VEB v BP: Centralisation of special jurisdiction in case of purely financial damages resulting from misinformation spread on the secondary securities market

Authors T.A.G. Bens 1

The judgment of the CJEU in VEB v BP confirms that the occurrence of purely financial loss in a bank account or investment account is in itself insufficient to allocate jurisdiction on the basis of Article 7(2) of the Brussels Ibis Regulation to the courts of the Member State where that account is held.2 Provided that these losses result from investment decisions taken as a result of misinformation spread on the secondary securities market by a listed company domiciled in a Member State, only the courts of the Member States in which that company has complied with statutory reporting obligations for the purpose of its listing on the stock exchange, can have jurisdiction on the basis of the place where the damage occurred. The latter connecting factor is far more suitable for collective claims than the place where an investment account is held, as it localises purely financial damage in a single place. However, the judgement also raises questions on whether the development of the regime for collective redress within the framework of the Brussels Ibis Regulation should be left to such piecemeal interventions by the CJEU.

Get access to top articles

Get access to highly qualified specialist journals and derivatives.

Login, subscribe or purchase this article to continue reading.

Login

Related articles

Judge Siofra O'Leary, President of the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg, on Protocol 16 of the European Convention of Human Rights
Mass Claims · 2022-2
Article · 17-01-2023
Author: D. Fairgrieve
    We are delighted to have the opportunity to discuss with you the advisory opinion procedure under Protocol 16 of the European Convention of Human Rights.   1. Maybe we could start by discussing the evolution of the number of individual...
For Justice, Not Profit: Public Funding of Collective Redress
Mass Claims · 2022-2
Article · 17-01-2023
Author: J. Kalajdzic
Third-party litigation funding (TPLF) is widely viewed outside of Canada and the United States as indispensable to a viable collective litigation regime. Australia, for example, has a robust TPLF industry that has funded hundreds of class a...
Encountering Class Actions in Swedish Law and Society
Mass Claims · 2022-2
Article · 17-01-2023
Author: M.M. Molavi
Class actions in Sweden are not flourishing. This article examines why the oldest class action regime in Scandinavia has not developed into anything more than a peripheral addition to the Swedish legal landscape, drawing on relevant procedu...
Bundling of claims by way of assignment in Italy
Mass Claims · 2022-2
Article · 17-01-2023
Author: G.A. Afferni
Bundling of claims by assignment (the so-called assignment model) is rapidly emerging in the European Union ("EU") as the favorite alternative to group actions for damages (either collective or representative).2 This is particularly true fo...
The role of class representatives in mass claims: Establishing the Class Representatives Network in the UK
Mass Claims · 2022-2
Article · 17-01-2023
Author: K.W. Wellington
In 2015 a new Consumer Rights Act2 entered the statute books in the UK. It propelled the country's consumer rights framework into the modern era, bringing together a variety of hitherto disparate rules and regulations. But tucked away at th...
Country reports
Mass Claims · 2022-2
Article · 17-01-2023
England and WalesAnna Dannreuther and Jackie McArthurCase lawMunicípio de Mariana and others v BHP Group (UK) Ltd (formerly BHP Group plc) and another [2022] EWCA Civ 951, [2022] 1 WLR 4691 This litigation concerns the collapse of the Fundã...