So zumindest mehren sich die Stimmen in den Fällen, in den ausländische Firmen aufgrund US-amerikanischen Kapitalmarktrechts zunehmend bei auch Nicht-US-Sachverhalten von US-Anwälten in US-Gerichten verklagt werden. Lesen Sie den nachfolgenden Wall Street Journal Artikel.
Increasingly, federal courts are rolling up the welcome mat when it comes to securities suits by foreign investors. That’s the theme of this WSJ article that looks at the impact of the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Morrison v. National Australia Bank. The ruling concluded that Australian investors who purchased shares of an Australian bank should not be able to bring a securities fraud suit in U.S. court.That holding has been a boon to multinational companies, as courts have interpreted Morrison to bar fraud claims by any investor — either from the U.S. or overseas — who purchased stock on a foreign exchange. Courts have dismissed claims against Credit Suisse Group, Alston SA, and others in light of Morrison.
The ruling could also save millions of dollars for the likes of BP, which faces securities suits over the Gulf oil spill, and Toyota, which faces securities claims arising from its handling of sudden acceleration claims. Some of the plaintiffs in each case purchased their stock overseas, so they could be out of luck.
Plaintiffs’ lawyers and some state officials are none too happy with this turn of events. They contend that, in a global marketplace in which U.S. capital increasingly flows into foreign stock exchanges, it is unfair to deprive U.S. investors of the protection of domestic law because they purchased stock overseas.
“It should make no difference whether [U.S. investors] plunk the money down here or whether it is transferred to foreign exchanges,” said Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray.
One of the biggest tests of Morrison is yet to come — the pending securities fraud suit against Vivendi.
In January, a New York jury issued a verdict that the French entertainment company was liable for misstatements about its financial health in 2001 and 2002. The damages could reach into the billions of dollars, but many of the shareholders purchased their Vivendi stock overseas.
The French entertainment and communications company is challenging the verdict in light of the Morrison case. Michael Spencer, counsel to the plaintiffs, said Morrison should have no impact on the damages paid by Vivendi.
James Quinn, co-lead counsel for Vivendi, begs to differ. “The class has been gutted by the Morrison decision,” he said.
