Trending Now

Global Lawsuit Loans Market Report 2019

Global Lawsuit Loans Market Report 2019

Global Lawsuit Loans Market Report 2019 is a professional and in-depth research report on the world’s major regional market conditions of the Lawsuit Loans industry, focusing on the main regions (North America, Europe and Asia) and the main countries (United States, Germany, Japan and China). The report firstly introduced the Lawsuit Loans market basics: definitions, classifications, applications and industry chain overview; industry policies and plans; product specifications; manufacturing processes; cost structures and so on. Then it analyzed the world’s main region market conditions, including the product price, profit, capacity, production, capacity utilization, supply, demand and industry growth rate etc. In the end, the report introduced new project SWOT analysis, investment feasibility analysis, and investment return analysis. Get sample copy of this report@  https://bit.ly/2LSDBVP Some of the key players operating in this market include: Peachtree Financial Solutions,DRB Capital,J.G. Wentworth Structured Settlements,Oasis Legal Finance,Fair Rate Funding,High Rise Financial,LawCash,Mayfield Settlement Funding,Nova Legal Funding,Pravati Capital The report includes six parts, dealing with: 1) Basic information 2) The Asia Lawsuit Loans market. 3) The North American Lawsuit Loans industry. 4) The European Lawsuit Loans industry. 5) Market entry and investment feasibility. 6) The report conclusion. Reasons for Buying this Report This report provides pin-point analysis for changing competitive dynamics It provides a forward looking perspective on different factors driving or restraining market growth It provides a six-year forecast assessed on the basis of how the market is predicted to grow It helps in understanding the key product segments and their future It provides pin point analysis of changing competition dynamics and keeps you ahead of competitors It helps in making informed business decisions by having complete insights of market and by making in-depth analysis of market segments TABLE OF CONTENT: 1 Industry Overview of Lawsuit Loans Market 2 Manufacturing Cost Structure Analysis of Lawsuit Loans Market 3 Technical Data and Manufacturing Plants Analysis of Lawsuit Loans Market 4 Global Lawsuit Loans Market Overview 5 Lawsuit Loans Market Regional Market Analysis 6 Global (2015-2019) Lawsuit Loans Market Segment Market Analysis (by Type) 7 Global (2015-2019) Lawsuit Loans Market Segment Market Analysis (by Application) 8 Major Manufacturers Analysis of Lawsuit Loans Market 9 Development Trend of Analysis of Lawsuit Loans Market 10 Lawsuit Loans Marketing Type Analysis 11 Consumers Analysis of Lawsuit Loans Market 12 Conclusion of the Global Lawsuit Loans Market Professional Survey Report 2019 Get Complete Report@ https://bit.ly/2LSDBVP Contact Us: Sanjay Jain Manager – Partner Relations & International Marketing www.reportsandmarkets.com info@reportsandmarkets.com Ph: +44-020-3286-9338 (UK) Ph: +1-214-736-7666 (US) About Us: Market research is the new buzzword in the market, which helps in understanding the market potential of any product in the market. Reports And Markets is not just another company in this domain but is a part of a veteran group called Algoro Research Consultants Pvt. Ltd. It offers premium progressive statistical surveying, market research reports, analysis & forecast data for a wide range of sectors both for the government and private agencies all across the world. This release was published on openPR.
Secure Your Funding Sidebar

Commercial

View All

Chartered Institute of Arbitrators Issues First Guidance on Third-Party Funding in Arbitration

By John Freund |

The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (CIArb) has issued its first-ever Guideline on Third-Party Funding in arbitration, offering comprehensive direction on how parties, counsel, tribunals, and funders should navigate funded disputes. This milestone guidance is aimed at promoting transparency, consistency, and effective case management in arbitration where third-party funding plays a role.

The guideline addresses two primary areas. First, it outlines the third-party funding process, explaining funding structures, pricing models, and key provisions typically found in funding agreements. It provides a practical overview of the benefits and potential pitfalls of using funding in arbitration proceedings. Second, it tackles arbitration-specific case management issues, such as how funder involvement—though often portrayed as passive—can influence strategic decisions, including arbitrator selection, settlement discussions, and procedural posture. The guideline stresses the need to clearly delineate the scope of the funder's control or influence in any agreement.

CIArb also emphasizes the importance of early disclosure. The existence of funding and the identity of the funder should be revealed at the outset to avoid conflicts of interest and challenges to tribunal impartiality. On confidentiality, the guidance urges parties to reconcile the typically private nature of arbitration with the disclosure obligations inherent in funded cases.

Additionally, the guideline explores three critical cost issues: whether funders may cover arbitrator deposits, the increasing prevalence of security for costs orders targeting funders, and the evolving question of whether tribunals should allow recovery of funding costs.

Minister Urges Litigation Funders to Embrace Self-Regulation

By John Freund |

UK Courts Minister Sarah Sackman has issued a clear call to third-party litigation funders operating in England and Wales: join the Association of Litigation Funders (ALF) and commit to self-regulation as the government weighs potential legislative reforms for the industry.

An article in Legal Futures notes that while speaking in Parliament, Sackman underscored the importance of litigation funding in promoting access to justice and enhancing the UK’s global standing as a legal hub. However, she also warned that regulatory uncertainty following the Supreme Court’s PACCAR ruling in 2023 could drive funders to more predictable jurisdictions such as New York, Paris, or Singapore.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) earlier this year urged Parliament to swiftly pass legislation reversing the PACCAR decision, which cast doubt on the enforceability of many litigation funding agreements by classifying them as damages-based agreements. The CJC also advocated for a light-touch regulatory approach, aiming to preserve funding’s benefits while instituting safeguards.

In the Commons, Conservative MP Sir Julian Smith echoed this sentiment, suggesting that strengthened self-regulation through ALF membership may be sufficient, possibly avoiding the need for more burdensome legislation. Sackman did not commit to a timeline for government action but emphasized that litigation funding’s reputation and long-term viability hinge on transparent practices and adherence to recognized standards.

Alberta Pays AU$95M to Montem Resources, Highlights Risk of Litigation-Funding Exposure

By John Freund |

In a striking development, the Province of Alberta has awarded a CA$95 million (roughly AU$102 million) settlement to the Australian mining entity Montem Resources (now rebranded as Evolve Power Ltd.) to resolve a CA$1.75 billion lawsuit alleging that Alberta’s 2022 reinstatement of its coal-moratorium policy amounted to a de facto expropriation of its coal-licence interests.

According to an analysis in The Tyee, the settlement followed earlier compensation to another Australian-backed miner, Atrum Coal Ltd., which reportedly collected CA$143 million though it declared sunk costs of approximately CA$46 million. For Montem, the article notes its declared investment into the assets was about CA$15 million, yet it received a multiple of that in the final settlement.

The piece further highlights that about one-third (roughly CA$35 million) of the Montem payout will go to an Australian litigation-funding firm, Wahl Citadel, which backed Montem’s suit after providing loans totaling around AU$6 million on conditional terms, effectively “betting” on a successful outcome.

Critics argue Alberta’s government under Premier Danielle Smith and Energy Minister Brian Jean did not vigorously defend the case through mechanisms provided under the Mines & Minerals Act, and instead opted to settle for large sums—arguably far exceeding what the firms had originally invested.