In Jeffery v. Nortel Networks, 2007 BCSC 69 at para. 28, Groberman J. (as he then was) distilled these factors into “four broad questions”: • Has counsel of sufficient experience and ability undertaken sufficient investigations to satisfy the court that the settlement is based on a proper analysis of the claim? • Is there any reason to believe that collusion or extraneous considerations have influenced negotiations such that an inappropriate settlement may have been reached? • On a cost/benefit analysis, are the plaintiffs well-served by accepting the settlement rather than proceeding with the litigation? and • Has sufficient information been provided to the members of the class represented by representative plaintiffs, and, if so, are they generally favourably disposed to the settlement?
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.