The nature of litigation funding means that it is often most sought after and most valuable in situations where unforeseen events lead to dire consequences for a wide array of parties. As a new piece of analysis suggests, the interconnected nature of the global economy and financial markets means that such situations could increase in frequency and trigger a higher volume of lawsuits requiring funding.This analysis by Jason Levine, investment manager and legal counsel at Omni Bridgeway, uses the example of the latest scandal in the cryptocurrency world: the collapse of FTX, to illustrate the danger of these ‘black swan’ events. Levine points out the unanticipated and massive financial losses that occur in such events, acting as a catalyst for a strong litigious response which can be enabled and bolstered by the use of third-party funding.Levine highlights that in situations where corporate plaintiffs are damaged by these black swan events, they may lack the liquidity to pursue litigation due to the financial strain imposed by the event. He also points to the fact that during these challenging times, taking on the costs of litigation may result in a hit to company valuation, and so, the use of litigation finance to shift these costs off the balance book can become particularly important.Levine concludes that if we do see an increase in the number and scale of these black swan events, particularly in the currently unstable financial markets, litigation funding will be a vital tool for corporates to seek redress and compensation through the legal system.
Although the issue of disclosure has primarily been discussed in recent months with relation to US plaintiffs being required to disclose details of their funding arrangements to the courts, a ruling in another jurisdiction appears to signal a victory for clients looking to disclose confidential information to their funders. Detailed in a piece of analysis by Ogier, a law firm specializing in offshore matters, a new ruling by the Court of Appeal in the British Virgin Islands (BVI), affirmed the right of clients to disclose certain confidential case details to their funders where necessary. In the case of Fang Ankong v Green Elite Limited, the Court agreed with the precedent set by the English High Court, that the ability of funders to access such information does fall within the ‘purposes of proceedings.’Ogier’s analysis noted that this is an important victory for funders and their clients, as it ensures they will be able to share information that could be used to assess the viability of future funding, thereby creating a more transparent process and one in which funders are less likely to be blindsided by information relevant to evaluating funding decisions. However, the analysis did note that this ruling only applies to cases within the BVI, and where cases involve proceedings in other jurisdictions, this guarantee is not automatically assured.
The volume and scale of class actions is on the rise in jurisdictions around the world, mirroring the regularity and broad scope of proceedings that are more commonly experienced in the US. Many industry commentators see Europe as a market with huge potential, driven by the expansion of litigation funding on the continent, and the regulatory development that could act as a catalyst for growth.In an article in Strategic Risk, Henning Schaloske, partner at Clyde & Co, argues that the European Union’s ‘Directive on Representative Actions’ will set the stage for a significant rise in class action activity, as it will create a uniform structure that will enable collective actions to be taken across all member states. Schaloske argues that this directive will be the mechanism to open the door for increased class actions, but it will be litigation funders who will play a key role in realising this opportunity.Whilst Schaloske does not see the EU completely emulating the US model, he does see an opportunity for funders to drive further activity, especially in cases related to data privacy misconduct which are enabled through the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). He does note the counter-balancing factor of proposed regulations that would restrict third-party funding, but argues that the trend of high-profile and high-value cases would suggest that litigation funding will still play an important role.
Lex Ferenda Litigation Funding LLC "LF2" is pleased to announce that it recently launched commercial funding operations after completing the first capital close for its Lex Ferenda Litigation Funding Master Fund. The Fund, which will focus its investments on US litigation and domestic commercial arbitration, welcomed several institutional investors whose commitments to LF2 exceeded initial expectations, and brought the Fund substantially closer to its USD $100 million+ target.LF2 is co-founded by Michael German, a veteran litigator and litigation funder with more than a decade of experience resolving high-value, complex commercial litigation, and Chris Baildon, a financial services expert with more than 30 years of industry experience."We are incredibly excited to officially announce our commercial launch and look forward to being disruptive to the litigation finance industry," said Michael German, LF2's Chief Investment Officer. "We have created an investment platform at LF2 that permits us to quickly assess and make informed, data-driven decisions about the potential litigation investments we consider. The resulting transparent, client-focused investment process, which is driven by true subject-matter experts, makes LF2 a trusted partner and advisor for our clients and the law firms that represent them," said German. "In addition, our industry access and deep bench of seasoned litigators and investors make LF2 a trusted investment manager for the Fund's investor-base as well," said Chris Baildon, LF2's Chief Operating Officer.LF2 Differentiates Through Niche Focus and Veteran Team of Industry ProfessionalsLF2 is a privately held investment management firm, with a focus on the litigation, legal, and litigation support and technology markets. As manager, LF2 is primarily focused on single-case investments in US commercial litigation and domestic commercial arbitration, with sizes ranging between USD $1 million and $10 million, although LF2 retains discretion to make all manner of investments on behalf of the Fund. LF2 brings to market one of the most flexible funding mechanisms currently available, with the ability to assess and invest in claims at any point along the dispute resolution life cycle and with flexible guidelines on law firm and client co-investment."We created the investment program at LF2 to specifically address the lack of focus on the customer across the industry," said German. "LF2 solves for this by creating a unique and individualized funding plan for each investment as assessed from the perspective of each of the investment's underlying stakeholders. Our experience shows us that this yields the greatest outcomes for our clients," said German.Executive TeamMichael German – Co-Founder and Chief Investment OfficerMichael is one of the co-founders of and the Chief Investment Officer at LF2. He is primarily responsible for the firm's strategic direction, investments, and fund risk management. Michael is an experienced litigator, trial lawyer, and litigation funder with more than a decade of experience litigating, resolving, and investing in complex commercial litigation and arbitration matters.Chris Baildon – Co-Founder and Chief Operating OfficerChris is one of the co-founders and the Chief Operating Officer at LF2. He is primarily responsible for the firm's operational and compliance efforts as well as its capital raising and investor relations efforts. Chris brings three decades of global investment banking and finance experience, with substantial experience in management, business development, and capital raising across investment verticals, including litigation finance.David Stickney – Managing Director, Underwriting and RiskDavid is LF2's Managing Director, Underwriting and Risk. He is responsible for the firm's case underwriting, investment monitoring, and risk management programs, and supports the firm's business development efforts. David is a renowned litigator and law firm leader who recovered billions of dollars for his clients through complex commercial litigation, earning him recognition as a "Titan of the Plaintiffs' Bar" and a "Litigation Groundbreaker."Advisory BoardHon. Vanessa Gilmore (ret.) – Member of the Advisory BoardJudge Gilmore is a member of the Advisory Board at LF2. She primarily advises the leadership team on new and existing investments, but is also an important strategic advisor to the firm on various legal and dispute resolution matters. Judge Gilmore recently retired from the bench after more than 25 years serving as an Article III judge in the Southern District of Texas.Scott Mozarsky – Member of the Advisory BoardScott is a member of the Advisory Board at LF2. He is an important strategic advisor to the business on legal, data and technology issues. Scott currently leads the M&A and Capital Markets Advisory Practice for a leading middle market investment bank and previously served as a corporate and legal leader to several large multinationals and publicly-traded entities.Institutionally Managed Capital Takes Long-Term View of LF2LF2's first close was led by a leading global financial investment manager with an alternatives portfolio AUM exceeding USD $22 billion. "We are thrilled to have an exceptionally strong investor, with substantial experience in the litigation finance asset class, show such confidence in LF2. With access to significant committed capital and the substantial reach of its industry-knowledgeable investors, LF2 is able to act quickly in meeting plaintiff funding needs, which is crucial to securing quality case investments," said Baildon.LF2 is structured with the objective of meeting the highest standards in investment process management, quality control, risk management, and compliance. For further information about Lex Ferenda Litigation Funding, please visit: www.lf-2.com. For Investor Relations or other questions, please contact: Chris Baildon.
Patent dispute funding has been a prominent topic in recent headlines, largely due to ongoing cases where the area of third-party funding disclosure has become a divisive issue. However, according to new research, this is unlikely to have a dampening effect on this type of litigation finance activity, and in fact, indicators suggest that it will continue to be a dominant sector.An article by Bloomberg Law highlighting the results of its recent Litigation Finance survey suggests that patent litigation remains one of the most active areas of third-party funding, with 23% of lawyers surveyed indicating they had obtained funding specifically for patent cases in 2022. This activity is reflected by the response from funders, with 68% of these companies having committed capital to patent litigation.Of particular interest for those looking ahead to 2023 is the fact that interest in exploring funding for patent law cases has risen dramatically in recent years, with 30% of lawyers expressing interest in 2022, compared to only 11% when asked two years prior. Unless a major regulatory development appears to discourage the use of third-party funding in patent litigation, it seems likely based on this data that we will see continued growth next year.
Although the US has traditionally been the primary jurisdiction for securities fraud litigation, a wave of regulatory developments and landmark cases has led to a much more active international market in recent years. In countries including the UK, Australia and the Netherlands, we are seeing numerous examples of high-value settlements being secured, and litigation funders are playing an increasing role both in providing capital and reducing risk for investors looking to take legal action.A new article by Bloomberg Law details the rise in investor-led litigation against major corporations, highlighting data from Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) which shows an average of 60 of these lawsuits being brought each year outside of the US, since 2016. Jeff Lubitz, director of securities class actions services at ISS, states that while this trend is not experienced in every jurisdiction, there is clear evidence that in certain countries there is a combination of investors, lawyers and funders working together to actively pursue these claims.Burford Capital’s director of legal finance, Michael Sternhell, argues that the Netherlands and Australia are two particularly promising jurisdictions due to the speed of their legal system and the willingness of the courts to take an inclusive approach to international shareholder participation. Adam Erusalimsky, senior investment officer at Woodsford, also highlighted the important role litigation funders play in this area, as they provide a counterbalance to corporate power and open access to justice for shareholders.
The traditional partnership model for law firms has been one of the bedrocks of the industry for so long, that suggestions of alternative ownership structures have been regularly dismissed without significant debate. However, with the advancement of law firm IPOs in the UK and the rise in adoption of the alternative business structure (ABS), some industry figures see outside investment as the best path forward.Writing in Law.com, Burford co-founder and chief investment officer, Jonathan Molot, argues that while there have been examples of IPOs and outside ownership gone awry, outside equity investment is still the best tool for law firms to innovate. He highlights the fact that the partnership model does not incentivize investment for long-term innovation and development, while outside capital can allow a firm to invest in new technology and services which will benefit firms and their clients.Molot goes on to state that by accessing outside investment, especially from legal finance companies, law firms can explore more flexible billing options for clients, which can be a powerful tool in attracting and retaining customers in such a competitive market. He also raises the currently unstable economic market as another reason why relying on traditional methods of funding can be vulnerable, whereas a third-party funder is able to provide capital and offer a stable foundation for growth and innovation.
Disclosure has been the key word in the litigation funding industry in recent weeks, as an ongoing patent infringement lawsuit brought the issue into the spotlight. However, the latest development in the case suggests that the tide may be turning against funders who seek to maintain a level of discretion over their involvement.Reporting by Reuters details the announcement today that Nimitz Technologies LLC failed in its appeal to prevent a federal judge in Delaware from mandating disclosure of its litigation funding arrangements. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in favour of Judge Colm Connolly, stating that the request for disclosure was within the Court’s authority, and did hold relevance to the ongoing patent infringement case.Whilst the Federal Circuit denied Nimitz’s appeal, it did make clear that Judge Connolly’s order was not a request for the plaintiff to make the details of its funding arrangements known to the public, and they would still have the ability to request the disclosure be sealed by the judge.
Litigation funding has been a powerful tool for widening access to justice and driving innovation in the legal sector, and technological evolution continues to provide ongoing sector optimization. Seeking to enable this kind of evolution, one major industry player is setting up a fund to boost technological development for the legal sector.Detailed in an article by Hello Entrepreneurs, LegalPay, the market-leading funder in India, has launched its Justice and Inclusion (JAI) Fund to provide startups and established LegalTech companies with $2 million in capital. The purpose of the fund is to invest in technologies and solutions to make India’s legal system more efficient, and speed up the litigation process.LegalPay’s founder and CEO, Kundan Shahi, stated that the JAI Fund aims to remedy the lack of capital for Indian startups, especially those whose solutions could be beneficial for the country’s legal structure, which has experienced relatively little innovation. In addition to Shahi, the fund’s investment committee includes Kashish Grover, COO of LegalPay and Ojasvi Babbar, CEO of the Amity Incubation Centre.
Sign Up for LFJ’s Weekly Newsletter & Daily Alerts
Thank you for signing up for the LFJ Newsletter!
Stay informed on the latest news and events taking place in the global legal funding space.
You'll now receive the latest global legal funding news, insights, and analysis straight to your inbox.
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
By completing this form, you agree to allow LFJ to communicate with you per the terms of our Privacy Policy. Your personal information will never be shared or sold to 3rd parties.
Access Premium Content
LFJ members, please log in below to access premium content.