2 total
The court approved class counsel fees of $2.45 million from a $12 million all-inclusive settlement, deducting disbursements and a notional costs contribution first.
This motion concerned the approval of class counsel fees, disbursements, and a representative plaintiff honorarium following the settlement of two national class proceedings (2012 and 2016 Actions) against various defendants, including Apple Inc., for an alleged eBook price-fixing conspiracy.
The aggregate settlement amount was $15,175,000.
Class Counsel sought $2.7 million in fees (25% of the Apple settlement, adjusted for Quebec) and $43,669.39 in disbursements, plus a $5,000 honorarium for the representative plaintiff.
The court addressed whether the Class Proceedings Act is a complete code for fee approval, the applicability of the Solicitors Act and its regulations regarding costs and disbursements in "all-in" settlements, and the treatment of notional cost contributions and administration costs.
The court found that the Solicitors Act provisions regarding costs and disbursements should apply harmoniously to class proceedings.
It ruled that disbursements should be deducted from the gross settlement amount, and a notional contribution to costs ($500,000) should be applied before calculating counsel fees.
Settlement administration costs were deemed not a disbursement incurred by counsel.
The court approved class counsel fees of $2,450,000 plus taxes, disbursements of $43,669.39 plus taxes, and an honorarium of $2,500 for the representative plaintiff.
Non-monetary class action settlement approved in exchange for individual defendant's cooperation and inside information.
The plaintiff in a price-fixing class action sought approval of a settlement with the sole individual defendant.
The settlement provided no monetary compensation but required the defendant to provide extensive cooperation, including an evidentiary proffer, interviews, document exchange, and trial testimony.
The court approved the settlement under s. 29 of the Class Proceedings Act, finding it fair, reasonable, and in the best interests of the class, as the defendant's inside information offered significant strategic value against the remaining corporate defendants.
