REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDINGS – incorporated solicitors controlled by a public company and who claim to be entitled to $82 million in costs and disbursements for running a class action now seek an additional alleged “just” deduction of $32 million from the settlement proceeds which would otherwise be paid to women who suffered serious and chronic complications caused by pelvic mesh implantation and who obtained a “borderline” settlement – where solicitors originally agreed to pay costs and disbursements and did so out of retained earnings until shortly prior to trial and then decided to enter into a “disbursement funding facility” potentially exposing group members to interest charges initially calculated at rates between 22.4% and 31.8% per annum – where evidence does not reveal sufficient exploration of alternatives and no earlier contingency plan if the case proceeded to trial – where evidence reveals inadequate disclosure to applicants and no disclosure to group members – where representation made that the interest sum now claimed could be recovered against the respondents but solicitors now say such an argument is “hopeless” and no attempt was made to make an application to the trial judge for an order for recovery of the sum – evidence reveals retained earnings reduced by over $45 million in dividends since 2016 financial year – absence of sufficient proof that exposure of group members to interest charges was reasonable in all the circumstances – proposed order not just for numerous reasons – application dismissed with costs
Original article available at: https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/single/2023/2023fca0902
For more information, see the original judgement.
