The major record labels have agreed to pay $45 million to settle claims they failed to pay songwriters and music publishers while including their works on compilation albums. Warner Music, EMI, Universal Music and Sony BMG were sued in 2008 in a class action by Canadian songwriters and music publishers.

Generally, labels had established a practice of including songs on compilations for which they had not yet secured proper rights, placing them on a "pending list" for later payment.

TorrentFreak noted that the pending list for unpaid tracks had reached 300,000 just in Canada.

In addition to the $45 million to be paid by the labels to artists, the proposed settlement "also establishes a new mechanism that will expedite future payments of mechanical royalties to music rights holders."

"This agreement with the four major labels resolves all outstanding pending list claims," said David Basskin, president and CEO the Canadian Musical Reproduction Rights Agency (CMRRA).

Len Gratto says there's no way he is paying a $5,200 fine to Mission, B.C., for growing cucumbers in his basement.

Gratto -- who has lived in the home for 30 years -- says he's raring to join an imminent class-action lawsuit attacking the municipality's grow-op bylaw inspections. A number of citizens, led by Stacy Gowanlock, allege their homes were illegally searched for marijuana grow ops resulting in them being slapped with fees and repair orders costing upward of $10,000 -- all on questionable evidence.

Gratto, 67, says he's never grown pot, but "laughable" evidence against him consists of pictures of some "dirt" on the basement wall and "a furnace pipe going up into the chimney, where it should be.

"It's upsetting they can do this," Gratto said. "We were growing cucumbers in the basement because they wouldn't take outside."

Gowanlock said he was searched in 2009 and hit with thousands in fees and repair orders despite never growing pot in his home.

A statewide class action in which Massachusetts homeowners accuse U.S. Bancorp and Ally Financial Inc. of faulty foreclosures will resume now that the state’s high court ruled in a similar case last week.

The litigation was on hold while the Supreme Judicial Court decided whether state law required foreclosures to be conducted by the mortgage owner. The high court ruled Jan. 7 in U.S. Bank v. Ibanez that an industry practice allowing post-foreclosure assignments violated state law.

“This is a statewide class action and it’s going to bring relief to all of the people who are dispossessed homeowners in many instances,” Kevin Costello, a lawyer for the borrowers, said in a telephone interview today. Costello today filed a motion to restart evidence gathering in the case.

Claims of wrongdoing by banks and loan servicers triggered a 50-state investigation last year into whether hundreds of thousands of foreclosures were properly documented as the housing market collapsed.

Unwinding of foreclosures may lead to loan workouts with homeowners or force originators to buy back loans that ended up in mortgage-backed securities.

A new foundation, Investor Claims against Fortis, has started legal proceedings in the Netherlands against the former bancassurer Fortis for "misleading investors", which it claims led to combined losses of €2bn.

The organisation argues that Fortis persisted in persuading investors to invest between May 2007 and October 2008 when the company was already on the ropes.

One of the foundation's claims is that Fortis failed to supply timely, accurate information about its exposure to sub-prime mortgages in the US.

The legal case – brought for the Utrecht court in the Netherlands – comes after the US high court decided that a class action by "foreign investors who have bought a stake in foreign companies on foreign stock markets" was inadmissible in a US court.

Within the EU, the legal climate in the Netherlands is ideal for shareholders wishing to reclaim damages from listed companies, according to Jay Eisenhofer, partner at law firm Grant & Eisenhofer.

Stuart Berman of law firm Barroway Topaz added: "This case offers a valuable framework for compensating duped investors outside the US."

Both law firms, as well as Alexander Reus, the foundation's director, have represented international shareholders against Shell for providing incorrect information about its oil reserves.

After Fortis became one of the three players that took over Dutch bank ABN Amro, it had to be rescued by the national governments of the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg.

Ultimately, the company was split up, with a large part of its assets being sold to third parties. The remainder of Fortis is now operating as Ageas.

Earlier, Fortis shareholders tried in vain to block the break-up of Fortis and hold its executive board accountable for the incurred losses.

The Amsterdam business court has not yet finalised a survey – conducted at the request of shareholders – into alleged mismanagement at Fortis.

The foundation said it had the support of more than 140 institutional investors, as well as 2,000 private investors worldwide.

A landmark David-versus-Goliath legal battle is unfolding in the town of Shannon, Que.

In 2007, residents of the small community northeast of Quebec City won the right to seek damages in a class-action lawsuit against the federal government over the town’s contaminated water supply.

Now, a trial is underway with the potential for billions worth of damages on the line for 2,300 current and past Shannon residents.

The lawsuit alleges munitions manufacturer Industries Valcartier Inc. and the Department of National Defence were negligent in handling and disposing of trichloroethylene, or TCE, a known carcinogenic substance used at nearby Canadian Forces base Valcartier.

For 40 years, personnel at CFB Valcartier used TCE as a cleaning agent for cannons and other military hardware at the base.

In 2000, TCE was discovered in Shannon’s water wells. For years, residents unknowingly drank and bathed in water laced with the deadly toxic substance.

Around the same time, residents started to take note of an increasingly high rate of cancer diagnoses. 500 cancer cases were documented in Shannon, 200 of which proved fatal, an alarmingly high rate of disease for a town with a population barely 4,000-strong.

While legal counsel for the government dismissed residents’ claims for a lack of scientific evidence, Charles Veilleux, the lawyer representing the people of Shannon, will attempt to prove how exposure to TCE is directly linked to the high rate of cancer and illness in Shannon.

A lawsuit that alleges the maker of Marlboro Lights used deceptive trade practices and false advertising when it marketed its cigarettes as "light" can proceed in Minnesota as a class-action claim, the state Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday.

The 45-page ruling by the three-judge panel sends the 2001 lawsuit against Philip Morris back to Hennepin County District Court.

The class would include people who bought Marlboro Lights in Minnesota for their personal use from 1972 through November 2004. The number of people in the class and the amount of damages they would seek was not immediately available Tuesday. The plaintiffs are seeking refunds of money they spent on the cigarettes.

In a statement, Philip Morris said it was considering its options for an appeal. The company said it believes class-action status is inappropriate because the circumstances of each smoker are different.

The district court denied the request for class certification in 2004, saying it was necessary to look at each person's reasons for smoking light cigarettes and the manner in which they smoked them. But later that year, the district court reversed itself and certified the class, saying that because the injury being claimed was economic, not physical, all class members suffered similar injury.

A federal judge granted class-action status to Netflix Inc. subscribers in their lawsuit against the company and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. over DVDs.

US District Judge Phyllis Hamilton said that the subscribers bringing suit against the companies in 2009 were “united by common and overlapping issues of fact and law,’’ in an order dated Dec. 23 and filed in federal court in Oakland, Calif.

Wal-Mart and the plaintiffs reached a preliminary settlement of the lawsuit that could pay them as much as $40 million in cash or equivalents, according to a motion filed Dec. 14. A hearing on that motion will be Feb. 9. It doesn’t include Netflix.

The plaintiffs charged that Netflix and Wal-Mart conspired in 2005 to divide the market for selling and renting DVDs to reduce competition. The companies formed an agreement in which Wal-Mart.com would stop renting DVDs online and Netflix wouldn’t offer them for sale.