REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDINGS — settlement approval — alleged misleading or deceptive conduct, negligence and breach of contract concerning representations about accreditation of a Bachelor Medical Engineering course — whether settlement fair and reasonable — litigation risks, early resolution, non-monetary relief and low objection rate — settlement approved subject to modifications
Quick Take
1Where a litigation funder seeks both a funding commission and reimbursement of after-the-event insurance premiums, the court may treat the combined claim as involving an element of double-dipping and reduce the commission or disallow the ATE reimbursement, particularly where the funder has not fully complied with its obligations under the funding agreement and has not provided evidence of its return on investment.
2An equal distribution methodology in a representative proceeding settlement will be approved where the cost of individualised loss assessment would significantly erode the settlement fund, provided the methodology is likely to deliver a broadly fair assessment and group members have been notified and few have objected.
3Non-monetary relief — including a formal apology and a commitment to fund alternate accreditation pathways — is a relevant factor supporting the reasonableness of a settlement in representative proceedings concerning misleading representations about professional accreditation.
