Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
subscribe to our newsletter sign up
Why do most Australian class actions result in settlement?
LIVE

Website Notifications

Get notifications in real-time for staying up to date with content that matters to you.

Why do most Australian class actions result in settlement?

Jason Betts
exclusive

In a recent webcast, a panel of legal experts discussed how and why the majority of Australian-based class actions settle, whether that trend will change and if class actions should have a different legal process.

Speaking recently on a Lawyers Weekly live webcast  Everything you need to know about class actions in AustraliaHerbert Smith Freehills partner Jason Betts said class actions are “quite different from conventional proceedings”, in that they involve the court requirement to approve any settlement and, obviously, give a judgement.

“The test for settlement of fairness and reasonableness has a heavy level of court supervision of group members that doesn’t arise in conventional litigation,” he explained.

“Yes, it is true that the majority of class actions settle. I think we’re going to see a trend away from that statistical truth over the next two to three years. There are a number of cases in the market at the moment. There’s one that’s pending judgement and a couple that are likely to go to a contested trial and judgment.”

Mr Betts outlined that he thinks the process needs to change around multiplicity.

“That is, we have to come up with a better way of dealing with the fact that at the moment, defendants aren’t facing one class action, they’re facing two, three, four, five class actions,” he posited.

Advertisement
Advertisement

“There’s nothing about that that’s appropriate, efficient, or effective. But in terms of the process for managing these cases through to resolution, they’re quite different from conventional litigation.

"But I do think theres a case for introducing a dedicated court-approved mediation parallel track that runs alongside class actions when theyre filed, from day one, for the court or its appointee to test at every reasonable juncture whether the parties are doing what they need to consider resolution.

“Not all cases will resolve, but because these cases are two to three years from commencement to resolution, prohibitively expensive to prosecute and defend, and tax a lot of the Australian economy, I think its worth looking at if theres a different way to resolve them.”

FTI Consulting senior managing director Dawna Wright provided context through the experience in the US: “I think that [settlement of class actions is] not uncommon there either, so even if you try to find judgements in the US that go to a very detailed level, all the way through to, for example, damages by group member, there are very few among them, very few that go all the way to that level of judgement as well over there.”

“So, were not alone there. But I also think its a bit of a trend. I see lots of our matters going to trial that whereas before they used to settle much earlier on. Im not sure why that is necessarily, but I think we see a lot more just going to trial,” she said.

Ms Wright hypothesised that companies may feel “perhaps the judge to make the decision.

“Theyve taken it as far as they can with each other. In fact, one of our economists actually gave evidence in one of those class action matters here in Melbourne last year. So we are seeing more and more all across the board, not just class actions, going to trial.”

Augusta Ventures managing director Neill Brennan offered that the reason so many class actions don’t make it to trial is that the cases will have merit, and thus insurers on the other side will deem it “sensible” to pay out.

“If youre seeing cases that are unmeritorious, and maybe theres been a bit of a feeding frenzy, maybe some of the class actions that are being run more recently have looked at it on the basis of well, they dont go to trial, so who cares, lets run it,” he said.

“But, if you look an action on the basis, it is likely to go to trial, and you price it on that basis, either as a lawyer or as a funder, and then obviously it settles because youve got the better argument, great. That's a good outcome. But youre not going to fund cases where you believe that youre going to lose them. So basically the settlement is a reflection of the value of the case.”

To watch the full webcast, click here.

Jerome Doraisamy

Jerome Doraisamy

Jerome Doraisamy is a senior writer for Lawyers Weekly and Wellness Daily at Momentum Media.

Jerome is an admitted solicitor in New South Wales and, prior to joining the team in early 2018, he worked in both commercial and governmental legal roles and has worked as a public speaker and consultant to law firms, universities and high schools across the country and internationally. He is also the author of The Wellness Doctrines self-help book series and is an adjunct lecturer at the University of Western Australia.

Jerome graduated from the University of Technology, Sydney with a Bachelor of Laws and Bachelor of Arts in Communication (Social Inquiry).

You can email Jerome at: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

FROM THE WEB
Recommended by Spike Native Network