilan tentunya sangat bergantung pada tingkat pemahaman hakim dan juga dokumen dan/atau berkas perkara dari KPPU sebagai bukti adanya pertimbangan terhadap kerugian konsumen.

This brief, yet current, commentary discusses the way eugenically guided policies, like the Sexual Sterilization Acts in Alberta (1928–1972) and British Columbia (1933–1973), have impacted Indigenous women’s reproductive healthcare in Canada. Indigenous women from Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario, Northwest Territories, and Saskatchewan have reported they were coerced into having tubal ligation procedures by their healthcare providers, the most recent account occurring in 2018. These procedures fit the definition of genocide according to the United Nations, and a form of torture as defined by the Criminal Code of Canada. This paper includes an analysis of the legislated and non-legislated policies which aim to control Indigenous women’s reproductive rights and discusses the action the Indigenous community has taken to fight back against racist policies and practices within government and healthcare using activism, storytelling, and a class action lawsuit. The article closes with multilevel recommendations moving forward.

This article analyses selected jurisprudence of various courts in South Africa on class actions. It traces the development of class actions since 1994 to date. The selected cases have been chosen b...

The need for decisive action on climate change is becoming increasingly urgent. The International Panel on Climate Change has warned that, on the current trajectory, global warming is likely to rea...

For over half a century, it has been axiomatic that environmental claims are particularly well suited for class actions. This paper examines this notion in the context of Ontario’s regime and finds that environmental class actions have been limited in the extent to which they have promoted access to justice. Starting with a brief overview of class action history in Canada and the economics of mass litigation at a general level, the paper then analyzes barriers specific to environmental claims. A series of representative case studies is then offered to substantiate the central contention on the limits of environmental class actions. In so doing, the paper takes a holistic approach, incorporating empirical, economic, political, and procedural factors and dynamics to provide an integrated assessment about the type of access to justice that is presently achieved and achievable for environmental claims in Ontario.

In 1992, the US military withdrew from its bases in the Philippines. But they left behind environmental toxins that continue to pollute the land and people. Why was the US military able to leave without cleaning up this environmental damage? What can the environment tell us about the broader Philippine–US relationship? In this article I analyse a 2002 class action lawsuit against the United States regarding environmental damages caused by the US military. I argue that at the heart of these legal arguments are different understandings of time and history, what I call a contractual timescape versus a stewardship timescape.

Law is acknowledged as playing an important role in the growing field of disaster resilience. Still, a detailed inquiry into the possible relationships between law and disaster resilience remains largely absent from the discourse. This paper explores how legal thinking, approaches, and instruments can act as 'tools' in altering the nature and conditions of disaster risks. It looks at how state institutions can wield them and non-state actors employ them to participate in processes of change. Moving beyond a resilience literature that has tended to focus on law in terms of statutes, regulations, and human rights, this paper examines the ways in which legal reasoning, procedure, and substantive law can be instrumentalised to resist shocks, provoke incremental adjustments, or even foment transformational shifts in underlying risk conditions. It concludes by suggesting that law can offer both a breadth of insights for reconceptualising how power influences resilience and a number of instruments for challenging these power structures.

Corruption in Indonesia is an endemic problem. It has been hampering the development, disconnecting hopes of fulfilling the fundamental constitutional rights of citizens, creating a repressive government, and harming the country's finances and economy. This research tries to find the right movement pattern of social control, such as whether in efforts to prevent and eradicate corruption in Indonesia. The conclusion from this legal research is that the movement of social control as an instrument to eradicate corruption in Indonesia has been described both in the aspect of Judicial review, Class Action and Citizen Law Suit (CLS), Court Monitoring, and the Whistleblower System (WbS), as well as non-legal movements (public hearing & advocacy, mass actions) that are not facultative, meaning that all efforts can be undertaken by civil society by being bridged by NGOs and the campus in the corruption eradication agenda in Indonesia Going forward, the challenge of eradicating corruption in Indonesia is increasingly tricky and steep, it requires commitment from all parties to strengthen commitments to eradicate corruption, create integrity zones, and more importantly enhance the KPK as an independent anti-corruption institution, as mandated by UNCAC to maintain the independence of anti-corruption in Indonesia.Keywords:Social-Control Movement, Law Enforcement, Anti-Corruption

This article aims to discuss the enforcement of foreign collective action and settlement judgments in Canada. More specifically, it investigates the enforceability of the decision by the Amsterdam Court of Appeal declaring binding a class settlement in the Ageas case. The development of the Netherlands into a prime venue for (cross-border) collective settlements – including with respect to claimants and defendants residing across the Atlantic – renders a discussion of the enforceability of court decisions pertaining to the collective settlement of disputes of interest from a Dutch, EU and extra-EU perspective.

I - United States Supreme Court Supreme Court precedent has established the enforceability of consumer arbitration agreements and mandatory employment arbitration agreements in non-union workplaces. Such arbitration agreements often require consumers or employees to waive their rights to litigate claims or to bring class action arbitrations. In Lamps Plus v. Varela, the Supreme Court extended this line of precedents, holding in a 5-4 decision that an employment arbitration agreement that was ...

In the above cases, which came before the Western Cape High Court for hearing on both 23 and 25 November 2010, the judge, Francois Van Zyl, AJ dismissed the two applications for leave to institute the class actions on behalf of the applicants against the respondent bread-manufacturing companies (ie, Pioneer Foods (Pty) Ltd, Tiger Consumer Brands Limited and Premier Foods Limited)who, together with Foodcorp (Pty) Ltd, enjoy between 50% and 60% of the domestic bread market in South Africa. The judge promised to give reasons for his decision subsequent to his ruling on 26 November 2010 and, indeed, on 07 April 2011, he provided detailed reasons for his decision in terms of Rule 49(1)(c) of the Rules of the High Court. Material facts as accepted by the Court and which are relevant for the purposes of this case note are as follows: Both cases emanated from a complaint raised with the Competition Commission following an allegation of a bread cartel operated by the Respondent companies in the Western Cape in December 2006. After a preliminary investigation, the Commission initiated a complaint against the three respondents in the above applications. One of the respondent companies, Premier, applied for leniency and disclosed to the Commission that, together with Pioneer and Tiger, it was part of a bread cartel in the Western Cape which fixed the selling price of bread and other trading conditions. Following this disclosure, Premier was granted corporate leniency by the Commission and, on 14 February 2007, an agreement was concluded between Premier and the Commission in terms of which Premier agreed to assist the Commission in its investigations and subsequent prosecution of the other respondents before the competition Tribunal. On the same day that the corporate-leniency agreement was concluded with Premier, the Commission referred the complaint made against Tiger and Pioneer in the Western Cape to the Competition Tribunal. Following the referral, Tiger negotiated a consent agreement with the Commission, in terms of which it admitted that it enteredinto an agreement with Premier and Pioneer during December 2006 regarding bread prices and discounts to independent distributors in the Western Cape which amounted to a contravention of the provisions of the Competition Act (89 of 1998). On 27 November 2007, the Competition Tribunal made a consent order against Tiger in terms of section 49D of the Competition Act and levied against it an agreed administrative penalty of approximately R98 million. With regard to the third respondent company, Pioneer, complaints against it were subsequently heard by the Competition Tribunal and, on 03 February 2010, it was found that, together with Premier and Tiger, it was part of a bread cartel in December 2006 in the Western Cape in contravention of the provisions of the Competition Act. Taking into account other contraventions of the Competition Act committed by the company in other parts of the country, Pioneer wassubsequently ordered to pay an administrative penalty of approximately R195 million. In the final analysis, the facts established that bread-cartel operations took place during December 2006 in the Western Cape. It was further established that the three respondent companies were part of that bread cartel in contravention of the provisions of the Competition Act (ie, Premier applied forand was granted corporate leniency, Tiger negotiated a consent agreement which was made a consent order by the Competition Tribunal in terms of the Competition Act and Pioneer was found by the Tribunal to have been in contravention of the Competition Act and an administrative penalty was imposed upon it). It was in the context of the above circumstances that the applicants brought applications for class-action certification against the three respondents in the Western Cape High Court for the compensation of theconsumers and distributors who were detrimentally affected by the conduct of the respondent companies in contravention of the Competition Act. The AJ’s primary reasons for dismissing the applications included, firstly, the fact that while it is important in cases such as this to clearly identify a class for the purposes of the “class action” on the “opt-out” basis, the applicants failed to identify the “class” for the purposes of the application.

Responsables scientifiques : Cartier, Emmanuel, Kacprzak, Alicja et Mudrochová, Radka (eds); International audience; The objective of this article is to study the linguistic adaptation that accompanies the introduction and modification of a type of lawsuit originating in another legal system: the case of class action. In the context of the study of the comparative neology of French, Polish and Czech, considered in particular from the angle of borrowing and its equivalents, it is interesting to explore the adoption and linguistic adaptation of a legal concept. The one selected for this study is the American class action, which has already been the subject of a linguistic analysis focusing on French in France and French-speaking countries, and in Spain and Italy. The present study therefore extends the research carried out so far to the cases of Czech and Polish while updating the data on French.

In the world class action is an effective remedy of protecting consumers’ rights. This institution makes it possible to protect the rights and interests of many people who have suffered from mass harm. A class action lawsuit in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation can also be brought for the protection of consumer rights. Moreover, such a claim has a number of features that are analyzed in the article.

In April 2018, the European Commission introduced a long awaited Proposal for a Directive on represented actions, which aims to modernize the existing European collective redress system. The aim of this paper is to answer the question whether the solutions put forward in this Proposal will improve the landscape of collective redress in the EU. For this purpose, I analyse the existing model of collective consumer redress in the EU, as set forth by Directive 98/27/EC, Directive 2009/22/ EC and Recommendation 2013/396/EU; I also evaluate it from the perspective of its functionality with special consideration of key problematic issues. Against this background, I present the legal provisions put forward in the Proposal for a Directive on representative actions. The comparison of both legal structures makes it possible to give an answer to the question whether the proposed legislation can remedy the existing problems of the collective redress system and, thus, to answer the question whether it will contribute to strengthening the mechanism for the protection of collective consumer interests in the EU.

The question of effective enforcement of consumer rights has been widely discussed for many years in the European Union. The models of consumer protection significantly vary in the individual Member States. Typically, consumers can claim their rights both at an individual and collective level. The systems of enforcement of consumer protection are either public, private or mixed, where both types of enforcement function in a parallel way. The goal of the paper is to discuss the issue of various legal mechanisms that function in the Member States, serving the consumers as a means of collective redress. The main analysis focuses on the legal solutions adopted in Belgium (first part of the paper), UK and the Netherlands (second part of the paper). In particular, the author presents the complementary character of the public and private mechanisms used to enforce the consumer rights. The paper utilises dogmatic and analytical methods for the process of interpretation of the normative material and for the analysis of case law. The study uses the comparative perspective to identify solutions emerging from effective practices found in legal systems of the Member States. The paper proposes several legal solutions to adopt in the Polish law. The findings emerging from the analysis show that both competent consumer organisations commencing group proceedings and experienced judges who choose between opt-in and opt-out systems are vital in the process of effective enforcement of consumer rights. The conclusions from the study are useful in mapping out the legislative process and the analysis discussed in the paper may be extended to legal systems of other Member States.

The residents of Port Harcourt and its environs recently experienced black substance, known as carbon or soot with dull brown particles produced by incomplete combustion of crude oil and other waste materials within the environs. Many residents, including the government are really concerned about the impacts of this substance on public health, and the ecosystem. This concern is germane because of the trans- boundary nature of carbon emissions, and coupled with the serious negative health impacts on the residents. For now, it is not quite feasible to quantify the magnitude of impacts because some impacts are temporary while others are irreversible. Being a novel occurrence in this part of the world, some traditional legal and regulatory frameworks did not anticipate this occurrence and are thus inadequate in addressing the problem. Similarly, private actions by aggrieved citizens had proven inadequate in redressing grave air pollution cases in Nigeria; hence the need for class action. The Rivers State Governments and other Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) in the state seemed overwhelmed with this development since the soot was first noticed in 2016 but not much have been done by the relevant agencies of government, to stem this menace. We argue that past efforts by these agencies have largely been episodic thereby occasioning serious havoc to human health and the ecosystem around Port Harcourt. The objective of this paper is to appraise the causes of soot in Port Harcourt, determine appropriate preventive measures and makes appropriate recommendations, drawing lessons from other jurisdictions.

Though Nigeria is inundated with human rights abuses, there is no procedure that could effectively accommodate a large number of victims in one litigation beside class action. Class litigation is limited in scope in Nigeria; hence, it cannot be applied in human rights cases. This has culminated in a culture of impunity by corporations in the country. This paper uses the class action legal regime in the United States to argue that the statutory introduction of a general class litigation regime will adequately address human rights violations in Nigeria. The author submits that beyond the legislative introduction of a general class action legal framework in Nigeria; judges should exercise their wide discretion as envisaged by the Nigerian constitution in civil matters to adjudicate human rights class litigations. Also, there is need to enlighten Nigerians of their human rights and an efficient procedure to address their violations: class action procedure.

Class Action Litigation in South Africa is the first book of its kind to be launched in South Africa. It is a contribution to knowledge for academics, practitioners, scholars, judges, lawyers and a...

Gary B. v. Snyder, a federal class action lawsuit originally filed in September 2016, is one of the most recent and high-profile entrants into the line of cases involving large-scale education reform. In this case, seven students from traditional public schools and charter schools in Detroit sued various Michigan state officials, arguing that the U.S. Constitution includes a fundamental right of access to literacy and that the state had denied them this right. Although the federal trial court in Detroit that initially heard the case found that students were not denied their right of access to literacy by the state, the plaintiffs appealed the case, and it is now being considered in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Given the difficulties that have historically emerged with court-driven education reform, we examine the opportunities and challenges inherent in Gary B. to provide insight into the prospects of Gary B. and similar cases to effectively promote educational improvement. Grounded in this examination, we also present an argument for the utility of a new model for education litigation. We specifically argue that courts acting as agenda setters and working in concert with stakeholders to tailor reform to ground-level conditions is a model that is highly compatible with contemporary education research on effective models of systemic improvement. A court-mandated agenda for educational improvement must be structured in a way that engages stakeholder groups in implementation efforts precisely because improvement naturally involves dynamic, contextual conditions that cannot be completely accounted for in advance.

Billed as the largest damages claim in the United Kingdom’s (UK’s) history,1 and now destined for Supreme Court adjudication,2 the case of Merricks v Mastercard Inc (‘Mastercard’)3 will undoubtedly...

The opt-out class action involves a unique participant, viz, the absent class member whose claim is prosecuted by a representative claimant, who does not opt-out of the action nor do anything else ...

The subject. The article is devoted to problems of institute of collective legal protection in German civil procedure law. The purpose of the article is to confirm or disprove hypothesis of the need to introduce the institution of general class action in German civil procedural law. The methodology of the study includes general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, description) and sociological approach. The main results and scope of their application. German civil procedure law is based on the principle of "two parties". However, there are many situations that do not fit into the traditional scheme of individual legal protection, because either the conflict is affected by many persons, or the conflict goes beyond the individual interests of the affected persons. For processes in which a significant number of persons are involved, as a means of protection, first of all, claims for abstention from actions (Unterlassungsklagen) submitted by associations of consumers and entrepreneurs are offered. These claims, in spite of the dogmatic difficulties, have been implemented in practice and proven. Special legal regulation on this issue exists in the legislation on consumer protection, competition and Antimonopoly legislation. Added to this are the more recently the claims of the unions about the withdrawal of the profits (Verbandsklagen auf Gewinnabschopfung). The claim for recovery (Einziehungsklage), which allows associations to join several unidirectional claims of consumers in a single lawsuit, is also regulated in a special way. However, there is still no General class action in German law. Conclusions. The author concludes that the absence of a General class action is a legal gap in German civil procedure law. This situation is criticized as insufficient to raise the issue of causing mass harm before the court. First of all, there is the absence of a collective action aimed at compensating for harm, which is regarded as alien to German law. The relevant initiatives of the European Commission in this regard contain only non-binding recommendations to States parties on the introduction of collective forms of legal protection. This topic becomes even more relevant in Germany in connection with the "diesel scandal" and the introduction of the bill on a collective model claim for recognition (Musterfeststellungsklage).

In the landmark decision in Nkala & others v Harmony Gold Mining Company Limited & others 2016 (5) SA 240 (GJ), the South Gauteng High Court certified a class action suit instituted by representatives of tens of thousands of mineworkers against the South African gold mining industry, with the intent of claiming damages arising from the occupational diseases of silicosis and tuberculosis. This article contextualizes the Nkala case against the use of the class action mechanism as a tool for social policy change and the promotion of access to justice. It provides an overview of the parties, design, and key legal findings of the Nkala decision and, in particular, elaborates on how the Nkala bench framed the purpose of the class action suit and dealt with the prospect of entrepreneurial lawyering.

In this important work, the author, Tel Aviv University law professor Leora Bilsky, examines two sets of class action lawsuits brought in United States federal courts in the mid-1990s. These suits ...

Custodial suicide is a foundational concern for correctional systems. The incarcerated population is at an increased risk for suicide as compared with people living in the community. Sufficient suicide prevention is a critical component of a constitutionally adequate system of correctional mental health care. The remedial phases of class action litigations have animated improvement in suicide prevention in many correctional systems across the United States. In the current climate, many legal obstacles make it more difficult for plaintiffs to prevail in such cases, but it is expected that advocates will find novel approaches in response to these legal hurdles, such as greater reliance on state law remedies, and will seek to expand the scope of potential actions in emerging areas such as immigration detention. Defendants and courts will, in turn, need to respond to these changes. This article explores the history of relevant litigations, and the legal obstacles currently faced by plaintiffs, as well as future directions the authors consider will likely be taken. Practical issues such as appropriate measurement of improvement in the area of suicide prevention are also explored.

Drawing on the political theory of judicial decision making, our paper proposes a new and parsimonious ex ante litigation risk measure: federal judge ideology. We find that judge ideology complements existing measures of litigation risk based on industry membership and firm characteristics. Firms in liberal circuits (the third quartile in ideology) are 33.5% more likely to be sued in securities class action lawsuits than those in conservative circuits (the first quartile in ideology). This result is stronger after the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the Tellabs case. We next show that the effect of judge ideology on litigation risk is greater for firms with more sophisticated shareholders and with higher expected litigation costs. Furthermore, judicial appointments affect litigation risk and the value of firms in the circuit, highlighting the economic consequences of political appointments of judges. Finally, using our new measure, we document that litigation risk deters managers from providing long‐term earnings guidance, a result that existing measures of litigation risk cannot show.

What is the role of litigation in the Australian response to climate change? Catastrophic bushfires and massive coral bleaching of Australia’s iconic Great Barrier Reef have gained worldwide infamy. Litigants have drawn on these and other climate-related events in domestic court proceedings that challenge Australia’s legislative and executive inertia. This chapter examines the potential and limitations of climate-related litigation in Australia. It analyses cases, doctrine and associated legislation at the federal and state level. The chapter investigates suits for failure to mitigate climate change, including challenges to the approval of coal mines that contribute to global greenhouse gas emissions. It compares the relative success of claims relating to adaptation. The growing transnational influence of climate-related proceedings against private enterprises is also discussed, alongside the pending class action against the Australian government for failing to disclose climate risks when issuing sovereign bonds. The chapter demonstrates that judicial decisions, though constrained, provide impetus to improve Australia’s response to climate change. Litigation can help to align Australia’s domestic actions with the international goals of the Paris Agreement.

The Canadian anti-free trade movement was a genuine ‘movement’ that originated locally in many different places throughout the country and was soon consolidated in a loose coalition at the national level. It was extraordinary for several reasons. First, it brought together a large number of groups that had never worked with each other before and their coalitions were strong and effective. Second, it was a movement based on class issues and was understood that way by its leaders and most of those who participated in it. Third, it democratized thinking and knowledge about economic policy, and this, in turn, meant that many groups and issues that were normally absent from a discussion of macro-economic policy, became central to the debate. Fourth, the anti-free trade movement grew in relation to the specific issues of regions and groups but the critical arguments that developed over time focused on the problems of having market mechanisms dominate both the economic and social spheres. This scrutiny and discussion of the market system itself has not been replicated in debates on any subsequent major policy issue.

After years of debate and several failed attempts by various political parties, Belgium enacted its first general Class Action Act on March 24, 2014 (hereafter BCAA). The Act reflects views commonly held by European policymakers on the desirability of class actions. Its scope is limited to the enforcement of an exhaustively listed number of specific statutory provisions, mainly dealing with consumer protection. Actions can only be brought by certain representative organizations, recognized as such by the government, not by ad hoc lead plaintiffs. Only traditional consumer protection groups have been recognized, while Deminor, the most important plaintiff in collective shareholder litigation, has been excluded. The presiding judge has to decide whether the class action will proceed on an opt-in or opt-out basis.

It is recognized that the Brazilian experience with class actions is one of the most developed in the civil law world. However, this experience is not only successful. After a long period of broad access to justice, for pragmatic reasons, new techniques are coming to the fore. This chapter focuses on the traditional Brazilian class actions, addressing some new trends and risks. The goal is to sketch a broad and realistic view of Brazilian class action landscape, highlighting the good experiences and new trends, as well as the evolution of the Brazilian system. An analysis of quantitative and qualitative data from more than 286,000 class actions filed between 2014 and 2018 is provided. The most important features of the Brazilian class action system: standing, res judicata, lis pendens, costs and fees, etc. will be presented, showing how new Civil Procedure Code applies to the collective redress schemes. The focus will be on the emergence of aggregate litigation as a form of collective redress, in combination with Brazilian class actions. Finally, we will deal with “the procedural law of disasters”.

While collective redress mechanisms continue to develop in much of Europe and in pockets around the world, the oldest class action regimes are undergoing reform. This contribution explores the state of reform in the first and second generation class action jurisdictions: the United States, Australia, Israel and Canada. Their respective class action procedures are outlined in Sect. 2. Section 3 discusses the reform initiatives of the past 3 years in each of the four countries. In Sect. 4, common areas of concern as well as areas of divergence are explored. Comparing and contrasting these reform efforts illustrates the evolution of class actions in these countries and provides useful insights for those studying and contributing to the development of newer collective redress systems.

Class actions were introduced in Norwegian civil procedure with the Norwegian Dispute Act of 2005, inspired by the United States’ federal rule on class actions. Norwegian civil procedure already had several other types of collective litigation, but these procedures did not cover the catchment area for the class action rules. The chapter on class actions was a novelty when the act was passed and it represented something new in Norwegian civil procedure. The ability to decide on a legal question with effect for many individual claims reduces the costs of each claim and thus gives access to the courts for claims involving amounts or interests so small that they would otherwise not be brought as individual actions. This chapter gives an introduction to the Norwegian class action rules and discusses whether the rules have been a success or not. The rules are compared with the source of inspiration. The importance of the origin of the rules and its influence on the interpretation of Norwegian rules is examined.

Common Fund Orders’ (CFOs) have had a significant effect on Australian third party-funded class actions by requiring all class members to make a contribution to the third-party litigation funder’s fee in the event of a successful outcome. This altered past practice whereby only class members who had contracted with the litigation funder would be liable for such a contribution. However in a 5:2 decision in BMW Australia Ltd v Brewster in 2019, the High Court cast some doubt on CFOs, determining that neither s 33ZF Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) nor s 183 Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) provided a legal basis for making CFOs at the outset of proceedings so as to secure litigation funding support. In late 2020, the Commonwealth Parliamentary Joint Committee (PJC) on Corporations and Financial Services recommended that legislation be enacted to ‘address uncertainty’ in Brewster in a manner that would enable CFOs to be made at settlement or judgment. The authors canvass normative arguments as to the merits of CFOs and compare the alternative practice of making Funding Equalisation Orders (FEOs). They also consider the related issue of courts setting overall funding commissions. Given the possibility of legislative intervention, they also review arguments as to the potential constitutional validity of CFOs, a matter that was raised, but received very limited treatment from the High Court in BMW.

Throughout the twentieth century, virtually all European countries that had studied the American class action had rejected implementation of the class action as a part of domestic law. In the early twenty­first century, however, several European countries reconsidered their longstanding antipathy to the American class action. The EU Parliament in 2013 issued a Recommendation for Injunctive and Compensatory Collective Redress Mechanisms requesting that all EU countries—by 2017—implement some form of collective redress mechanism. In May 2018, the Commission issued a Report assessing the practical implementation of the Recommendation. The Commission’s study reveals that the 28 EU countries have developed a patchwork quilt of differing approaches to collective redress. Although many EU countries have undertaken legislative initiatives and implemented some of the Commission’s recommendations, in a number of countries, several of the Commission’s principles have had little or no impact on domestic laws. Perhaps most significantly, the 28 EU countries largely have eschewed implementing procedural mechanisms that resemble the American class action rule, in efforts to preserve domestic cultural and legal norms, and to avoid American­style class action abuses. Thus, European initiatives towards implementing a class action device represent an American class action defense lawyer’s dream.