Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
113,110
result(s) for
"Civil actions"
Sort by:
The Class Action in Common Law Legal Systems
Multi-party litigation is a world-wide legal process, and the class action device is one of its best-known manifestations. As a means of providing access to justice and achieving judicial economies, the class action is gaining increasing endorsement – particularly given the prevalence of mass consumerism of goods and services, and the extent to which the activities and decisions of corporations and government bodies can affect large numbers of people. The primary purpose of this book is to compare and contrast the class action models that apply under the federal regimes of Australia and the United States and the provincial regimes of Ontario and British Columbia in Canada. While the United States model is the most longstanding, there have now been sufficient judicial determinations under each of the studied jurisdictions to provide a constructive basis for comparison. In the context of the drafting and application of a workable class action framework, it is apparent that similar problems have been confronted across these jurisdictions, which in turn promotes a search for assistance in the experience and legal analysis of others. The book is presented in three Parts. The first Part deals with the class action concept and its alternatives, and also discusses and critiques the stance of England where the introduction of the opt-out class action model has been opposed. The second Part focuses upon the various criteria and factors governing commencement of a class action (encompassing matters such as commonality, superiority, suitability, and the class representative). Part 3 examines matters pertaining to conduct of the action itself (such as becoming a class member, notice requirements, settlement, judgments, and costs and fees). The book is written to have practical utility for a wide range of legal practitioners and professionals, such as: academics and students of comparative civil procedure and multi-party litigation; litigation lawyers who may use the reference materials cited to the benefit of their own class action clients; and those charged with law reform who look to adopt the most workable (and avoid the unworkable) features in class action models elsewhere.
eBook
The Rising Behemoth
Over the last few decades, multidistrict litigation in the federal courts has exploded. Originally a mechanism for consolidating relatively small numbers of commercial cases, with the advent of large-scale mass tort litigation, it has become the primary vehicle for resolving hundreds of thousands of tort claims pending in the federal court system. From asbestos to opioids, MDL proceedings are now used to resolve many of the largest and most high-profile disputes. In recent years, however, participants in multidistrict litigation have expressed significant dissatisfaction. Defendants maintain that MDL proceedings attract large numbers of meritless claims and that many MDL courts are failing to provide sufficient scrutiny to the claims that are filed. As a result, defendants are overwhelmed with large numbers of meritless cases and face significant pressure to settle, providing compensation for many claims that should not have been filed in the first place.From filing to resolution through litigation or settlement, The Rising Behemoth addresses each of the steps in large-scale MDL litigation in the federal courts. In the process, it significantly advances the debate regarding modern MDL practice and offers concrete suggestions for ways in which the system can be improved.
eBook
The litigators
Law firm partners Oscar Finley and Wally Figg see a chance for huge financial gain when they learn of a pending class action lawsuit against the makers of Krayoxx, a popular cholesterol-reducing drug suspected of causing heart attacks.
Book
Obtaining Evidence in Canada for United States Civil Actions: What American Counsel and Clients Need to Know
The superior courts of each province have inherent jurisdiction and handle most litigation matters (these courts go by different names, for instance the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, the Superior Court of Québec, the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and the Court of King's Bench of Alberta). The Federal court system hears certain matters within the purview of the Federal Government, such as tax, immigration, and patents, but these courts do not have inherent jurisdiction. Relevance is considered in relation to the United States litigation and is defined by the pleadings in that action.16 Canadian courts have confirmed that considering the relevance of the evidence requested is within their own purview, though deference should be afforded to the United States court making the request; the scope of such deference has ranged from significant, as in the Alberta case of King County (a Washington Municipal Corp.) v. Gelhaus 17 or the British Columbia case of B.I. Incorporated v Au, 18 to cursory, as in the Ontario case of Cunix v. Sol Global Investment Corp.19 Canadian courts have narrowed down requests in light of the narrower view of relevance in the Canadian discovery process20 and have denied applications so broad they constituted a \"fishing expedition. Parties making applications in United States and Canadian courts have generally made substantive efforts at obtaining the evidence they seek, and it is important to show the Canadian court that such evidence cannot be otherwise obtained without an order. 25 This does not mean any evidence on the same issue, but rather evidence of the same value.26 Be specific.
Journal Article
Class Actions in the United States and Israel: A Comparative Approach
Unlike most countries, the United States and Israel have employed the class action procedure for decades. This Article compares the two countries’ class action regimes and examines how the device has evolved in those countries. It examines the current procedures, as well as proposed reforms. It also compares class action statistics in the two countries relating to filings and outcomes. We demonstrate the many common features between the United States and Israeli class action procedures. As we illustrate, these common features have led to robust class action practices in both countries. At the same time, there are profound differences between the types of class actions filed and their outcomes. Thus, while Israel has many more class actions than the United States on a per capita basis, the cases are much less consequential from a monetary and subject matter perspective. We explore possible explanations for these observations. Furthermore, this study identifies features — utilized by the United States and Israel — that can serve as models for other countries that are adopting or amending their own class action regimes.
Journal Article
The litigators
Law firm partners Oscar Finley and Wally Figg see a chance for huge financial gain when they learn of a pending class action lawsuit against the makers of Krayoxx, a popular cholesterol-reducing drug suspected of causing heart attacks.
BOOK
Suing the tobacco and lead pigment industries
In Suing the Tobacco and Lead Pigment Industries, legal scholar Donald G. Gifford recounts the transformation of tort litigation in response to the challenge posed by victims of 21st-century public health crises who seek compensation from the product manufacturers. Class action litigation promised a strategy for documenting collective harm, but an increasingly conservative judicial and political climate limited this strategy. Then, in 1995, Mississippi attorney general Mike Moore initiated a parens patriae action on behalf of the state against cigarette manufacturers. Forty-five other states soon filed public product liability actions, seeking both compensation for the funds spent on public health crises and the regulation of harmful products. Gifford finds that courts, through their refusal to expand traditional tort claims, have resisted litigation as a solution to product-caused public health problems. Even if the government were to prevail, the remedy in such litigation is unlikely to be effective. Gifford warns, furthermore, that by shifting the powers to regulate products and to remediate public health problems from the legislature to the state attorney general, parens patriae litigation raises concerns about the appropriate allocation of powers among the branches of government.
eBook