Trending Now

SHIELDPAY LAUNCHES GUIDE TO EFFECTIVE LITIGATION SETTLEMENT DISTRIBUTION FOR LEGAL SECTOR

SHIELDPAY LAUNCHES GUIDE TO EFFECTIVE LITIGATION SETTLEMENT DISTRIBUTION FOR LEGAL SECTOR

In the face of increasing demand for better strategies for litigation compensation payments, Shieldpay, the payments partner for the legal sector, has created the Blueprint to Distribution’a step-by-step guide that shares best practice on how to scale efficiently and distribute best-in-class payments for claimants. 

The huge growth in litigation in recent years (total value of UK class actions alone rose from £76.6 billion in 2021 to £102.7 billion in 2022) means the legal sector must adopt strategies that will enable it to scale efficiently with the growing demand. In 2019, the average litigation revenue for a firm in the UK Litigation 50 was £82.4m. That figure had reached £110m by 2023 and is widely predicted to follow this upward trajectory.

Settlement payouts can be a complex and lengthy process without the right support and guidance. The process of distributing funds can often be overlooked until the settlement is finalised, leading to sudden complications, risk concerns and a huge administrative burden on a tight deadline.

Litigation cases are by no means finished once a settlement has been agreed. Depending on the size and complexity of the case, the distribution process can take many months, if not years. Most claimants will want the compensation due to them as quickly as possible, so firms need to plan for a successful and seamless distribution of funds well ahead of time to avoid frustration and uncertainty for their clients.

To help lawyers navigate litigation payments and adopt strategies that will reassure and build trust amongst claimants, Shieldpay’s ‘Blueprint to Distribution’ guide goes through the critical steps teams need to take throughout the case to ensure claimants receive their funds quickly and efficiently. The key to success is planning the distribution process as early as the budget-setting phase, where the payout is considered as part of the case management process to optimise for success. This process also includes developing a robust communications strategy, collecting and cleansing claimant data, and choosing the right payments partner to handle the settlement distribution.

In its guidance for legal practitioners on delivering a successful payout, ‘Blueprint to Distribution’ highlights the need for payment considerations to be aligned and collaborative throughout the lifecycle of a case, not left to be worked out at the end. Working with the right partner enables firms to understand how to design and deliver an optimal payout, taking into account the potential long lead times involved from the initial scoping of a case to the actual payout, with refinements and changes likely to occur to the requirements as a case unfolds. 

Claire Van der Zant, Shieldpay’s Director of Strategic Partnerships, and author of the guide, said: “Last year, the conversation amongst the litigation community was understandably focused on how to get cases to trial. Delays to proceedings arising from evolving case management requirements, including the PACCAR decision, caused delays and frustration amongst those actively litigating cases and striving for final judgements. 

“Fundamentally, legal professionals want to deliver justice and good outcomes for claimants. To do that, we need to think bigger than just a blueprint to trial, and consider a ‘Blueprint to Distribution’, because once a final judgement has been delivered, it doesn’t end there. Delivering a successful distribution requires advance planning and consideration to be effective and efficient. This step-by-step guide aims to help law firms, administrators and litigation funders deliver the best payment experience and outcome for claimants.” 

For the full ‘Blueprint to Distribution’ guide visit www.shieldpay.com/blueprint-to-distribution

Commercial

View All

Fintechs Target Estate Disputes as Baby Boomer Wealth Transfer Fuels Litigation Funding Demand

By John Freund |

A wave of fintech startups is moving into the estate and probate space, offering litigation funding and technology solutions for executors navigating the spiralling costs of administering deceased estates.

As reported by the Australian Financial Review, with a $5.4 trillion Baby Boomer wealth transfer now underway, legal sector disruptors are positioning themselves to capitalize on the growing complexity and expense of settling estates. The report highlights how litigation funding is extending into probate and succession disputes, a segment that has historically been underserved by traditional funders.

The trend reflects a broader expansion of the litigation finance market beyond its traditional strongholds in commercial disputes and class actions. Estate litigation is expected to surge as record intergenerational wealth transfers generate contested wills, disputed charitable bequests, and family succession battles. In Australia alone, the over-60 population is projected to pass on $3.5 trillion to younger generations over the next two decades.

For litigation funders, estate disputes present an attractive proposition: cases with quantifiable asset pools, clear legal frameworks, and relatively predictable timelines compared to large-scale commercial litigation. The entry of technology-driven players into this space signals a new frontier for the industry as it continues to diversify its portfolio of funded case types.

Historic Jury Verdicts Against Meta and Google Mark Turning Point in Funded Social Media Litigation

By John Freund |

Two landmark jury decisions in March 2026 have delivered the first major courtroom victories in litigation holding social media companies liable for platform design harms, in cases backed by third-party litigation funding.

As reported by Tech Policy Press, a New Mexico jury awarded $375 million in civil penalties against Meta for consumer protection violations, finding the company misled the public about child safety while prioritizing profit. Separately, a Los Angeles jury returned the first-ever verdict holding social media companies liable for addiction-related mental health injuries, awarding $6 million in compensatory and punitive damages in K.G.M. v. Meta and Google.

Both cases employed a "design approach" strategy that targets harmful platform features rather than user-generated content, effectively circumventing Section 230 protections that have long shielded technology companies. Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl ruled that features like infinite scroll that cause harm cannot claim immunity based on content protections alone.

The social media addiction litigation wave has drawn significant interest from the litigation finance community. Flashlight Capital has been among the funders active in this space, backing cases through the Social Media Victims Law Center. With thousands of pending cases across coordinated proceedings and multi-district litigation, these verdicts could open the floodgates for additional funded claims against major technology platforms.

Innsworth-Funded £1.5 Billion Lawsuit Targets Rightmove Over Estate Agent Fees

By John Freund |

UK property portal Rightmove is facing a £1.5 billion competition lawsuit funded by specialist litigation funder Innsworth Capital, alleging the company abused its dominant market position by charging estate agents excessive subscription fees.

As reported by Reuters, the action was filed in the Competition Appeal Tribunal by Jeremy Newman, a former panel member of the Competition and Markets Authority. The opt-out claim automatically includes thousands of estate agents and new home developers who paid Rightmove fees over the past six years, with more than 250 estate agencies already expressing support for the case.

The legal team assembled for the claim includes Scott+Scott UK LLP and Kieron Beal KC of Blackstone Chambers. Innsworth Capital, a London-based litigation funder that specializes in competition and commercial disputes, is fully funding the action. The case represents one of the largest funded competition claims in UK history.

Rightmove has called the claims meritless and said it will mount a vigorous defense, expressing confidence in the value it provides to partners and consumers. Shares in the company fell nearly 9% following the announcement. The case highlights the growing role of litigation funders in enabling large-scale competition claims that individual claimants might otherwise lack the resources to pursue.