Supremes Take Aussie Securities Case

Seldom does Blawgletter get the chance to copy something we wrote a year ago, plop it into a post, and hit "Publish". 

The Supremes gave us the excuse today by granting cert in Morrison v. Nat'l Australia Bank Ltd., No. 08-1191 (U.S. Nov. 30, 2009), about which we noted last October:

Down Under Securities Case Goes . . . Down

 
One is reminded of a terrier.

Something about a class of overseas people suing an Australian bank about securities fraud that emanated from the world's smallest continent.  They lost on subject matter grounds.  Seems the U.S. Securities Exchange Act doesn't reach so far.  Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., No. 07-0583-cv (2d Cir. Oct. 23, 2008).

Kinda like Empagran.

The Court had raised the stakes by asking the U.S. to give its views.  The Securities and Exchange Commission answered by asking the Court to deny the cert petition while expressing the opinion that the complaint alleged too thin a connection between the fraud and U.S. activity to justify liability under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. 

 Happy 21st, Caroline! 

 
One is reminded of a terrier.

Something about a class of overseas people suing an Australian bank about securities fraud that emanated from the world's smallest continent.  They lost on subject matter grounds.  Seems the U.S. Securities Exchange Act doesn't reach so far.  Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., No. 07-0583-cv (2d Cir. Oct. 23, 2008).

Kinda like Empagran.