澳大利亚集体诉讼改革的循证方法:共同基金命令、资助费用和偿还款项

V. Morabito
{"title":"澳大利亚集体诉讼改革的循证方法:共同基金命令、资助费用和偿还款项","authors":"V. Morabito","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3326303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The public release of the ALRC’s final report on class actions and litigation in late January 2019 was accompanied by the announcement by the Federal Attorney-General that, over the next two months or so, he will seek the views of stakeholders with respect to the 24 recommendations contained in this report. It is, of course, important that these consultations and assessments of the ALRC’s recommendations be based on an accurate understanding of the actual, as opposed to perceived, operation of Australia’s class action regimes. \n \nOne of the two aims of this third report - in the An Evidence-Based Approach to Class Action Reform in Australia series - is to secure this desirable scenario with respect to two of the most controversial aspects of Australian class actions: (a) the percentages of class action settlements that are paid to commercial litigation funders with respect to their commissions or funding fees; and (b) the impact that the ground-breaking common fund doctrine enunciated by the Full Federal Court in October 2016 has had on the remuneration received by funders in successful class actions. \n \nThe other purpose of this report is to provide data with respect to what are rapidly becoming common features of class action settlement agreements: what are generally-referred to as reimbursement payments to lead plaintiffs and occasionally to sub-group representatives and active/sample class members.","PeriodicalId":246136,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Enforcement of Consumer Laws (Topic)","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Evidence-Based Approach to Class Action Reform in Australia: Common Fund Orders, Funding Fees and Reimbursement Payments\",\"authors\":\"V. Morabito\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.3326303\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The public release of the ALRC’s final report on class actions and litigation in late January 2019 was accompanied by the announcement by the Federal Attorney-General that, over the next two months or so, he will seek the views of stakeholders with respect to the 24 recommendations contained in this report. It is, of course, important that these consultations and assessments of the ALRC’s recommendations be based on an accurate understanding of the actual, as opposed to perceived, operation of Australia’s class action regimes. \\n \\nOne of the two aims of this third report - in the An Evidence-Based Approach to Class Action Reform in Australia series - is to secure this desirable scenario with respect to two of the most controversial aspects of Australian class actions: (a) the percentages of class action settlements that are paid to commercial litigation funders with respect to their commissions or funding fees; and (b) the impact that the ground-breaking common fund doctrine enunciated by the Full Federal Court in October 2016 has had on the remuneration received by funders in successful class actions. \\n \\nThe other purpose of this report is to provide data with respect to what are rapidly becoming common features of class action settlement agreements: what are generally-referred to as reimbursement payments to lead plaintiffs and occasionally to sub-group representatives and active/sample class members.\",\"PeriodicalId\":246136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: Enforcement of Consumer Laws (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: Enforcement of Consumer Laws (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3326303\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Enforcement of Consumer Laws (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3326303","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

ALRC于2019年1月底公开发布了关于集体诉讼和诉讼的最终报告,与此同时,联邦总检察长宣布,在未来两个月左右的时间里,他将就本报告中包含的24项建议征求利益相关者的意见。当然,重要的是,对法律研究委员会建议的这些磋商和评估应基于对澳大利亚集体诉讼制度实际运作的准确理解,而不是对其运作的感知。第三份报告(澳大利亚集体诉讼改革的循证方法系列)的两个目的之一是确保澳大利亚集体诉讼中两个最具争议的方面实现这一理想情况:(a)支付给商业诉讼资助者的集体诉讼和解百分比;以及(b) 2016年10月联邦法院颁布的具有开创性的共同基金原则对成功的集体诉讼中资助者获得的报酬的影响。本报告的另一个目的是提供关于迅速成为集体诉讼和解协议共同特征的数据:通常被称为向主要原告支付的偿还款项,偶尔也会向分组代表和活跃/样本集体成员支付。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Evidence-Based Approach to Class Action Reform in Australia: Common Fund Orders, Funding Fees and Reimbursement Payments
The public release of the ALRC’s final report on class actions and litigation in late January 2019 was accompanied by the announcement by the Federal Attorney-General that, over the next two months or so, he will seek the views of stakeholders with respect to the 24 recommendations contained in this report. It is, of course, important that these consultations and assessments of the ALRC’s recommendations be based on an accurate understanding of the actual, as opposed to perceived, operation of Australia’s class action regimes. One of the two aims of this third report - in the An Evidence-Based Approach to Class Action Reform in Australia series - is to secure this desirable scenario with respect to two of the most controversial aspects of Australian class actions: (a) the percentages of class action settlements that are paid to commercial litigation funders with respect to their commissions or funding fees; and (b) the impact that the ground-breaking common fund doctrine enunciated by the Full Federal Court in October 2016 has had on the remuneration received by funders in successful class actions. The other purpose of this report is to provide data with respect to what are rapidly becoming common features of class action settlement agreements: what are generally-referred to as reimbursement payments to lead plaintiffs and occasionally to sub-group representatives and active/sample class members.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信