Volkswagen “Clean Diesel” Consumer Class Action Settlement in the U.S.

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 193-233
Author(s):  
Hai Jin Park
Keyword(s):  
Class Action ◽  
Clean Diesel ◽  
The U.S

Rethinking the Relationship Between Public Regulation and Private Litigation: Evidence from Securities Class Action in China

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 333-361
Author(s):  
Robin Hui Huang
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Class Action ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Securities Law ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Public And Private Enforcement ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The U.S

Abstract China has a civil procedure for collective litigation, which is dubbed Chinese-style class action, as it differs from the U.S.-style class action in some important ways. Using securities class action as a case study, this Article empirically examines both the quantity and quality of reported cases in China. It shows that the number of cases is much lower than expected, but the percentage of recovery is significantly higher than that in the United States. Based on this, the Article casts doubt on the popular belief that China should adopt the U.S.-style class action, and sheds light on the much-debated issue concerning the relationship between public and private enforcement of securities law. The Article also discusses the future prospects of securities class action in China in light of some recent developments which may provide its functional equivalents, including the regulator-brokered compensation fund and public interest group litigation.

After Pinochet: Foreign Sovereign Immunity in Respect of Serious Human Rights Violations - The Decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the Al-Adsani Case

2002 ◽  
Vol 3 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Rau
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Class Action ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Universal System ◽  
International Human ◽  
Civil Courts ◽  
The U.S

For want of an effective and accessible universal system for redress of international human rights abuses, victims of human rights violations increasingly seek reparations in domestic civil courts. In the United States in particular, the federal courts, since the 1980 Filártiga decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, have already decided on a remarkable number of civil suits alleging human rights violations committed abroad, the most recent example of this trend being a class action of members and supporters of opposition political groups in Zimbabwe who invoke the so-called Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA) against President and Foreign Minister Robert Mugabe with respect to alleged acts of torture. According to the proponents of such lawsuits, international human rights litigation in domestic civil courts can serve as an important tool in the worldwide effort to enforce international norms concerned with the protection of the individual which may complement criminal prosecutions of the offenders. As stated by Professor Stevens, who has litigated many of the international human rights cases in the U.S. federal courts, \\\“civil lawsuits for human rights violations […] serve a role similar to tort litigation in a domestic forum: to offer victims of violence a legal remedy which they control and which may satisfy needs not met by the criminal law system.\\\”

scholarly journals Publicly Funded Objectors

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-68
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Chamblee Burch
Keyword(s):  
Political Campaigns ◽  
Class Action ◽  
Publicly Funded ◽  
Red Flags ◽  
Public Funds ◽  
Information Barriers ◽  
Class Actions ◽  
Private Actors ◽  
Best Responses ◽  
The U.S

Abstract On paper, class actions run like clockwork. But practice suggests the need for tune-ups: sometimes judges still approve settlements rife with red flags, and professional objectors may be more concerned with shaking down class counsel than with improving class member’s outcomes. The lack of data on the number of opt-outs, objectors, and claims rates fuels debates on both sides, for little is known about how well or poorly class members actually fare. This reveals a ubiquitous problem — information barriers confront judges, objectors, and even reformers. Rule 23’s answer is to empower objectors. At best, objectors are a partial fix. They step in as the adversarial process breaks down in an attempt to resurrect the information-generating function that culture creates. And, as the proposed changes to Rule 23’s handling of objectors reflect, turmoil exists over how to encourage noble objectors that benefit class members while staving off those that namely seek rents from class counsel. The U.S. class-action scheme is not the only one that relies on private actors to perform public functions: citizens privately fund political campaigns, and private lobbyists provide research and information to lawmakers about public bills and policies. Across disciplines, the best responses to those challenges have often been to level up, not down. This Article therefore proposes a leveling up approach to address judges’ information deficit such that they can better perform their monitoring role. By relying on public funds to subsidize data collection efforts and nonprofit objectors’ information-gathering function, we can disrupt private class counsel’s disproportionate influence.

Globalization of Clinical Research by the Pharmaceutical Industry

2003 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonia Shah
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Services ◽  
The United States ◽  
Class Action ◽  
Ethical Standards ◽  
Health And Human Services ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Drug Companies ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The U.S

Drug companies' quest for speedy results has led to a boom in trials based in developing countries, where ethical standards may be lax and the impoverished sick abundant. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Inspector General's office, the number of researchers based outside the United States seeking new drug approvals has increased 16-fold over the last decade. In this article, a 1996 Pfizer trial in Nigeria—the subject of a controversial class-action suit—illustrates the dangers.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of Private Enforcement and Class Actions to Secure Antitrust Enforcement

2017 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 603-637
Author(s):  
Žygimantas Juška
Keyword(s):  
Class Action ◽  
The Other ◽  
Antitrust Enforcement ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
The Public ◽  
Class Actions ◽  
Settlement Agreement ◽  
The One ◽  
Controversial Nature ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. system has relied heavily on antitrust class actions as a means of ensuring compensation and deterrence. Although this tool seems sensible in theory, the reality is that it remains highly controversial. On the one hand, commentators argue that class actions force defendants to settle cases lacking merit. Even if a settlement agreement is assumed to have a merit, class actions are accused of doing a poor job in compensating victims and deterring wrongdoers. On the other hand, the proponents of class actions claim that there is no reliable empirical evidence proving that class action schemes caused negative effects on antitrust litigation. The public debate about the effectiveness of class actions illustrate the controversial nature of American class actions fairly well. Therefore, using comparative insights from the predominant controversies, this study will determine how well antitrust class actions fulfill compensation objectives and to what extent they can facilitate deterrence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document