A court reviewing a proposed settlement must not measure it against a standard of perfection. The court must be assured that the settlement secures appropriate consideration for the class in return for surrender of litigation rights against the defendants. However, the court must balance the need to scrutinize the settlement against the recognition that there may be a number of possible outcomes within the "zone or range of reasonableness". As was stated in Dabbs v. Sun Life, at para. 30: [...] all settlements are the product of compromise and a process of give and take and settlements rarely give all parties exactly what they want. Fairness is not a standard of perfection. Reasonableness allows for a range of possible solutions. A less than perfect settlement may be in the best interests of those affected by it when compared to the alternative of the risks and costs of litigation.
"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.