Australian High Court Rejects "First To File" Approach To Choosing Between Competing Class Actions

There is no "one size fits all" approach to competing class actions. 

Five competing and overlapping shareholder class actions were commenced in two separate Australian courts against AMP Limited. All actions were transferred to the NSW Supreme Court, and all plaintiffs sought to stay all of the other class actions, except their own.

The judge at first instance applied a multifactorial analysis to determine which action should progress. Her Honour ultimately chose to stay all actions except one and placed most weight on the funding proposal that minimised the cost to class members.

The first plaintiff to file a class action against AMP appealed, arguing that there is a rule or presumption that it is prima facie vexatious and oppressive to commence an action if an action is already pending in respect of the same controversy.