US firm launches class action over Burford share crash

New York: Law firm launches contingency class action

The first shareholder class action against litigation funder Burford Capital arising out of the recent report by US short seller Muddy Waters has been filed in New York.

The lawsuit filed by The Rosen Law Firm, an investor rights practice, claims the company made “false and/or misleading statements” between 18 March 2015 and 7 August 2019.

Alternatively or in addition, it says Burford failed to disclose that it “has been manipulating its metrics, including ROIC and IRR, to create a misleading picture of investment returns to investors”, hiding “the fact” that it was at high risk for a liquidity crunch and is already arguably insolvent.

As a result, the claim continues, Burford’s statements about its business, operations and prospects “were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times”.

When the Muddy Waters report was published, the lawsuit says, there was a “precipitous decline in the market value of the company” and investors suffered “significant losses and damages”.

The Burford share price dropped from 1381p on 5 August to 605p two days later after Muddy Waters first teased its report and then released it.

The shares have recovered somewhat since after the funder mounted an aggressive defence, but been up and down in the intervening period, closing yesterday at 808p. It reached a high of 2040p a year ago. Last week, Burford announced changes to its governance.

Rosen, which is now seeking a lead claimant, is acting on a fully contingent basis and its retainer says it may apply for a fee of up to 33.3% of the recovery plus disbursements, subject to court approval.

The action also names Burford co-founders Chris Bogart and Jonathan Molot – chief executive and chief investments officer respectively – chairman Sir Peter Middleton and director Charles Parkinson as co-defendants.

The Rosen Law Firm has announced nine other securities class actions this month alone.

Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


30 March 2021

Judicial review reform: A risk to the courts’ post-Brexit standing

In addition to questions about the motivations for curbing legal challenges to political decisions, the proposed reforms to judicial review raise concerns about undermining the reputation of the English courts

Read More