A/HRC/14/27 and civil law jurisdictions. The responsibility of partners in joint ventures and other contract-based relationships raises even more complex questions, though the theory of multi-agency liability has gained traction in some jurisdictions. In short, far greater clarity is needed regarding the responsibility of corporate parents and groups for the purposes of remedy. 107. Second, these challenges are compounded in cases involving the foreign operations of multinational corporations. A central issue here concerns the permissible grounds for courts to exercise extraterritorial jurisdiction. There is some consensus: for example, in criminal cases, nationality is an acceptable basis for exercising such jurisdiction over defendants, including companies; in civil cases, the defendant being “domiciled” (or “present”) in the forum serves that purpose. All national systems need to adopt a principled approach to the question of adjudicative extraterritorial jurisdiction, balancing the interests of claimant, defendant and States, especially in situations where there is a heightened risk of denial of remedy in the host country. 108. A third legal challenge is that investigating large companies for human rights abuses is typically well beyond State prosecutors’ usual work. It requires expertise, resources and political will. Where events in other countries are involved, such investigations also rely on international cooperation to be effective. Criminal provisions remain mere words on paper unless States act upon their obligations to investigate individual and corporate involvement in business and human rights-related crimes. 109. Turning to practical obstacles, three are particularly problematic: costs; bringing representative and aggregated claims; and disincentives to providing legal and related assistance to victims. Their coexistence can make it almost impossible for victims to access effective judicial remedy. 110. The question of costs is fundamental – costs of obtaining legal advice and of the case itself should the claimant prove unsuccessful. There is an appropriate role for costs as a deterrent to unmeritorious cases, but they should not prevent legitimate claimants from accessing the judicial system. The costs of simply accessing a qualified lawyer can be a barrier for at least some plaintiffs in most jurisdictions. Beyond the provision of legal aid, there are examples of innovation in litigation funding and fee rules — legal expenses insurance, for one — but they are not widely available. 111. A second practical barrier can result from limitations on “standing” (who can bring a suit) and on the ability to bring group claims for compensation. Many instances of corporate-related harm involve a large number of individual claims that are grounded on the same underlying set of facts, each of which would be too costly for a single claimant to pursue. Jurisdictions are increasingly considering how such claims can be most effectively aggregated, and the conditions under which representative proceedings will be allowed. Alternatives being explored include the European debate over models of “collective redress” in the consumer protection field; the evolving system of “opt-in” representative suits in civil cases in China; and the expansion of forms of “class actions” in such jurisdictions as Chile (for consumer claims), Indonesia (in cases of environmental harm) and South Africa (to protect constitutional rights). However, the scope of many of these developments in relation to business and human rights claims remains unclear. 112. A third practical barrier is the financial, social and political disincentives for lawyers to represent claimants in this area. As a result, there is a far larger (and better compensated) pool advising corporate defendants. In some jurisdictions, the terms of settlements exacerbate this situation by requiring that the claimants’ lawyers not act against the same company in future matters. Compounding this, where human rights defenders are obstructed or intimidated, victims may be without any legal or related support at all. GE.10-12629 21