Financial Recovery Technologies Fast Five provides you with the top news in shareholder class actions. Stay up-to-date on the latest developments in settled (U.S./Canada) claims filing opportunities, Antitrust settlements, Global Group Litigation matters and more. For more information, contact your Financial Recovery Technologies representative or email us.

1. Pinterest Hit With Investor Suit on Market Capacity, Ad Revenue

Pinterest Inc. failed to tell investors about problems related to its user market and advertising revenue, a would-be class suit filed Monday in federal court in California alleges. The social networking platform didn’t disclose how its potential U.S. market was reaching its maximum capacity in 2019, which could cause ad revenue to take a hit, according to the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Click here to read the full article.

2.  Online Educator Misled Investors on Pandemic Prep, Suit Says (subscription may be needed)

K12 Inc. misled investors about its capability to handle the increased demand for virtual learning during the coronavirus pandemic, a would-be class suit says in federal court in Virginia. The online education firm also failed to disclose how it lacked adequate cyberattack protections before a 16-year-old successfully breached its network and knocked out services for several days, the investor complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia says. Click here to read the full article.

3. Jalla V Shell: a Blow to US Style “Class Actions” Before the English Courts, or Welcome Clarity on “Same Interest” Test Under CPR 19.6(1)?

The English courts have, until recently, shown reluctance to encourage the kind of “class-action” regime so beloved in the US. However, last year’s Court of Appeal decision in Lloyd v Google, alongside the relatively new collective action regime for competition claims, suggested a more promising future for “class-action” style proceedings. At first glance, in the recent High Court decision in Jalla v Shell International Trading and Shipping Co Ltd, the English courts appeared to take two steps back from the more expansive approach shown in Lloyd v Google. Mr. Justice Stuart-Smith’s judgment does however provide helpful guidance on representative actions in what is still a very uncertain landscape for multi-party proceedings. It also emphasises that there remain alternative methods of pursuing multi-party litigation, which is perhaps an indication that the UK courts will continue to reserve CPR 19.6 representative actions for low-value data protection claims similar to that in Lloyd v Google. Click here to read the full article.

4. Larry Crowley V Worley Limited: Do Company Directors and Officers Have Anything to ‘Worley’ About?

On 22 October 2020, a single judge of the Federal Court dismissed a shareholder class action against Worley Limited (Worley) in Crowley v Worley Limited [2020] FCA 1522 (Crowley v Worley). This is the first shareholder class action won by a respondent in Australia, and only the second shareholder class action to go to judgment after trial. On 19 November 2020, Shine Lawyers announced that they would appeal the judgment. In advance of the appeal, MinterEllison lawyers have analysed the key takeaways of the primary judge’s landmark decision, which (unless reversed on appeal) remain good law in Australia. Click here to read the full article.

5. Closing the Class: Uncertainties and Challenges for Class Action Settlements in Australia

Earlier this year, two decisions of the New South Wales Court of Appeal have challenged the appropriateness of what had been a standard class action procedural step known as “class closure”. The New South Wales Court of Appeal held that: 1) the Court does not have power to make class closure orders under section 183 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), where the outcome is to effectively extinguish the claims of non-registering group members; and 2) the Court can make orders exhorting registration, but cannot approve a registration notice that includes a reference to the parties’ intention to apply in the future for orders extinguishing the claims of non-registering group members if settlement occurs. This development will likely add to the complexities in resolving class action litigation, particularly where there are numerous potential group members or where the claims of group members vary considerably. Click here to read the full article.

Subscribe to FRT’s Monthly Newsletter

Financial Recovery Technologies’ Shareholder Litigation Fast Five provides you with the top news in shareholder class actions. This is your exclusive summary of the latest industry developments related to settled, group and antitrust actions and recovery opportunities. Click here to subscribe.

Learn More

To learn more about how FRT can help your firm maximize recoveries in shareholder class action settlements, contact us at learnmore@frtservices.com.

About FRT

SETTLED CLAIMS  I  PASSIVE GROUP  I  ANTITRUST  I  FUTURE CLAIMS  I  OPT-IN MONITORING  I OPT-OUT MONITORING

Founded in 2008, Financial Recovery Technologies (FRT) is the leading technology-based services firm that helps the investment community identify eligibility, file claims and collect funds made available in securities and other class action settlements. Offering the most comprehensive range of claim filing and monitoring services available, we provide best-in-class eligibility analysis, disbursement auditing and client reporting, and deliver the highest level of accuracy, accountability, and transparency available. For more information, go to www.frtservices.com.

• Follow us on Twitter: @FRTServices
• Follow us on LinkedIn Financial Recovery Technologies
• Email us: learnmore@frtservices.com

This communication and the content found by following any link herein are being provided to you by Financial Recovery Technologies (FRT) for informational purposes only and do not constitute advice. All material presented herein is believed to be reliable but FRT makes no representation or warranty with respect to this communication or such content and expressly disclaims any implied warranty under law. Opinions expressed in this communication may change without prior notice. Firms should always seek legal and financial advice specific to their unique situation and objectives.