Shareholders claiming they were impacted by a "deliberate" AMP policy to charge fees for no service have overwhelmingly backed a $110 million settlement with the financial firm.
The NSW Supreme Court has also found the deal reasonable and in the interests of affected investors.
After the settlement was reached with the Maurice Blackburn-led class action in August, over 18,700 investors were notified of the multimillion-dollar compromise and given the chance to raise concerns.
Only one investor objected to the settlement on the "misunderstanding" they had been instead promised full compensation for a drop in share value allegedly caused by AMP's conduct.
The amount reached in the compromise only reflected a portion of the total claimed in the class action, barrister Cameron Moore SC said in court on Tuesday.
Large corporate shareholders and mum-and-dad investors - referred to as group members in legal terms - have lined up to get their cut of the $110 million payout, which AMP agreed to on the eve of a 15-day hearing.
Lawyers for the class-action plaintiffs and AMP appeared before acting Justice Michael Elkaim, who approved the deal on Tuesday afternoon.
Maurice Blackburn will recoup over $26 million in legal costs from the total settlement amount for running the case since 2018 and will snag an extra $1.1 million for future work in deciding the amounts owed to each investor.
A further $60,000 has been approved for the two lead plaintiffs for their work in the case.
Mr Moore earlier told the court the "vast majority" of the proceeds would go to group members despite these deductions.
"They are getting a meaningful percentage of the total cut," he said.
The plaintiffs allege AMP had a deliberate policy in place to charge customers fees for financial advice services even though those people did not have advisers in place at the time.
"That had a deliberate aspect to it. It wasn't just an accident," Mr Moore said.
AMP head of financial advice Anthony Regan admitted there was "no legal basis" for this policy when interrogated at the banking royal commission in April 2018, the court heard.
But that information should have been revealed to the public prior to the royal commission, Mr Moore said.
Those who purchased AMP shares from May 2012 up until that time say they paid an inflated price and that if the alleged misconduct had been disclosed, it would have negatively impacted the firm's reputation and share value.
The class action further alleged that AMP misled the Australian Securities and Investments Commission regarding the fees for no service.
These matters had been "hotly contested" by the financial firm, the court heard.
AMP claimed information about its financial advisory fees did not have to be disclosed to the market and rejected allegations the share price drop in 2018 was caused solely by revelations from the royal commission.
Representing the firm, barrister Imtiaz Ahmed supported the proposed deal, highlighting the disputes over those issues.
