Australian Business Group Calls for Regulation of Litigation Funders and Plaintiff Firms
The group, an employers' organisation, claims that class actions are costing investment and jobs and pushing up insurance costs, presenting "a clear and present danger to Australia's fragile economy."
October 30, 2019 at 01:37 PM
3 minute read
The Australian Industry Group, also known as Ai Group, is calling on the Australian government to regulate litigation funders and impose limits on returns earned by plaintiff law firms and funders, as class actions are costing investment and jobs and pushing up insurance costs, it claims.
The group, an employers' organisation, says A$10 billion ($6.9 billion) in class actions have been filed in the past fiscal year, and they present "a clear and present danger to Australia's fragile economy".
"The Australian government needs to act now to rein in speculative and costly class actions before they materially damage our economy," Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox said in a statement.
"Overseas litigation funding firms have moved into Australia in a big way due to the fact that class actions in Australia are subject to scant regulation, compared with other countries such as the U.S. and U.K. Overseas investors should not be permitted to make super-profits at the expense of Australian businesses and jobs."
A report on class actions and litigation funding released by the Australian Law Reform Commission earlier this year did not recommend any substantial changes to regulations governing the sector.
Willox said plaintiff firms and funders are seeking "unconscionable" returns and are using misleading and deceptive conduct to entice workers into joining some class actions.
"The growing threat of class actions adds to business risks and creates a disincentive for those considering setting up new businesses or taking on board and senior leadership positions. This has potential impacts for leadership and management capability in the long term," he added.
Ai Group called for regulation of litigation funders through the corporate regulator, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. "Litigation funding arrangements are financial products and there is no legitimate reason why these arrangements should not be subject to regulation like other financial products," the group said.
It also wants "reasonable limits" on returns to plaintiff lawyers and litigation funders.
Litigation funders should be prohibited from exerting any control over the positions taken by, and the arguments pursued by, the lawyers in the proceedings, Ai Group said. "This is important to protect lawyers' duties to the court and their clients. A similar requirement applies in some other countries," it said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBaker & Partners, LCWP Lead on $1B Fraud Claim by Malaysia's 1MDB Against Amicorp
Apple Subsidiaries in Belgium and France Sued by DRC Over Conflict Minerals
2 minute readBaker McKenzie, Norton Rose & Other Top Litigators Foresee Rise in AI, Data & ESG Disputes
Freshfields Takes on Syria's Brutal Legacy, But Will Victims Ever See Compensation?
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250