We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results:1-10 of 347

“Final order” in Supreme Court mutual fund fee case: more lessons for fund boards
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • July 31 2015

Having decided Jones v. Harris 559 U.S. 335, 346 (2010), the US Supreme Court sent the case back to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals for application


Supreme Court ruling in 401(k) fee case extends statute of limitations for breach of fiduciary duty claim
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • June 9 2015

On May 18, 2015, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held in Tibble v. Edison International that in addition to the fiduciary duty to


Optionally fully convertible debentures whether securities or not
  • Singh & Associates
  • India
  • June 21 2013

The Supreme Court on 31st August, 2012 in Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited ('SIRECL') and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation Limited


Government enforcement actions: Supreme Court holds “Discovery Rule” does not apply to general federal statute of limitations for government enforcement actions seeking civil penalties
  • Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
  • USA
  • February 27 2013

On February 27, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the five-year statute of limitations for Securities and Exchange Commission


Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders: Supreme Court rules regarding liability of secondary actors
  • Vedder Price PC
  • USA
  • October 18 2011

On June 13, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders, 564 U.S. ___ (2011).


Seventh Circuit again finds that sponsor's offering of retail mutual funds in defined-contribution plan does not run afoul of ERISA duties
  • Jorden Burt LLP
  • USA
  • September 12 2011

Following its earlier holding in Hecker v. Deere & Co., 556 F.3d 575 (7th Cir. 2009), the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has again rejected ERISA breach of fiduciary duty claims brought against a plan sponsor by plan participants challenging the sponsor's offering of "retail" mutual funds as investment options in its defined-contribution retirement plan.


High Court addresses rule 10b-5
  • Jorden Burt LLP
  • USA
  • August 18 2011

The Supreme Court recently issued two opinions regarding rule 10b-5.


Supreme Court rules on who is the “maker” of statements under Section 10(b)
  • Vedder Price PC
  • USA
  • August 1 2011

On June 13, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in Janus Capital Group, Inc. v. First Derivative Traders.


Supreme Court limits liability of mutual fund advisor for fund prospectus misstatements
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • July 21 2011

The Supreme Court continues to limit private rights of action under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5.


Supreme Court limits 10b-5 claims
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • July 12 2011

In Janus Capital Group v. First Derivative Traders, No. 09525 (decided June 13, 2011), a divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an investment adviser to a mutual fund cannot be held directly liable under Rule 10b-5 for misstatements in the fund's prospectus.