Australian directors still exposed to the long arm of US law

insurance/national-australia-bank/

5 August 2010
| By Milana Pokrajac |

Australian directors have been warned they are still exposed to offshore legal action following United States President Barack Obama signing into law the high profile Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act).

A recent decision made by the US Supreme Court barred Australian shareholders from launching a class action against the National Australia Bank (NAB) in the US Courts due to lack of jurisdiction, but the highly publicised case of Morrison v National Australia Bank has now been partially overturned with the reforms introduced by the US President.

According to Kemsley Brennan, special counsel in the insurance group of law firm Colin Biggers & Paisley, Australian directors should take note of the aggressive stance of US lawmakers and not become complacent about their US exposures.

“The long arm of the US law is alive and well and still reaching into our backyard,” Brennan said.

“There was much initial excitement that the Morrison decision had brought an end to so-called ‘foreign-cubed’ lawsuits, which have caused Australian companies and their directors much anxiety over the attempts of US regulators and courts to impose US law beyond its borders. But that excitement has quickly disappeared, with the US regulators wasting no time in clawing back their powers,” he added.

Shareholders of NAB who purchased the bank’s shares in Australia alleged that its wholly-owned US subsidiary, HomeSide Lending Inc, had overstated the present value of fees it would generate from the servicing of the mortgages.

Once the bank disclosed in 2001 that HomeSide’s servicing and goodwill had been overstated by approximately $2.2 billion, NAB’s share price fell.

The plaintiff shareholders then brought proceedings in the US courts alleging securities fraud against NAB and HomeSide, along with four of its directors.

The signing into law of the Dodd-Frank Act includes a partial overruling of the Morrison case, due to the Securities Exchange Commission and the US Department of Justice regaining jurisdiction over some foreign transactions.

“At present, Australian companies and directors can still be sued by non-US investors if their companies are listed in the US,” Brennan said.

Brennan added that on top of this, Australian companies and directors needed to be alert to broader US litigation risks driven by US regulators and plaintiff class action lawyers pursuing violations of US anti-trust, product liability or employment laws.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

The succession dilemma is more than just a matter of commitments.This isn’t simply about younger vs. older advisers. It’...

1 week 3 days ago

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

1 month ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

1 month 1 week ago

AMP has settled on two court proceedings: one class action which affected superannuation members and a second regarding insurer policies. ...

3 days 17 hours ago

ASIC has released the results of the latest adviser exam, with August’s pass mark improving on the sitting from a year ago. ...

1 week 6 days ago

The inquiry into the collapse of Dixon Advisory and broader wealth management companies by the Senate economics references committee will not be re-adopted. ...

2 weeks 6 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo