In recent years collective litigation procedures have spread across the globe, accompanied by hot controversy and normative debate. Yet virtually nothing is known about how these procedures operate in practice. Based on extensive documentary and interview research, this volume presents the results of the first comparative investigation of class actions and group litigation 'in action'. Produced by a multinational team of legal scholars, this book spans research from ten different countries in the Americas, Europe, Asia and the Middle East, including common law and civil law jurisdictions. The contributors conclude that to understand how class actions work in practice, one needs to know the cultural factors that shape claiming, the financial arrangements that enable or impede litigation, and how political actors react when mass claims erupt. Substantive law and procedural rules matter, but culture, economics and politics matter at least as much. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of law, business and politics. It will also be of use to public policy makers looking to respond to mass claims; financial analysts looking to understanding the potential impact of new legal instruments; and global lawyers who litigate transnationally. Contributors: A. Barroilhet, C. Cameron, N. Creutzfeldt, M.A. Gomez, A. Halfmeier, D.R. Hensler, C. Hodges, K.-C. Huang, J. Kalajdzic, A. Klement, B. Stier, E. Thornburg, I. Tzankova, S. Voet

This groundbreaking volume of The ANNALS provides the first overview of class action laws and related mechanisms around the world. It features 30 "country reports" by leading scholars, describing the adoption, characteristics and consequences to date of class action and non-class group litigation procedures ranging across North and Latin America, Australia, Asia and Europe. What were once seen as singular disputes between individuals (or between an individual and a corporation) are now viewed increasingly as group struggles against multinational corporations and other global institutions. This escalating trend of class actions and group litigation in private civil court cases extends well beyond the interest of lawyers. The social, economic, and political ramifications of permitting class actions are potentially vast-not just in the United States, but increasingly throughout the world, as in less than a decade the number of countries that permit representative litigation by private actors has multiplied dramatically. The United States has led the way in these developments. Adopted by the U.S. federal judiciary in 1966, group litigation made it easier for individuals to come forward to claim remedies, including money damages, on behalf of large groups of similarly affected individuals. Class actions dramatically shift the balance of power between the "haves" and the "have-nots." Yet as this trend has grown in the United States. and has taken hold around the globe, little analysis has been done on the costs or outcomes of group litigation - and even less is known about litigants' and lawyers' choices to prosecute class actions. There is impassioned debate over the cost and benefits of class litigation in the United States. Does it impose costs on economic factors that are larger than any benefit it creates - thereby diminishing social welfare? By placing responsibility for social reform and public policy in the hands of appointed judges or lay jurors - rather than elected legislators - does it produce outcomes that are not supported by the majority of citizens? In December 2007, Stanford Law School and the Oxford Centre for Socio-Legal Studies organized an international conference that studied the global spread of class actions and group litigation procedures. Scholars, jurists, and practitioners from around the world gathered to discuss and debate the use of group litigation procedures and initiate a research project on the evolution of class actions and aggregate litigation worldwide. This volume of The ANNALS is one result of that conference. Students, scholars and policymakers will find this anthology of reports to be an essential overview, providing a solid understanding of the effects of class actions around the globe.

This groundbreaking volume of The ANNALS provides the first overview of class action laws and related mechanisms around the world. It features 30 "country reports" by leading scholars, describing the adoption, characteristics and consequences to date of class action and non-class group litigation procedures ranging across North and Latin America, Australia, Asia and Europe. What were once seen as singular disputes between individuals (or between an individual and a corporation) are now viewed increasingly as group struggles against multinational corporations and other global institutions. This escalating trend of class actions and group litigation in private civil court cases extends well beyond the interest of lawyers. The social, economic, and political ramifications of permitting class actions are potentially vast-not just in the United States, but increasingly throughout the world, as in less than a decade the number of countries that permit representative litigation by private actors has multiplied dramatically. The United States has led the way in these developments. Adopted by the U.S. federal judiciary in 1966, group litigation made it easier for individuals to come forward to claim remedies, including money damages, on behalf of large groups of similarly affected individuals. Class actions dramatically shift the balance of power between the "haves" and the "have-nots." Yet as this trend has grown in the United States. and has taken hold around the globe, little analysis has been done on the costs or outcomes of group litigation - and even less is known about litigants' and lawyers' choices to prosecute class actions. There is impassioned debate over the cost and benefits of class litigation in the United States. Does it impose costs on economic factors that are larger than any benefit it creates - thereby diminishing social welfare? By placing responsibility for social reform and public policy in the hands of appointed judges or lay jurors - rather than elected legislators - does it produce outcomes that are not supported by the majority of citizens? In December 2007, Stanford Law School and the Oxford Centre for Socio-Legal Studies organized an international conference that studied the global spread of class actions and group litigation procedures. Scholars, jurists, and practitioners from around the world gathered to discuss and debate the use of group litigation procedures and initiate a research project on the evolution of class actions and aggregate litigation worldwide. This volume of The ANNALS is one result of that conference. Students, scholars and policymakers will find this anthology of reports to be an essential overview, providing a solid understanding of the effects of class actions around the globe.

Presents the most comprehensive description to date of the longest-running mass tort litigation in U.S. history. Asbestos litigation is the longest-running mass tort litigation in U.S. history. Through 2002, approximately 730,000 individuals have brought claims against some 8,400 business entities, and defendants and insurers have spent a total of USD70 billion on litigation. Building on previous RAND briefings, the authors report on what happened to those who have claimed injury from asbestos, what happened to the defendants in those cases, and how lawyers and judges have managed the cases.

Class action lawsuits--allowing one or a few plaintiffs to represent many who seek redress--have long been controversial. The current controversy, centered on lawsuits for money damages, is characterized by sharp disagreement among stakeholders about the kinds of suits being filed, whether plaintiffs' claims are meritorious, and whether resolutions to class actions are fair or socially desirable. Ultimately, these concerns lead many to wonder, Are class actions worth their costs to society and to business? Do they do more harm than good? To describe the landscape of current damage class action litigation, elucidate problems, and identify solutions, the RAND Institute for Civil Justice conducted a study using qualitative and quantitative research methods. The researchers concluded that the controversy over damage class actions has proven intractable because it implicates deeply held but sharply contested ideological views among stakeholders. Nevertheless, many of the political antagonists agree that class action practices merit improvement. The authors argue that both practices and outcomes could be substantially improved if more judges would supervise class action litigation more actively and scrutinize proposed settlements and fee awards more carefully. Educating and empowering judges to take more responsibility for case outcomes--and ensuring that they have the resources to do so--can help the civil justice system achieve a better balance between the public goals of class actions and the private interests that drive them.