Osmo,

Any philanthropic legal representation you will ever get will not be by law firms such as Gowling. The fact that Gowling agreed to represent the Shareholders' Committe on a contingency basis does not equate to Gowling agreeing to work for free. If this had been the expectation, Gowling would have agreeed to the representation on a pro bono basis.

Gowling must have signed a representation agreement with the Committee knowing full well what they were getting into and with the expectation to make millions of dollars on a case that was surely vetted by their best and brighhtes and approved by their top brass based on their belief that they stood to make a ton of money. They must have made representations to the Committee about the likelyhood of success and a range of likely recovery for the shareholders. 

When a lawyer commits to represent you it is for the duration of the case, unless continuing the representation breaks ethical and professional rules, the client does not pay the bills (which does not apply in this case) and other such good reasons. Failing this, your legal counsel cannot just pick up his marbles and go home. Doing this would not only be professionally unethical but also a bad business decision. To begin with, the legal counsel's reputation would be tarnished for years to come. In addtion, the Committee would most like have no legal repesentation going forward, since getting representation on a contingency or even on a paid basis would not be an easy task at this late stage of the case. Then there is the fact that, in this case, there is likely a pay out to the Committee and the opt-ins. So getting x% of something is better than getting nothing.

In summary, a scenario like this has all the markings of a lose-lose outcome for the parties involved, and would most lkely end up in court. This assumes that the Court would agree to approve the withdrawal order, which is not always the case, since the presiding judge will have the last word in deciding what is the best course of action for the court to follow to protect the rights and interests of the parties involved with the case.