G.O. Abolonin, 

Candidate of Legal Sciences, Consultant on Legal Regulation of Investment, 

Judicial Protection of Rights and Legitimate Interests of Foreign Investors 

The article is devoted to the application of the institute of class actions in the USA legal system. There are applied specific rules in the trial of class actions: each of the parties must bear its own legal costs associated with the civil case. All legal costs incurred in the case from the losing party are not awarded to the party in whose favor was the decision of the court. Also institute of punitive damages is applied, which is a remedial order under which the court awards the victim of the offense the sum of financial compensation for any damage or losses in excess of its real character. It is considered that by doing so the court operates in the public interest by punishing the offender for the commission of a violation of rights and legitimate interests of the person and thus providing a preventive effect to prevent further offenses. 

Keywords: civil procedure of the USA; class actions.

References

Kheel T.W. Guide to Fair Employment Practices. Prentice-Hall, 1964. Rluger R. Simple Justice. New York, 1975. 

Sovern M.I. Legal Restraints on Racial Discrimination in Employment. New York, 1966. Holland S.S., Wetzel J.R. Labor Force and Employment in 1964. Monthly Labor Review, 1965, vol. 88, no. 343.

Alexander J.C. The Value of Bad News in Securities Class Actions. University of California Los Angeles Law Review, 1994, vol. 41, no. 1421–1469.

Hazard J.C., Jr., Taruffo M. American Civil Procedure: An Introduction. Yale University Press, 1995, p. 105.

Friedenthal J.H., Kane M.K., Miller A.R. Civil Procedure. West Publishing Co., 1985, p. 164.

Puchinskij V.K. Grazhdanskij protsess SShA [Civil Procedure of the USA]. Moscow, 1985. (In Russian)

Rock N.L. Class Action Counsel as Named Plaintiff: Double Trouble. Fordham L. Rev., 1987, vol. 56, no. 111.

Consumer Class Actions: A Practical Litigation Guide.

Felsenthal E. Legal Beat: Supreme Court Agrees to Rule on Group Asbestos Settlement. The Wall Street Journal, November 4, 1996.

Shepherd S.R. Comment, Damage Distribution in Class Actions: The Cy Pres Remedy. U. Chi. L. Rev., 1977, vol. 39, no. 448.

Osakve K. Sravnitel’noe pravovedenie v shemah: obshchaja i osobennaja chasti [Comparative Law in Schemes: General and Special Parts]. Moscow, 2000, p. 50. (In Russian)

Owen D.G. A Punitive Damage Overview: Functions, Problems and Reform. Vill. L. Rev., 1994, vol. 39, no. 363.

Massey C.R. The Excessive Fine Clause and Punitive Damages: Some Lessons From History. Vand. L. Rev., 1987, vol. 40, no. 1233.

Moiseev S.V. Porjadok obrashchenija v arbitrazhnyj sud [Procedure for Bringing Cases to the Arbitrate Court]. Moscow, 2004, p. 4. (In Russian)

Radchenko V.I. Sudebnaja reforma v Rossijskoj Federatsii: nekotorye teoreticheskie i prakticheskie problemy [Judicial Reform in the Russian Federation: Some Theoretical and Practical Problems]. Moscow, 1999, p. 10. (In Russian)

Afanas’eva E.G., Dolgih M.G. Chastnoe i publichnoe v odnom flakone: shtrafnye ubytki [Private and Public in the One Bottle: Punitive Damages]. System «ConsultantPlus». (In Russian)

Grishin D.A. Neustojka: teorija, praktika, zakonodatel’stvo [Forfeit: Theory, Practice, Legislation]. Moscow, 2005. (In Russian)

Geistfeld M.A. Punitive Damages, Retribution and Due Process. South California Law Rev., 2008, vol. 81, no. 2, p. 280.

Information about the author

Abolonin G.O. (Moscow) – Candidate of Legal Sciences, Consultant on Legal Regulation of Investment, Judicial Protection of Rights and Legitimate Interests of Foreign Investors (e-mail: [email protected]).