INTRODUCTION 1
PREFACE： RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND SUMMARY OF DATA 15
Ⅰ. CHOICE OF METHOD 15
Ⅱ. QUALITATIVE INTERVIEW METHODOLOGY 17
Ⅲ. SPECIFIC ANALYTICAL APPROACH： TESTING THE PLAUSIBILITY OF REFORM HYPOTHESES 21
Ⅳ. LIMITATIONS TO PROJECT 22
CHAPTER Ⅰ： CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT DYNAMICS：LAWS AND PROCESSES 25
Ⅰ. CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT LAWS 25
A.Similarities in the Class Action Statutes across Jurisdictions 26
B.Statutory Laws Relating to Class Action Settlements in the Four Target Jurisdictions 30
1. Ontario，British Columbia and Quebec Statutes 31
2. United States Federal Statutes 35
C.Court Organisation in the Focus Jurisdictions 42
Ⅱ. CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT PROCESSES 43
A.Types of Class Action Settlements 45
B.Evidence and Materials Supporting the Proposed Settlement’s Fairness 49
1. Burden of Proof of Settlement Fairness 49
2. Materials Supporting the Proof of Settlement Fairness 50
C.Class Action Settlement Hearings 54
1. Preliminary Hearing 54
2. Notices of Settlement and Hearing，Objections and Opt-Outs 57
3. Fairness Hearing 62
D.Class Action Settlement Approval Practices 64
1. The Fairness Hearing（s） 64
2. Experts，Witnesses and Oral Arguments 69
3. Court Monitor or Counsel for the Court 72
4. Evidence Necessary to Prove Settlement Fairness 74
5. Objections 76
E.Consequences of Settlement Approval 78
1. Binding Effect 78
2. Involvement in Administration and Implementation of the Settlement 79
F.Appeal Rights 81
Ⅲ.REFORMING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT PROCESSES： AN INFORMED，TRANSPARENT AND ECONOMICAL PROCESS OF SETTLEMENT EVALUATION AND APPROVAL 83
A.At the Negotiations Stage 84
B.At the Settlement Evaluation Stage 89
C.At the Settlement Administration and Implementation Stages 96
CHAPTER Ⅱ： CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT ACTORS：WHO PROTECTS WHOM？ 99
Ⅰ. THE RELATIONSHIPS CREATED BY AND BETWEEN CLASS REPRESENTATIVES，CLASS COUNSEL AND THE ABSENT CLASS MEMBERS 100
A.Who Are the “Absent” Class Members？ 100
B.Are Class Counsel Properly Fiduciaries of Absent Class Members？ 103
C.The Class Representative： A Real or Fictitious Spokesperson of the Class Members？ 109
D.Judicial Perceptions of the Settlement Actors and Related Practices 115
1. The Class Action Representative 116
2. Class and Defence Counsel and the Absent Class Members 119
Ⅱ. THE ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT JUDGES 122
A.The Law Applicable to the Role of Settlement Judges 123
B.Judicial Perceptions and Practices Relative to the Role of Settlement Judges 130
1. The Context： Lack of Adversarial Presentation 130
2. The Role of the Settlement Judge 134
a） A Complex，Multifaceted Role 134
b） Judicial Perceptions of the Role of the Settlement Judge： Negotiator，Conciliator，Adjudicator 136
c） Protectors，Fiduciaries，and Ombudsmen 138
d） Inquisitorial Judges 141
e） Trends in Judicial Practices： the Weight of Time，the Timing of Judicial Involvement and the Multi-Jurisdictional Context 146
（ⅰ） The Weight of Time 146
（ⅱ） The Timing of Judicial Involvement with Settlement 147
（ⅲ） The Multi-Jurisdictional Context 149
Conclusion on Settlement Actors and Judges 151
Ⅲ. REFORMING THE ROLES OF CLASS REPRESENTATIVES AND CLASS COUNSEL 154
A.Candid，Honest and Adequate Representatives and Informed Class Members 154
B.Active，Inquisitorial and Protector Judges 162
1. The Active and Involved Judge 165
2. The Judge as Protector of the Interests of Class Members，But Also of Defendants and the Public 166
3. An Inquisitorial Judge 169
4. Different Task，Different Role？ 171
CHAPTER Ⅲ： CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT FAIRNESS 175
Ⅰ. FAIRNESS HEARING DOCTRINE IN NORTH AMERICAN COURTS 177
A.“Fair，Reasonable and Adequate” or “In the Best Interests of the Class” 177
B.Substantive and Procedural Inquiries into the Proposed Settlement’s Fairness 181
C.Scarcity of Settlement Denials 183
Ⅱ. RE-CATEGORIZATION OF THE RELEVANT FAIRNESS FACTORS 187
A.Tracking the Merits of the Proposed Settlement：Factors Useful to the Substantive Fairness Inquiry 187
1. Intrinsic Factors of Substantive Fairness 187
a） Judicial Risk Analysis： Likelihood of Recovery or Likelihood of Success on the Merits Weighed Against Amount and Form of Settlement Relief 187
b） Future Expense，Complexity and Likely Duration of the Litigation 189
2. Extrinsic Factors of Substantive Fairness 191
a） Class Reaction： Number and Nature of Objections 191
b） Recommendation and Experience of Counsel and Opinion of Interested Persons 193
B.Procedural Concerns about the Proposed Settlement：Factors Useful to the Procedural Fairness Inquiry 195
1. Adequacy of Representation，Good Faith and Absence of Collusion 195
a） Negotiation of Counsel Fees in Settlement and Amount of Fees 197
b） Discovery Evidence Sufficient for “Effective Representation” 198
2. Adequacy of the Notice of Proposed Settlement to Absent Class Members 199
C.Golden Rules of the Fairness Inquiry 201
1. Required “Range of Reasonableness” of the Proposed Settlement 201
2. Consideration of the Underlying Objectives of the Class Action Statutes 203
Ⅲ. INADEQUACY OF THE CURRENT JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCESS OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENTS 205
A.Strong Public Policy and Judicial Preference for Class Action Settlements 205
B.Inconsistent Uses and Applications of the Procedural and Substantive Fairness Lines of Inquiry at the Fairness Hearing 208
Ⅳ. IN SEARCH OF A CLEARER STANDARD OF SETTLEMENT FAIRNESS 209
A.Is Fairness Definable in a Class Action Settlement Context？ 209
1. Model of Conciliation of Procedural and Substantive Fairness： the Jeffery Case 212
2. Settlement Fairness in the American Law Institute’s Principles of the Law of Aggregate Litigation 215
3. Settlement Fairness in the Dutch WCAM 218
B.Fairness in Non-Class Action Contexts 220
1. Fairness in Contract Law 221
2. Fairness in Procedural （and Class Action） Law 222
3. Fairness in the Approval of Canadian Corporate Arrangements 225
a） The “Deal”： Arrangement versus Class Action Settlement 226
b） Approval Processes and Actors 227
c） Fairness Test and Court Approval of a Plan of Arrangement 229
d） Conclusion 235
C.Settlement Fairness Theories 236
Ⅴ. JUDICIAL PRACTICES； OR MAKING SENSE OF “FAIRNESS” 240
A.Adequacy of the Settlement Fairness Standard 240
B.What Convinces Judges of Settlement Fairness 242
C.Presuming Settlement Fairness 249
D.Evaluating Settlement Fairness with Settlement Fairness Lists and Fairness Indicators 251
1. Traditional Fairness Factors 252
a） Adequacy of Notice of Proposed Settlement 252
b） Adequacy of Representation 253
c） Likelihood of Recovery or Likelihood of Success on the Merits Weighed against Amount and Form of Relief，and Future Expenses 253
d） Good Faith of the Parties and Absence of Collusion 254
e） Discovery Evidence Sufficient for Adequate Representation 254
f） Reaction of the Class/Number of Objections 255
g） Recommendation of Counsel 257
h） Time of Negotiation of Counsel Fees and Amount of the Fees 257
i） Equal and Fair Treatment of Class Members 258
j） Other，Non-Traditional Fairness Factors 258
2. Conclusion on Settlement Fairness Factors 263
Ⅵ. REFORMING THE STANDARD OF SETTLEMENT FAIRNESS： A FAIR SETTLEMENT IS A SUBSTANTIVELY AND PROCEDURALLY FAIR DEAL REACHED BY ADEQUATE REPRESENTATIVES，CONSISTENTLY WITH CLASS ACTION OBJECTIVES 264
CONCLUSION： THREE HATS，THREE MAJOR REFORM RECOMMENDATIONS； OR THE ROAD TO FAIR PROCESSES AND JUST OUTCOMES IN CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENTS 275
BIBLIOGRAPHY 287
LEGISLATION 315
TABLE OF CASES 317
INDEX 333