US courts are becoming more European.
A plaintiff triggered a lawsuit in Florida against the company behind Pokemon Go (Niantic Inc.) since its T&Cs were “illusory, deceptive, unfair, and/or unconscionable”.
Such privisions gave Niantic the right to unilatrally modify the agreement, to edit or delete one users’s data and similar nice stuff.
Well, the court denied protection to the plaintiff, because:
- he had not yet suffered a damage (good work on the prevention of it, anyway)
- the applicable law was the one from California, which could not be unapplied in Florida.
Bail hearings are being accompanied by algorithms to ensure unbiased outcomes and serve only as a guide. This IT-solution leverages a database of +1,5m hearings, coming from 300 jurisdictions.
On the light of the recent ruling by Mr Justice Hildyard, notes taken by the bank during meetings with their lawyers and any bank employees regarding an internal investigation can be disclosable in court.
A glimpse of light in U.S. Courts. Instead of detention and social services like those you can see in the movies, these young vandals were ordered to visit the holocaust museum and write monthly essays on books written by black, Jewish and Afghan writers, since the “Court purpose #1 is to rehabilitate convicts”.
Another trend lots of legals are not aware of is the funding of litigation (and prisons) from third parties.
Although on the one hand it allows short-resourced parties to afford litigation, this phenomenon also sets some worrisome issues:
- firstly, what if “investors” decide to fund only litigation where sucess’ rate is higher?
- on top of percentages on awarded damages, additional expenses are required (and render the process less profitable): upfront due-diligence, NDA drafting and the funding agreement.
- Although in English litigation, a third-party funder of an unsuccessful litigant could be liable to contribute towards the costs of the other side in proportion to the initial contribution, within arbitration boundaries, this is less clear and it may force the funder to resort to security for its costs.
- conflict(s) of interest may arise
- Privilege and confidentiality may vary across countries.
Further issues come along and the question is once again: is more regulation the answer?
From 1/3/2017 files and cases are stored and exchanged digitally. Gradually, this will involve also Crime and Tax cases.
Litigation funding his gaining momentum in New Zealand too.
Yet, Courts are quite reluctant on them, also because there is no set of rules to regulate such phenomenon.
The two main cases (to date) are Saunders v. Houghton (where the Court accepted the third-party funding) and Waterhouse v. Contractors Bonding (where such feature didn’t go as smooth as planned).
That’s what happens when your Law school fails ABA standards, hides it and still charges tuition fees (60 grans per year).
Despite inducing federal scholarship for almost $50m, the pending lawsuit on Charlotte School of Law (defined the “Law School Scam”) involves only $5m.
Fancy a good laugh? Here is a list of the top 10 most ridiculous lawsuits filed in U.S.
Initiative to show why fair trials are fundamental in a western democracy. Nice video.