## Facts

- Multiple federal civil actions were filed by current and former South African residents, including putative classes, seeking reparations for apartheid-era harms.
- Plaintiffs sued multinational corporations and financial institutions, alleging the defendants profited from and/or assisted the apartheid regime.
- At least three actions were pending in federal courts: two in the Southern District of New York and one in the District of New Jersey, with additional related actions pending or anticipated elsewhere.
- Plaintiffs moved for centralization under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 in the Southern District of New York for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.
- Some defendants initially opposed centralization, but several later supported (or no longer opposed) centralization in the Southern District of New York.

## Issues

1. Whether the actions involved one or more common questions of fact sufficient to warrant transfer and centralization under 28 U.S.C. § 1407.
2. Whether centralization would serve the convenience of parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
3. If centralization was warranted, which district should be selected as the transferee forum.

## Decision

- The Panel granted the § 1407 motion and ordered centralization for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings.
- The Panel found the actions shared common factual questions concerning alleged corporate cooperation with, and benefit from, apartheid-era practices and abuses.
- The Panel concluded centralization would reduce duplicative discovery, avoid inconsistent pretrial rulings (including on class certification), and conserve party and judicial resources.
- The Panel selected the Southern District of New York as the transferee district because multiple actions were already pending there and it was an appropriate forum for complex, multinational commercial disputes.
- The action pending in the District of New Jersey was transferred to the Southern District of New York, and related “tag-along” actions were identified as candidates for inclusion.

## Legal Principles

- Under 28 U.S.C. § 1407, civil actions may be transferred to a single district for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings when they involve one or more common questions of fact and transfer serves convenience and the just and efficient conduct of the actions.
- Centralization is appropriate when it is likely to eliminate duplicative discovery, minimize the risk of inconsistent pretrial rulings, and conserve the resources of the parties, counsel, and judiciary.
- In selecting a transferee forum, the Panel considers where related cases are pending and which district is best situated to manage coordinated pretrial proceedings efficiently.

## Conclusion

The Panel centralized the apartheid-related corporate-liability actions in the Southern District of New York under § 1407, finding shared factual questions and determining that coordinated pretrial management in a single forum would improve efficiency and consistency.


In re S. African Apartheid Litig., 238 F. Supp. 2d 1379 (J.P.M.L. 2002)