Webster (Trustee) v Murray Goulburn Co-Operative Co. Limited (No 4)

In this case, the plaintiff, acting as trustee, brought an action against Murray Goulburn Co-Operative Co. Limited, seeking damages for alleged misleading and deceptive conduct in relation to the sale of securities. The proceeding was a representative proceeding in the Federal Court of Australia, and the plaintiff sought to have a proposed settlement approved under s 33V of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth). The court had to determine whether the settlement was fair and reasonable, considering various factors such as the strengths and weaknesses of the case, the complexity and duration of the litigation, and the response of class members to the settlement.

The court identified several key legal issues, including whether it had the power to order payment of a litigation funding commission as a percentage of the gross settlement sum, and whether the proposed funding rate was fair and reasonable. The court also had to consider the substantial reduction in the plaintiff's legal costs and the litigation funding commission as proposed by the Costs Referee and Contradictor, respectively.

In its decision, the court found that the settlement was fair and reasonable, taking into account the various factors mentioned earlier. The settlement had been reached following a mediation, and the plaintiff and his lawyers had made an informed assessment of the case's strengths and weaknesses, the MG Parties' defences, and the potential costs and delays involved in taking the case to trial and appeal. The court also considered the complexity and likely duration of the litigation, the ability of the respondents to withstand a greater judgment, and the response of class members to the proposed settlement.

Based on its findings, the court approved the settlement with substantial reductions in the quantum of the plaintiff's legal costs and the litigation funding commission. The final orders included the approval of the settlement, the adoption of the Costs Referee's report, and the payment of litigation funding charges to the Funder. The court also provided for the dismissal of the proceeding upon the completion of the distribution of the Settlement Sum, with certain rights reserved for the parties.

In summary, the court approved the proposed settlement in the representative proceeding between the plaintiff and Murray Goulburn Co-Operative Co. Limited, taking into account various factors such as the strengths and weaknesses of the case, the complexity and duration of the litigation, and the response of class members to the settlement. The court made several final orders, including the approval of the settlement, the adoption of the Costs Referee's report, and the payment of litigation funding charges to the Funder.