Remedies for Foreign Investors Under U.S. Federal Securities Law
Hannah L. Buxbaum
Indiana University School of Law-Bloomington
December 4, 2011
Law and Contemporary Problems, Vol. 75, No. 1, 2011
Indiana Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1968245
In its 2010 decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, the Supreme Court held that the general anti-fraud provision of U.S. securities law applies only to (a) transactions in securities listed on domestic exchanges and (b) domestic transactions in other securities. That decision forecloses the use of the “foreign-cubed” class action, and in general precludes the vast majority of claims that might otherwise have been brought in U.S. court by foreign investors. This article assesses the post-Morrison landscape, addressing the question of remedies in U.S. courts for investors defrauded in foreign transactions. It begins by reviewing the current case law, analyzing the approaches that courts have used in applying Morrison and highlighting certain weaknesses in the transaction-based test adopted in that case. It then investigates two potential paths for foreign investors: litigation brought in U.S. federal courts under foreign, rather than domestic, securities law; and participation in FAIR fund distributions ordered by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 26
Keywords: securities fraud, extraterritoriality, Morrison, foreign-cubed, FAIR Funds, foreign investors
JEL Classification: K20, K22, K33, K41Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: December 6, 2011 ; Last revised: January 25, 2012
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.406 seconds