Petrobras International Litigation

Continually hunting for news of emerging and newly filed class action litigation

Request Information on This Case

PENDING

Petrobras International Litigation

SETTLEMENT FUND: TBD

FILING DEADLINE: TBD

icon-filing-deadline

CASE NUMBER:

TBD

CLASS PERIOD:

See Eligible Class

  • icon-non-settling-defendant

    NON-SETTLING DEFENDANTS

    Petrobras

  • icon-eligible-class

    ELIGIBLE CLASS

    Investors who purchased Common and Preferred shares of Petrobras and/or Bonds issued by Petrobras Global Finance B.V. or Petrobras International Finance Company S.A. anytime before July 28, 2015 should confirm their eligibility today.

  • icon-eligible-instruments

    PROPOSED INSTRUMENTS

    Common and Preferred shares of Petrobras and/or Bonds issued by Petrobras Global Finance B.V. or Petrobras International Finance Company S.A.

  • icon-allegations

    Preliminary Allegations

    For nearly a decade, Petrobras allegedly engaged in a massive corruption scheme that went unchallenged until 2014, when, on October 27, 2014, it issued a press release stating that certain of its key executives were being investigated  in connection with bribery and money laundering. Since then, prosecutors and federal police in Brazil have unearthed the countrys largest-ever corruption scandal by linking a ring of black-market money changers to a price-fixing and political kickback scheme at the state-run oil company.

  • icon-case-summary

    Case Summary

    This is a collective legal action against Petroleo Brasileiro SA for investors who purchased Petrobras securities in transactions outside of the United States, primarily securities issued in Brazil, the Netherlands and Spain. The action is alleging violations of the federal securities laws by defendants for purportedly concealing a multi-year, multi-billion dollar bribery and kickback scheme.

    Jurisdiction

    Netherlands.

    The Netherlands currently has two separate collective redress mechanisms: A representative collective action (governed by Article 3:305a of the Dutch Civil Code) and a class settlement mechanism, also called WCAM, (codified in sections 7:908-7:910 of the Dutch Civil Code and Articles 1013-1018 of the Dutch Civil Procedure Code) based on an opt-out system. In a collective action, the scope is limited for the representative entity to submit a claim for a declaratory judgment or seek injunctive relief. However, WCAM proceedings allow parties, including international investors, in a collective settlement to try to make the settlement binding on all, international members of a group unless members opt out. WCAM may be used only to settle claims on a classwide basis, not to prosecute them. The foundation and the compensating party must enter a contract before presenting it to the Amsterdam Court of Appeal which has exclusive jurisdiction over WCAM proceedings. Sine US Supreme Court’s decision in Morrison v. National Australian Bank, which limited non-U.S. shareholders ability to file securities claims in the US, WCAM proceedings have been used to pursue internationally binding settlements. These include the Royal Dutch Shell settlement in 2009, the former Converium Holding AG settlement in 2012, and the Ageas settlement in 2016. WCAM proceeding can be and have been used for global settlements with relatively little connection to the Netherlands. It is recognized that the Netherlands is the only national legal system in the EU that authorizes opt-out collective settlements.

Case Updates

June 2018: The Dutch Class Action Against Petrobras Moves Forward

  • On May 26, 2021, after several years of litigation, the District Court in Rotterdam in the Netherlands came down with a ruling in favor of international and Brazilian shareholders and certain bondholders suing Petrobras for wrongdoing and economic losses suffered in connection with the infamous “Lava Jato” scandal.
  • Petrobras previously settled a similar case for USD $3 billion with a sub-set of shareholders buying shares via US ADRs on the NYSE and investors buying USD denominated bonds. The much larger class of international and Brazilian shareholders who bought shares directly on the primary Brazilian B3 exchange in Sao Paolo, and a smaller class of bond holders, are eligible to assert claims in the Netherlands.
  • The Court set a date of September 1, 2021 for Stichting Petrobras Compensation Foundation (SPCF) to submit its further arguments and facts regarding the merits of the case and specifically the arguments that support SPCF’s allegations that Petrobras violated investors’ rights under applicable laws as previously determined by the Court in Rotterdam.
  • Battea, who has been appointed by ISAF Management to collect client data and process and validate investor losses in the Netherlands on behalf of global investors who purchased Petrobras securities on the Brasil Bolsa Balcão S.A. or B3 – Brazil (formerly BM&FBOVESPA) and linked markets in the European Union as well as certain bonds prior to July 28, 2015, is encouraging all interested and eligible claimants to register a claim with ISAF-Petrobras and support SPCF.

To learn more about this recent ruling, you can read Battea Global Litigation Research’s “Petrobras Litigation Research Report & Point of View” here. This in-depth research report includes a detailed analysis of the May 26, 2021 ruling and the damages in the Netherlands class.

REGISTER YOUR CLAIM: Click here to start the process to participate in the ISAF-Petrobras recovery initiatives.

September 2018: The Dutch Court ruled for granting jurisdiction in the Netherlands.

  1. The Dutch court ruled that the Company’s own articles calling for arbitration, did not meet the standard for which Dutch courts determine to be valid ground to deny the investors and the Foundation constitutional access to bring litigation and claims against Petrobras in the Netherlands.

Next Steps

The Court set a date of September 1, 2021 for Stichting Petrobras Compensation Foundation (SPCF) to submit its further arguments and facts regarding the merits of the case and specifically the arguments that support SPCF’s allegations that Petrobras violated investors’ rights under applicable laws as previously determined by the Court in Rotterdam.

The Foundation is confident that it will prevail against Petrobras on the merits of the fraud allegations. If this happens, Petrobras will be subject to a binding judgement for damages in the EU.

View More Pending Cases