Three years after twice acknowledging that it had systematically overstated its reserves, Shell agreed to pay $352.6 million to settle civil fraud litigation filed by investors outside the U.S.

Without admitting any wrongdoing, Shell also agreed to pay $47 million to the lawyers pressing the case—unusual in Europe—and took steps to resolve similar lawsuits in the U.S. It asked the Securities and Exchange Commission to use $120 million it received from the company in a 2004 consent agreement to compensate American investors whose shares plunged when the overstatement was made public.

In addition, Shell said it would offer $80 million to settle the smaller U.S. suit, at terms it said were equivalent to those agreed to in Europe. It was unclear if American investors, who are pursuing their class-action claim in federal court in New Jersey, would accept the terms.

Most of the European settlement—$340.1 million—is for non-American investors who bought shares outside the U.S. from April 8, 1999, until March 18, 2004. Another $12.5 million is to be divided equally among all shareholders who submit a valid claim, and $6.25 million will be paid to shareholder-rights groups that helped investors prepare claims against Shell.

The Wall Street Journal said that the $47 million to be paid to American trial lawyers represents a milestone in extending U.S.-style litigation to Europe.

American trial lawyers have been actively seeking European institutional investors as plaintiffs in securities lawsuits for years, the Journal said. Some have been filed in the U.S., but that requires that foreign plaintiffs have a connection to the country, such as having bought shares on an American exchange.

Lawyers have preferred to try cases in the U.S. because they hadn't been able to win settlements or judgments in Europe that were as large as those in the United States, the Journal said. Most European countries also do not let lawyers charge contingency fees, which are based on the size of settlements or judgments.

The American firms in this case were Grant & Eisenhofer of Wilmongton, Delaware, Schiffrin Barroway Topaz & Kessler of Philadelphia and Diaz, Reus, Rolff & Targ of Miami, the Journal said. Bloomberg News said a Dutch firm, Pels Rijcken & Drooglever Fortuijn, was also involved in the case. Together, the firms represented 50 European institutional investors and investor organizations.

The restatements at the heart of the case had shaved more than $100 billion off the estimated value of Shell's future revenue, the New York Times reported. The news and its fallout, including the ousting of chairman Phil Watts, caused Shell's shares to fall 15 percent over six weeks. The Times added that the settlement covers 10 percent to 13 percent of shareholders' losses.

Shell investors in Europe opted out of the U.S. class-action suit because they believed an American court might dismiss their complaint because they neither lived in the country nor bought their shares there.

"It seemed a bit awkward under current circumstances that European investors who bought European shares on European exchanges should turn to the U.S. to solve their disputes," René Maatman, a lawyer for one shareholder advocacy group, told the New York Times. "We think it would be better to have a well-functioning alternative in Europe available."

The Times said, however, that if the U.S. federal court decides that it has jurisdiction over European investors, the settlement would be voided. A hearing on the matter is scheduled for June.