The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Monday morning in Morrison v. National Australia Bank. For previous InsideCounsel coverage of the case, click here.

The case deals with F-cubed lawsuits. As Eriq Gardner explained in April's “Vivendi Verdict Highlights Potential Costs of F-Cubed Lawsuits,” such claims are made “in U.S. courts from aggrieved foreign investors who purchased foreign shares on foreign exchanges. These cases are termed 'F-cubed,' due to the amount of 'foreignness' involved.”

The Australia case, then, asks the high court whether, given such foreignness, such cases should be heard in U.S. courts, among other questions.

SCOTUSblog has a recap of Monday's oral arguments, with Lyle Denniston noting, “Little sentiment was expressed on the bench in favor of allowing foreign investors to come to America to sue for fraud that occurred mainly overseas, even if there were some connection to the United States.”

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Monday morning in Morrison v. National Australia Bank. For previous InsideCounsel coverage of the case, click here.

The case deals with F-cubed lawsuits. As Eriq Gardner explained in April's “Vivendi Verdict Highlights Potential Costs of F-Cubed Lawsuits,” such claims are made “in U.S. courts from aggrieved foreign investors who purchased foreign shares on foreign exchanges. These cases are termed 'F-cubed,' due to the amount of 'foreignness' involved.”

The Australia case, then, asks the high court whether, given such foreignness, such cases should be heard in U.S. courts, among other questions.

SCOTUSblog has a recap of Monday's oral arguments, with Lyle Denniston noting, “Little sentiment was expressed on the bench in favor of allowing foreign investors to come to America to sue for fraud that occurred mainly overseas, even if there were some connection to the United States.”