The power of courts to choose a single winner from a contest of competing class actions is not the likely target of the High Court in taking up a challenge to last year’s beauty parade of shareholder proceedings against AMP, but the analysis behind the decision to award Maurice Blackburn the prize could face scrutiny, experts say.
With Victoria set to pass legislation permitting law firms to charge contingency fees, experts have raised fears of an exodus of class actions from other states and the federal system. But the Federal Court, which hears about two-thirds of Australia’s representative proceedings, is not likely to surrender easily.
Common fund orders in federal class actions could live to see another day, the Federal Court has indicated in new guidance to be released Friday, which swiftly responds to a recent judgment by the High Court that appeared to spell their doom.
The end of the common fund order is a setback for class actions that will see a revival of the days of closed proceedings, costly bookbuilding, higher commission rates and the shelving of worthy but risky cases, experts say, and all eyes will now turn to state and federal governments to see how they respond to calls for legislative intervention.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s high-stakes case against Google is the first of its kind worldwide targeting the tech giant’s data collection practices. The ACCC is in familiar territory in bringing a front-page legal challenge under the consumer laws that will require it to prove misleading conduct by silence, but if recent losses by the regulator are any guide, it could face an uphill battle.
A groundbreaking class action ruling by the Federal Court on Thursday that found Myer misled shareholders and accepted the applicant’s market-based causation theory is the only judgment in an Australian securities class action since the first shareholder case was brought 20 years ago, and it might be the only one for years to come.
A judge’s decision refusing to approve a $42 million settlement in a shareholder class action against Murray Goulburn because of a “too high” funder’s commission has set the stage for a showdown over the power of courts to alter funding agreements, a battle potentially more consequential than the fight over common fund orders now before the High Court.
A judge’s decision to pick Maurice Blackburn’s no win, no fee class action against AMP over three funded class actions puts the pressure on litigation funders, which will now face more competition from law firms prepared to go it alone, experts say. The ruling also shows the value courts place on funding arrangements that seek to maximise returns for class members, which means class action beauty parades are sure to get less ugly.
A ruling by a judge deciding a four-way contest to run a shareholder class action against AMP is expected this week, a judgment significant not just because it is the first time a court in Australia has been asked to choose among so many competing representative cases.
The writing may be on the wall for common fund orders in class actions that put all unregistered group members on the hook for a litigation funder’s commission, after the High Court agreed Wednesday to take up landmark challenges by Westpac and BMW, experts say.