A ruling this week that kept intact a contingency fee rate of 27.5 per cent sought by Slater & Gordon to run a shareholder class action against G8 Education might encourage law firms to seek higher percentage payouts at the outset of group proceedings in Victoria.
Class action settlement approval hearings are not a time for the court to second guess a law firm’s contingency fee as set down in a group costs order, a judge has found, but the question of proportionality is still key, and evidence of a firm’s return on investment and hourly fees may be relevant to the final decision.
A judge has signed off on the first-ever settlement allowing a law firm to earn a contingency fee, approving a $12.8 million cut for Slater & Gordon in a shareholder class action against G8 Education.
The law firm running class actions against ANZ and Westpac has been pulled up for claiming confidentiality over a solicitor’s affidavits on the costs incurred by the applicants since the court approved settlements in the cases.
A judge has allowed a law firm running a shareholder class action against medical glove maker Ansell to earn a 40 per cent contingency fee, but slashed the rate for settlements or judgments over $50 million.
A class action has been launched seeking “housing justice” for Aboriginal tenants living in alleged substandard public housing in Western Australia.
The lead plaintiff in a class action alleging NSW Police conducted illegal strip searches at music festivals has argued the state cannot rely on a defence that the searches were a reasonable exercise of power, after a recent judgment found the defence does not apply to unlawful arrests.
A judge has signed off on a $23.1 million cut for funder Augusta of a $100 million settlement in a class action against Colonial First State, which he previously called “strange” and said may not reflect the risk the funder shared with Slater & Gordon in running the case.
A judge has signed off on an agreed-to $5 million penalty against Noumi in ASIC proceedings for violating its continuous disclosure obligations and found the food company’s non-disclosures caused it shares to trade at an inflated price.
In the first-ever settlement approval hearing involving a group costs order, a contradictor has argued that Slater & Gordon should have provided the court with more information on legal costs and internal rate of return as part of its bid for a $12.8 million contingency fee.