Reed Smith LLP (LexBlog Australia)
23 results for Reed Smith LLP (LexBlog Australia)
-
Legal challenges in autonomous flight: Things to consider before investing in an aircraft that flies itself
Today, some commentators have even argued that autonomous flight is likely to become a reality much earlier than autonomous driving. However, a distinct issue is the extent to which artificial intelligence (AI) may be used in autonomous flight.
-
We have questions: Clem Newton-Brown, founder and CEO of Skyportz Australia
With a background in law, politics, and transport services, Clem Newton-Brown is well placed to facilitate the development of vertiports in Australia and to help connect the various moving pieces of the local advanced air mobility (‘AAM’) puzzle. Through Skyportz, his team is working to assemble the expertise and investment needed to make this happen,...
-
Hoping for the best but preparing for the worst
It is now a unanimous conclusion that the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the worst ever crisis in the history of the aviation industry. In 2020, we saw major airlines such as Avianca, LATAM, Thai Airways, Virgin Atlantic and Virgin Australia enter into formal insolvency or restructuring proceedings, with the majority of other airlines being...
-
Post-Albrecht Preemption Pervasively Pummels Pradaxa Plaintiffs
This year has seen a lot – and most of it would not fall into the positive category. The pandemic; severe wildfires in the U.S. and Australia; record setting tropical storms in the Atlantic; social unrest over police brutality; explosion in Beirut. Unfortunately, we could go on. Even more unfortunate is the fact that all...
-
Case Note: What does ‘give possession’ mean under the Cape Town Convention?
Wells Fargo Trust Company, National Association (trustee) v VB Leaseco Pty Ltd (administrators appointed) [2020] FCA 1269 In a significant decision for aircraft leasing and finance, the Federal Court of Australia last week provided important guidance on the meaning of the phrase ‘give possession of the aircraft object to the creditor’ as used in Article...
-
Notes from a large island: Australia and its aircraft models
Australians are well known as keen travellers, and our geographical isolation has meant that air travel has long been a very important part of this aspect of our national identity. Perhaps unusually, this has grown into a strong local affinity for certain models of aircraft – especially the big ones. But is this set to...
-
ICOs Receive Guidance from Abu Dhabi FSRA
Earlier this month, the Financial Services Regulation Authority of the Abu Dhabi Global Market joined the ranks of various regulatory agencies from countries, including Australia, Canada, and the United States that have addressed ICOs, by issuing Supplementary Guidance on the regulation of ICOs and virtual currencies. The Guidance offers parameters for classifying, for legal and...
-
Sanchez v. Crocs, Inc.: The Tenth Circuit Addresses Extraterritoriality
In Sanchez v. Crocs, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 13285 (10th Cir. 2016), the Tenth Circuit addressed whether, after Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 561 U.S. 247 (2010), a plaintiff has standing, under § 10(b) of the Securities and Exchange Act (“Exchange Act”), to pursue claims in a United States federal court for its...
-
A Frye Opinion By Any Other Name: Zoloft Plaintiffs’ Experts Excluded in Philadelphia
We spent the weekend in the Boston area, visiting the Drug and Device Law Rock Climber for “parents’ weekend.” Saturday’s schedule was replete with activities: a keynote speech by the university president, lectures on topics academic and not, an informative session on the school’s “semester abroad” program (the DDLRC has informed us that she hopes to spend next spring in...
-
Australian Data Protection Authority Issues Guidelines On Securing Personal Information
On 19 January 2015, the Australian data protection authority, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC), released an updated information security guide: ‘Guide to securing personal information.’ The Guide aims to help organisations meet their data security obligations under the Australian Privacy Principles (APPS) that provide the framework for Australia’s Privacy Amendment (Enh
-
Further reform in Australia
Australia’s privacy protection reform laws came into force in mid-March, making significant changes to the regulation of data. Further reform is now on the horizon, with the Australian Law Reform Commission (the Commission) publishing a discussion paper titled, ‘Serious Invasions of Privacy in the Digital Era’ (Discussion Paper). The Commission is carrying out an inquiry...
-
Australian Data Protection Authority Issues Further Guidelines On Australian Privacy Principles
The Australian data protection authority, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC), has issued two sets of guidelines further to our previous blog analysing earlier guidelines issued on the Australian Privacy Principles (APPS) that will provide the framework for Australia’s Privacy Amendment (Enhancing Privacy Protection) Act 2012 scheduled to take effect beginning 12 March...
-
Post-Morrison, State Law Rather Than Federal Supports Claims By Non-U.S. Investors for Alleged Securities Fraud
We have been following the law’s development since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank (No. 08-1191). Morrison held that Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 did not provide a private cause of action in “foreign-cubed” cases—cases where foreign plaintiffs sue foreign...
-
Court Dismisses Both “Foreign Cubed” as Well as “Foreign Squared” Securities Claims Based on Morrison
In the absence of appellate guidance, District Courts continue to apply or expand the ruling of Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., No. 08-1191 (June 24, 2010), the first “foreign-cubed” securities action to appear before the Supreme Court—in which (i) non-U.S. plaintiffs, (ii) sued a non-U.S. issuer, (iii) based on securities transactions outside of the United...
-
Morrison Strikes Again — District Court in D.C. Modifies International, Industry-wide Tobacco Judgment Only As Against BATCo
We have posted many times on last year’s U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank (No. 08-1191), which held that Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 did not provide a private cause of action in “foreign-cubed” cases—cases where foreign plaintiffs sue foreign defendants for misconduct in connection with securities traded...
-
Southern District of New York Courts Are Not Alone in Dismissing Securities Fraud Claims Under Morrison
Recall (how can one forget!) that the Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank (No. 08-1191), held that Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 did not provide a private cause of action in “foreign-cubed” cases—cases where foreign plaintiffs sue foreign defendants for misconduct in connection with securities traded on foreign...
-
Morrison and International Practice in Financial Services and Products: Scorecard Nine Months In
It’s time to take quick stock of Morrison v. National Australia Bank (No. 08-1191). It will be recalled that in that case the Supreme Court held that Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 did not provide a private cause of action in “foreign-cubed” cases—cases where foreign plaintiffs sue foreign defendants for misconduct...
-
District Court Extends Morrison Again, Dismissing Not-So-“Foreign-Cubed” Claims — ’33 Act Claims by U.S. Plaintiffs
Twice recently (here and here) we posted summaries of decisions extending the Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank (No. 08-1191)(24 June 2010), holding that Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 did not provide a private cause of action in “foreign-cubed” cases—cases where “foreign” plaintiffs sue “foreign” defendants for misconduct in connection...
-
Supreme Court Morrison Decision Expanded To Dismiss Claims Where U.S. Swap Agreement Is Pegged to Non-U.S. Stock
In the area of international litigation, the District Court decision in Elliott Associates, et al. v. Porsche Automobil Holding SE, et al., 10 Civ. 0532 (HB) (S.D.N.Y. 30 Dec. 2010), represents a noteworthy extension of the holding of Morrison v. Australia National Bank, 130 S.Ct. 2869 (2010), which we have written about here and here. ...
-
Extraterritorial Application of Federal Act Both Congressionally Justified and Constitutional in the Case of the Torture Act (Eleventh Circuit) But Not in the Case of the Lanham Act, on the Facts (Ninth Circuit)
Prior posts discussed Morrison v. National Australia Bank (No. 08-1191), where the Court held that the federal securities laws did not apply to extraterritorial conduct in a so-called foreign cubed case (foreign plaintiffs sue foreign defendants for misconduct in connection with securities traded on foreign exchanges). Notwithstanding the press generated by and the extensive judicial treatment...
-
Congressional Legislation to Overturn Morrison v. National Australia Bank
The passage of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (H.R. 7143) (the “Act”) limits the Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australian Bank Ltd., No. 08-1191 (June 24, 2010), to private rights of action. The Act leaves open the possibility that Morrison will be completely overturned by legislation following a mandatory...
-
Morrison v. National Australia Bank Redux: The potentially even greater impact to international practice of the “other” holding of Morrison: the judicial power to hear a case vs. whether the statute applies to the challenged conduct.
The substantial amount of press and commentary generated by the second holding of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank, discussed in our post of 7/16/10, has overshadowed the potential importance of the first holding of that decision, which has attracted little attention. In fact, we have only one commentator on...
-
The US Supreme Court’s “foreign-cubed” ruling in Morrison v. Nat’l Australia Bank: Much ado about how much?
In the last “international litigation” case of the Term, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank (No. 08-1191) held that Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 did not provide a private cause of action in “foreign-cubed” cases—cases where foreign plaintiffs sue foreign defendants for misconduct in connection with...