BP Settlement Program Timeline for Compensation of Claims

• Early March 2012 – BP and the Plaintiff’s Steering Committee reach a negotiated settlement which, with court approval, will become the Deepwater Horizon Court-supervised Settlement Program (“DHCSSP”). Once approved, BP will terminate the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (“GCCF”), BP’s own claims center which had operated for nearly two years and paid out billions of dollars to hundreds of thousands of claimants.

• 5/2/12 – Preliminary Approval Order- The Settlement Agreement is preliminarily approved by the Federal District Court.

• 6/4/12 – Deepwater Horizon Court-supervised Settlement Program commences.

• 11/8/2012 – Fairness Hearing is held before the District Court’s Judge Barbier where objectors could voice their objections to the Settlement Program. BP participated in this hearing, advocated for the Court’s final approval of the Settlement Agreement that created the Settlement Program, and advised the Court that the Settlement Program was working exactly as planned. The Settlement Program advocated for by BP at this hearing had paid out over $1,000,000,000 by this time.

• 12/21/2012 – Order Granting Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement is issued by the District Court, which was appealed by several groups of objectors within 30 days to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

• 1/15/13 – Claims Administrator for the Settlement Program, Patrick Juneau, renders a policy decision on the handling of valuation of claims under Exhibit 4(c) of the Settlement Agreement. BP objects to the policy and asked Judge Barbier to rule on the issue.

• 3/5/13 – Judge Barbier enters Order approving the Claims Administrator’s 1/15/13 policy.

• 4/3/13 – BP appeals Judge Barbier’s 3/5/13 Order to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

• 7/8/13 – Oral argument is heard on BP’s appeal of Judge Barbier’s 3/5/13 Order.

• 10/2/13 – 5th Circuit Court of Appeals sends the case back down to the District Court to look at issues about how the Settlement Program is applying certain financial information to the Program formulas as it relates to the “matching” of revenues and expenses, and asks the District Court to make specific findings of fact in reference to the matching issues. The appellate court also issued a temporary stay on Business Economic Loss claims and asked Judge Barbier to enter an expeditious and limited stay affecting only those cases wherein it was clear that revenues and expenses were not adequately matched.

• 10/18/13 – District Court issued a Preliminary Injunction- this injunction was issued in response to the decision by the appeals court. The court suspends the payment of most types of Business Economic Loss claims.

• 11/22/13 – District Court issues an order denying BP’s emergency motion to have “causation” under 4(b) of the Settlement Agreement reviewed as part of the remand determination.

• 12/2/13 – 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issues a clarifying order that it wanted Judge Barbier to consider the 4(b) causation issues and framework as part of the remand.

The response of the District Court on the remand issues is due by year end.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.