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 50

English Law Schemes of Arrangement: Class Composition
  • Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • August 24 2016

Having received the sanction of antitrust regulators in Europe, the U.S., China and South Africa, the planned merger of brewing giants AB InBev and

D.C. Circuit Affirms Expansive Reading Of Public Disclosure Bar
  • Sidley Austin LLP
  • USA
  • July 5 2016

In a recent opinion by Judge Wilkins, the D.C. Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a qui tam action against Phillip Morris, United States ex rel Oliver

Philip Morris Asia Limited (Hong Kong) v. The Commonwealth of Australia: Permanent Court of Arbitration Tribunal Publishes Redacted Version of Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility
  • Dorsey & Whitney LLP
  • Australia, Hong Kong
  • May 24 2016

The Permanent Court of Arbitration (“PCA”) has just released the full award of the Tribunal in Philip Morris Asia Limited (Hong Kong) v. The

Butts out for Philip Morris - lessons for structuring investments to take advantage of investment treaty protections
  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • Australia, Hong Kong
  • May 17 2016

Last night the reasons for the decision in Philip Morris' billion dollar challenge to Australia's plain packaging legislation were released. The

Ohio federal judge delivers big win for defense bar in consumer protection case
  • Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP
  • USA
  • March 27 2013

Manufacturers of consumer products scored a double-win in a recent decision by Judge Sara Lioi of the United States District Court for the Northern

What is Buckman?
  • Reed Smith LLP
  • USA
  • August 31 2012

We’re rather tired of the other side, abetted by the flawed reasoning in Desiano v. Warner Lambert & Co., 467 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2006), aff’d by equally divided court, 552 U.S. 440 (2008), attempting to distinguish Buckman Co. v. Plaintiffs Legal Committee, 531 U.S. 341 (2001), into oblivion as relating to nothing more than a “separate, freestanding” claim for “fraud on the FDA.”

Substance over form?
  • Alston & Bird LLP
  • USA
  • September 28 2011

Altria lost an appeal from an adverse jury verdict on its SILO and LILO transactions.

Absent allegations of detriment, court snuffs out unjust enrichment claim
  • Kelley Drye & Warren LLP
  • USA
  • September 26 2011

CLEARY v. PHILIP MORRIS INC. (August 25, 2011) A class-action complaint brought against Philip Morris in 1998, and later amended, sought disgorgement of profits under an unjust enrichment theory, alleging that Philip Morris concealed facts about the dangers of cigarettes in its marketing and advertising.

ALJ Gildea rules on motions to supplement notice of prior art and to exclude expert reports in Certain Reduced Ignition Proclivity Cigarette Paper Wrappers and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-756).)
  • Oblon
  • USA
  • September 23 2011

On September 15, 2011, ALJ E. James Gildea issued the public version of Order No. 19 (dated September 6, 2011), denying Complainant Schweitzer-Mauduit International, Inc.’s (“SWM”) motion to strike portions of Respondents’ expert reports, and granting certain Respondents’ motion to supplement their notice of prior art and contention interrogatory responses in Certain Reduced Ignition Proclivity Cigarette Paper Wrappers and Products Containing Same (Inv. No. 337-TA-756).

Employers suffer setback in 401(k) plan fee litigation
  • Quarles & Brady LLP
  • USA
  • May 30 2011

On April 11, 2011, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago issued a ruling that was a setback for employers fighting lawsuits claiming excessive 401(k) plan fees and other 401(k) plan mismanagement.