Finding Nemo: Locating Financial Losses after Kolassa/Barclays Bank and Profit

M. Haentjens & D.J. Verheij, ‘Finding Nemo: Locating Financial Losses after Kolassa/Barclays Bank and Profit’, JIBLR 2016-6, p. 346-358

Leiden Law School Research Paper

Hazelhoff Research Paper Series No. 8

35 Pages Posted: 13 Jun 2016  

Matthias Haentjens

Leiden University - Leiden Law School

Dorine Verheij

Leiden University - Leiden Law School

Date Written: June 10, 2016

Abstract

This contribution concerns prospectus liability and critically analyses the CJEU’s recent Kolassa and Profit judgments as well as pending case Universal Music. The authors argue that jurisdiction and choice of law clauses in a prospectus must be upheld and that Kolassa is wrong to conclude that there is no agreement and no freely assumed legal obligation between the issuer and the (ultimate) investor. Moreover, they propose a radical new approach to the location of financial losses.

Keywords: 7(2) Brussels I Regulation, CJEU, conflict of laws, financial law, financial losses, Kolassa/Barclays Bank, location of financial losses, Private international law, Profit Investment/Ossi et al., prospectus liability, Universal Music International Holding BV/X

Suggested Citation

Haentjens, Matthias and Verheij, Dorine, Finding Nemo: Locating Financial Losses after Kolassa/Barclays Bank and Profit (June 10, 2016). M. Haentjens & D.J. Verheij, ‘Finding Nemo: Locating Financial Losses after Kolassa/Barclays Bank and Profit’, JIBLR 2016-6, p. 346-358; Leiden Law School Research Paper; Hazelhoff Research Paper Series No. 8. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2793727

Matthias Haentjens

Leiden University - Leiden Law School ( email )

P.O. Box 9520
2300 RA Leiden, NL-2300RA
Netherlands

Dorine Verheij (Contact Author)

Leiden University - Leiden Law School ( email )

P.O. Box 9520
2300 RA Leiden, NL-2300RA
Netherlands

Paper statistics

Downloads
161
Rank
148,052
Abstract Views
316