The Netherlands as an Attractive Alternative for Settling International Mass Claims

by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
Contact

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision blocking actions by non-U.S. investors related to securities in companies not listed in the U.S. and traded outside the U.S. (the “foreign-cubed-cases”), Morrison v. Natinonal Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S.Ct. 2869 (2010), the Netherlands has proven to be an attractive forum for bringing international securities class actions. The Netherlands’ attractiveness as a potential forum for these types of cases was further strengthened by a 17 January 2012 landmark decision of the Amsterdam Court of Appeal (“the Court”), in which the Court declared an international collective settlement binding in a case where none of the potentially liable parties and only a limited number of the potential claimants were domiciled in the Netherlands. That decision will likely be recognized by all European Members States, as well as Switzerland, Iceland, and Norway. The Netherlands is the only European country where a collective settlement may bind an entire class, albeit on an “opt out” basis. This makes the Netherlands an attractive venue for settling international mass claims.

Background of the Case
Converium Holding AG (“Converium”) is a Swiss reinsurance company (currently known as SCOR Holding AG). Converium was a wholly owned subsidiary of Zürich Financial Services Ltd (“ZFS”) until 2001, when ZFS sold all its Converium shares through an IPO. Converium shares were listed on the SWX Swiss Exchange and Converium ADSs were listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Converium’s share price declined after the company announced increases in its loss reserves in the period from 2002 through 2004. These announcements led to securities class actions in the United States against Converium and ZFS on behalf of a worldwide putative class. The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “U.S. Court”) certified a class consisting of all U.S. persons who had purchased Converium securities on any exchange, as well as all persons - regardless of their residence - who had purchased Converium securities on a U.S. exchange (the “U.S. Purchasers”). The U.S. Court excluded from the class all non-U.S. persons who had purchased Converium securities on any non-U.S. exchange (the “Non-U.S. Purchasers”). The U.S. class action was settled and these settlements (the “U.S. Settlements”) were approved by the U.S. Court. Both Converium and ZFS then settled the potential claims of all Non-U.S. Purchasers with a Dutch foundation representing the Non-U.S. Purchasers (the “Non-U.S. Settlements”). The Non-U.S. Purchasers were predominantly domiciled in Switzerland and the U.K. Only a few were domiciled in the Netherlands.

The Court’s Decision
The Court’s decision on jurisdiction followed substantially the same line of reasoning as its important “Shell decision” of 29 May 2009. Shell c.s. / Dexia Bank, LJN BI 5744; NJ 2009, 506. In Shell, a Dutch/British entity had recategorized certain of its oil and gas reserves in 2004. The corporate entity reached a worldwide settlement with its shareholders, except for those in the U.S. The Court declared this settlement agreement binding on all shareholders throughout the world, giving full weight to its terms.

The Converium settlement goes one step further than the Shell settlement. In Converium, none of the potentially liable parties and only a limited number of the interested persons were domiciled in the Netherlands. While the Court emphasized the significance of a Dutch foundation representing the interested persons and having to distribute the settlement relief under the settlement agreement, the language of the opinion suggests that even without any interested persons domiciled in the Netherlands the Court could have jurisdiction to declare the settlement binding. In its earlier provisional decision, the Court explicitly referred to the limitations for the U.S. courts to do the same in securities and anti-trust cases as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank.

In Converium, a number of the defendants argued that the amount of the settlement for the Non-U.S. Purchasers under the Non-U.S. Settlement concluded by Converium was unreasonable, because the amount to be received by the U.S. Purchasers under the U.S. Settlements was relatively higher. The Court dismissed this objection on the ground that the legal position of the Non-U.S. Purchasers differed substantially from the legal position of the U.S. Purchasers, because the Non-U.S. Purchasers had been excluded from the class by the U.S. Court and no litigation by Non-U.S. Purchasers had been initiated outside of the U.S.

The same defendants also argued that the amount of settlement relief was unreasonable, because the fees for U.S. plaintiffs’ lead counsel, to be deducted from the settlement relief, were too high. The Court rejected this objection, holding that the work in connection with the settlement had been carried out for a substantial part within the U.S. by U.S. law firms and that what is considered customary and reasonable in the U.S. may be taken into account in applying the reasonableness test under Dutch law.

The Court also ruled that the requirement of “representativity” under Dutch law had been met because the Dutch foundation representing the interested persons had various participants and supporters, including shareholder associations and institutional shareholders, domiciled in Switzerland and the U.K., where most known Non-U.S. Purchasers were domiciled.

Implications
The Netherlands is the only European jurisdiction offering a procedure to declare a collective settlement binding on all class members on an “opt out” basis. Using the Shell decision as a precedent, the Converium decision confirms that the Court not only has jurisdiction to declare an international collective settlement binding on all class members, irrespective of their domicile, but also has the appetite to approve such settlements even if the parties to the settlement and the class members only have a limited connection to the Netherlands.

In theory, all EU Member States, Switzerland, Iceland, and Norway, will have to recognize the Converium decision. No case law has yet to address this issue and local law may impact the reception of the Convenium decision in other European countries.

The Converium decision strongly suggests the attractiveness of the Netherlands as an important venue for facilitating international settlements. This would appear to be the case whether the settlement arises from a class action and irrespective of the country in which the litigation took place.

Contact information
If you have any questions or require further information, you may contact Ruud Hermans at ruud.hermans@debrauw.com or Jan De Bie Leuveling Tjeenk at jan.tjeenk@debrauw.com, partners at the Amsterdam office of De Brauw (www.debrauw.com). The article is submitted by Rurik van Opstal, lawyer at De Brauw and currently on an internship at Quinn Emanuel, Los Angeles office.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
Contact
more
less

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.