We reported last year on the SEC’s and FSA’s bans on short selling in financial companies (see the post by clicking here). The FSA has now published a consultation paper reviewing the short selling measures that it implemented last year, which are due to expire on 16 January 2009. Those measures required disclosure to the market of significant (greater than 0.25% of the issued share capital) short positions in UK financial sector companies and banned the creation of, or increase of existing, short positions in those companies. 


Read More UK: FSA Consults on Changes to Short Selling Rules

As we previously reported here, the American Council of Life Insurers (“ACLI”) submitted a letter to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”) asking the NAIC to consider changing reserve and risk-based capital requirements that it believes are too conservative.  On January 2, 2009, the NAIC issued a press release to announce that its Capital and Surplus Relief Working Group will hold a public hearing on January 27, 2009 at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel in Washington D.C. to gather additional comments and information regarding current reserves and capital requirements. 


Read More NAIC to Hold Public Hearing on Reserve and Capital Relief Proposal

In a recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth  Circuit, Safety National Cas. Corp. v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, No. 06-30262 (5th Cir. Sept. 29, 2008), the court held that the McCarran-Ferguson Act (“McCarran-Ferguson”) does not cause a state law regulating the business of insurance to “reverse preempt” the provisions of a United States treaty. 


Read More Fifth Circuit Rules New York Convention Not “Reverse Preempted” By Louisiana Statute

Springwell, the unsuccessful party in JP Morgan v Springwell, failed to establish a case that the investment bank was liable for Springwell’s investment losses, and the High Court awarded costs on an indemnity basis against it. 
Read More UK: JP Morgan v Springwell: Costs Awarded on Indemnity Basis After Unsuccessful Investment Losses Claim

The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California recently granted a motion to dismiss, without prejudice, for failure to adequately plead the reliance element of a purported securities class action brought under Section 10(b) of the 1934 Securities Exchange Act. 

Read More California Federal Court Grants Motion to Dismiss For Failure to Plead Reliance in Countrywide Private Placement Action

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that a D&O policy’s so-called “Prior Litigation” Exclusion barred coverage for a shareholder derivative action because it was “in any way related” to litigation pending prior to the Prior Litigation Date specified in the policy. 


Read More Eleventh Circuit Broadly Construes Prior Litigation Exclusion

The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California recently granted the defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings in a consolidated shareholder derivative action alleging breach of fiduciary duty against Countrywide’s former directors and officers arising out of Countrywide’s exposure to the subprime crisis. 


Read More California Federal Court Dismisses Shareholder Derivative Action Against Countrywide

In Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Liberty Surplus Ins. Co., No. 08-10544 (11th Cir. Dec. 2, 2008), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit certified to the Florida Supreme Court the question of whether the law of the place of contracting or the law of the place of the insured’s risk governs a coverage dispute arising from a commercial general liability (“CGL”) policy. 


Read More Eleventh Circuit Certifies Conflict-of-Law Question to Florida Supreme Court: Does Law of Place of Contracting or Law of Place of Insured’s Risk Govern Coverage Under CGL Policy?

On December 15, 2008, the United States Supreme Court held that state law fraud claims are not preempted by the federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1331-1341, (“Labeling Act”) or the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) policy on “light” cigarette advertising and sales. 


Read More U.S. Supreme Court Rules That State Law Fraud Claims Are Not Preempted by Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act