Last year was an exciting one for class action lawyers, with monumental court decisions on competing cases, cross-jurisdictional spats, proportionality in settlements and the power of judges to decide how a recovery is distributed. Here, top class action litigators tell us what the most significant rulings of 2018 were and why the decisions will continue to matter this year.
The law firms that challenged a ruling staying their cases against GetSwift gave the Full Federal Court a chance to guide judges managing competing class actions, but they can’t avoid paying their opponents’ legal costs because the court happened to seize the opportunity.
A law firm on the losing end of a landmark ruling over competing shareholder class actions against GetSwift has argued that a proposed opt-out notice to group members should wait until after its High Court appeal. And the judge will let the firm make its argument, after hearing that the winning law firm has been, in his words, “sitting on its hands”.
The High Court has granted special leave to mortgage aggregator Connective in a dispute between the firm’s founder and major shareholders over a transfer of one-third of the company’s shares, in a case that could clarify whether litigation should be considered a prohibited form of financial assistance under the Corporations Act.
Law firm Squire Patton Boggs is taking a fight over a ruling that shut down its shareholder class action against logistics startup GetSwift to the High Court.
Seven class actions against auto makers that sold cars equipped with defective Takata airbags can allege the car makers’ silence constituted misleading and deceptive conduct.
And then there were four. Plaintiffs law firm Slater & Gordon wants to consolidate its AMP shareholder class action with Maurice Blackburn’s case and hand over the reins to its rival, a deal signed the day the Full Federal Court affirmed the power of judges to shut down competing class actions.
Quinn Emanuel has hit global insurance broker Jardine Lloyd Thompson with a class action for allegedly charging local councils in NSW hundreds of millions of dollars in excessive premiums over the past nine years, and the firm says there may be more lawsuits on the horizon.
The showdown between five law firms vying to lead a class action over the AMP fees for no service scandal kicked off in the NSW Supreme Court Thursday with counsel for one case saying the contest, although costly and consuming, would ultimately be a win for all class action participants.
AMP’s advice executive Jack Regan, the witness who aired the firm’s fees-for-no-service dirty laundry at the Royal Commission, has retired, a day before five law firms compete to lead a class action over the scandal.