Abstract
For the first time, the CJEU has ruled in VEB v BP on the court competent for deciding liability suits regarding misinformation on the secondary securities market. Surprisingly, the Court localises the damage resulting from misinformation on the secondary financial markets at a single place, that where the financial instruments in question were listed. This raises the question of how the decision can be squared with earlier cases like Kolassa or Lither and other precedent. It is also unclear how the new ruling applies to special cases like dual listings or electronic trading venues. Furthermore, the judgment is of utmost importance for the jurisdiction over collective actions by postulating that they should not be treated any differently than individual actions, without clarifying what this means in practice. This contribution analyses these questions, puts the judgment in larger context, and discusses its repercussions for future cases.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1-27 |
Number of pages | 27 |
Journal | Journal of Private International Law |
Volume | 18 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 6 Jun 2022 |
Austrian Fields of Science 2012
- 505004 Financial law
- 505032 Civil procedure law
Keywords
- Brussels Ia Regulation
- Rome II Regulation
- collective action
- dual listings
- electronic trading venues
- fraud on the market
- lex mercatus
- liability for misinforming financial markets
- place of damage
- place of harm