Securities class action litigation have continuously skyrocketed over the past years. This trend is expected to grow in fiscal year 2020 as companies constantly engage in global expansions making securities markets more seemingly interconnected. With this, companies are encouraged to prepare for significant changes as well as potential risks and pitfalls. Being updated with the trends and recent court decisions to mitigate the possibility of setbacks is essentially recommended.
The number of class action lawsuits across industries has significantly proliferated over the years, creating a profound impact on the regulatory and litigation landscapes. Because of this, the climate of class action litigation continues to remain uncertain and the need to be abreast of any emerging development must always be underscored. More importantly, businesses and their counsel must keep themselves in the know of the latest regulatory updates and up-to-date litigation tools and strategies to successfully win this type of lawsuit.
Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of consumer class action lawsuits drastically upsurged in various industries. The regulatory paradigm has also significantly evolved with recent court decisions shedding light on future class action lawsuits. As the landscape remains uncertain, businesses and their counsel should keep themselves in the know of any emerging development in this field of law. They must also plan for effective litigation strategies to avoid mishaps.
Several regulatory updates and trends on consumer law have resulted in thousands of consumer class actions over the last few years. Concurrently, the present economic upheaval brought by the COVID-19 pandemic fueled a spike in the number of consumer lawsuits filed from various industries.
The COVID-19 pandemic is reshaping antitrust law enforcement across the globe. Recognizing the need for a closer cooperation among private businesses, the US government seems to be more flexible now in reviewing COVID-19-related competitor collaborations. In April, both the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced the expedited seven-day evaluation procedure, which typically takes months for traditional business reviews.
Prompted by the Biden administration’s aggressive focus on market competition, the past year has witnessed notable antitrust enforcement activities in several key industries. Furthermore, recurring debates over class certification standards continue to shake up the legal landscape for antitrust lawsuits.
Class actions remain at the forefront of in-house counsel’s concerns and top legal spend.
The rising competition among several industries including the healthcare and digital platforms has continuously challenged economic fairness and posed compliance hurdles for practitioners specifically under the Sherman Act. Some of the violations include price fixing, rigging contract bids, and allocating consumers between businesses that should be competing for them.
In the class certification stage, plaintiffs bear an evidentiary burden to satisfy Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. District courts are also required to consider all probative evidence regardless of overlaps or other merit issues, especially with the inclusion of unharmed class members. Recent decisions released by the Supreme Court in Goldman Sachs and TransUnion clearly define this mandate.
Class certification standards continue to evolve as new litigation trends emerge and sweeping decisions come down from courts. In the antitrust class action landscape, recent issues include the use of statistical analysis, the preponderance of evidence standards, and the resolution of conflicts regarding the number of uninjured class members.
Consumer financial services companies continue to face unprecedented regulatory and enforcement scrutiny and increasing litigation. Several types of consumer class actions cause disruption to many businesses. Consequently, the increasing number of this type of litigation as well as its size, complexity, and interplay with existing regulatory actions may damage businesses if not handled correctly.
