Trending Now

All Articles

3220 Articles

Validity Finance Launches New Summer Fellowship for Law Students of Diverse Backgrounds

NEW YORKMay 14, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Leading litigation funder Validity Finance has launched a new Equal Access Fellowship, providing a paid summer fellowship to first-year law students of diverse backgrounds. For 2019, the company has selected two distinguished first-year students to spend the summer in Validity's New York office, with an option to split their time working for a pro bono organization of their choice. The two inaugural Equal Access Fellows are New York University School of Law JD candidate Amanda Gonzalez Burtonand Georgetown University Law Center JD candidate Jarrett Lewis. "We created the Equal Access Fellowship to help law students from underrepresented backgrounds obtain meaningful experience early in their careers, and begin building the professional networks that will promote their growth," said Validity founder and CEO Ralph Sutton. While at Validity, fellows will learn about the burgeoning litigation finance sector and its increasing role in leveling the playing field in commercial disputes. Fellows will interact with perhaps dozens of law firms and help review an equal number of prospective cases seeking funding, performing legal research, participating in client meetings, and drafting articles for publication in the process. After an initial five weeks, each fellow will have the option of either staying with Validity or spending the balance of the summer with a public service organization of his or her choice. In either case, Validity Finance will pay the fellows' salaries for the entire 10-week program. While both Ms. Burton and Mr. Lewis will be based in New York, future fellows will serve in Validity's offices in Chicagoand Houston as the program expands in size and scope. Validity expects to maintain an ongoing mentoring relationship with the fellows as they advance through law school and enter the legal profession.  Validity hopes participants will emerge from the fellowship with an excellent grounding in the economics of law firms and litigation risk. The 2019 fellows were chosen through a selective process that included interviews and a review of academic performance.  Candidates were also required to submit essays addressing factors that influenced their decision to train as lawyers. "We want to help lead the litigation funding sector in giving back to the legal community," said Julia Gewolb, Validity's Head of Underwriting. "Our new Equal Access Fellowship is an opportunity to invest in the development of our profession by helping promote promising, diverse young lawyers.  Fellows will gain not just a solid introduction to the business of law, but an opportunity to meet with dozens of commercial litigation practitioners, helping these young law students build a key professional network early in their legal careers." "We are delighted to welcome Amanda Burton and Jarrett Lewis as our inaugural Equal Access Fellows to New York," Mr. Sutton said. "We look forward to working with these talented law students and are pleased to be offering them an introduction to the world of litigation finance, where stellar lawyers are seeing enormous career opportunities." About the Fellows Validity's inaugural Equal Access Fellows are: Amanda Gonzalez Burton is a 1L at New York University School of Law, where she is a recipient of the Norma Z. Paige Scholarship and is a Dean's Scholar and Birnbaum Women's Leadership Fellow. She is a board member of the Latinx Law Students Association. She previously worked for Teach for America and as a Sponsor for Educational Opportunity Law Fellows at Clifford Chance. Ms. Burton obtained an MBA from Rutgers Business School in 2014 and a B.A. in Interdisciplinary Social Sciences from Florida State University in 2009, graduating magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa. Jarrett Lewis, a 1L student at Georgetown Law School, is a member of the Black Law Students Association and the Rise Fellows Program, a pre-orientation program for students from historically underrepresented backgrounds in the legal profession. He previously interned with Foy & Seplowitz LLC and The Legal Aid Society, and attended the Shook Scholars Institute at Shook Hardy Bacon. He obtained a Bachelor of Science in criminology from Pennsylvania State University in 2018. About Validity Validity is a commercial litigation finance company that provides businesses, law firms and individuals with non-recourse financing for a wide variety of commercial disputes. Founded in 2018 with $250 million in financing, Validity believes that capital and legal expertise combine to help solve legal problems on behalf of clients. Validity's' mission is to make a meaningful difference for clients by focusing on fairness, ethics, innovation, and clarity. Validity is committed to developing a diverse and inclusive work force in its own offices and within the legal profession as a whole. Validity embraces a broad definition of diversity, encompassing race, gender, ethnicity, disability, and LGBTQ background, as well as individuals from underrepresented social, economic, religious, and geographic backgrounds. Equal access to justice; equal access to opportunity— this is what Validity believes is fair and right. CONTACT: Allan Ripp, 212-262-7477, aripp@rippmedia.com SOURCE Validity Finance

Related Links

https://validity-finance.com
Read More

“Therium Access” not-for-profit funding initiative announces first grant awards to improve access to justice in the UK

Jersey, Channel Islands, 15 May 2019. Therium Group Holdings Limited, one of the world’s leading providers of litigation, arbitration and specialty legal finance, today announced the first recipients of grant awards by Therium Access, the firm’s not- for-profit funding initiative dedicated to facilitating access to justice. The inaugural recipients include The Personal Support Unit, LawWorks, Crosslight Advice and the Suffolk Law Centre. Therium Access is the first-of-its-kind initiative in the litigation funding industry. Grants awarded by Therium Access are intended to promote access to justice for those who lack the funds necessary to pursue or defend claims, as well as to projects that seek to improve access to justice. John Byrne, Co-Founder and CEO of Therium Capital Management Limited, said: “We launched Therium Access two months ago and we are delighted to be announcing the first recipients of grant awards. The recipients have been selected on the basis that the funding provided by Therium Access will have a significant impact and help to improve access to justice for as many people as possible. Therium is ten years old this year and the making of this first round of grants is a fantastic way to mark our 10 year anniversary.” Lord Falconer, Chairman of Therium Access Advisory Committee said: “This is a first for the litigation funding industry and will hopefully lead the way for further initiatives.  The not-for-profit funding that Therium Access is providing to these projects will provide help for a large number of individuals who otherwise would not have received legal advice and assistance, in the light of years of punitive cuts to legal aid and advice funding by the state. I strongly support the initiative Therium have taken. And am proud to be Therium Access’ chair.” Ellen Pereira, CEO of Personal Support Unit (PSU) said: “We are immensely grateful to Therium Access for their kind and most generous grant in support of four of our PSU services. In a difficult funding climate and with increased competition for limited funds, we are absolutely delighted that Therium Access is supporting our vital work of increasing access to justice. The funding will not only help us support more people accessing the civil and family courts but also help support our new delivery model, enabling us to reach more people in more places. From everyone here at the PSU, thank you once again for your generosity.” Martin Barnes, CEO of LawWorks said: “LawWorks is delighted to have been awarded one of the first grants by Therium Access. The grant will fund our project to support solicitors providing pro bono advice and representation for social security benefit tribunal appeals. With bespoke training and supervision provided by LawWorks, pro bono volunteers are achieving success rates at appeal of over 90% of cases, ensuring that many vulnerable people receive the vital financial support to which they are entitled.” Bruce Connell, CEO Crosslight Advice said: "We are incredibly grateful to have partners like Therium Access supporting our work with the most vulnerable. Like Therium, we believe that justice should be a universal concept and we are thrilled to be working with them to provide our clients with access to justice and improve their lives." Audrey Ludwig, Director of Legal Services of the Suffolk Law Centre said: "Suffolk Law Centre is England’s newest Law Centre. We work to offer access to justice for all, particularly the most vulnerable and those most impacted by the legal aid desert in Suffolk. Our services include weekly Legal Advice Clinics, a Family Support Court Helpdesk, and a discrimination casework service.  We assisted over 1,500 people in our first year with advice, casework, legal education workshops, policy work and referrals to other services. We are extremely proud to be supported by Therium Access, and are delighted that with their generosity we can continue to support the diverse communities of Suffolk to gain equal access to justice, to challenge disadvantage and inequality, and to help them understand their legal rights, obligations and protections." Therium Access is the primary expression of Therium’s corporate and social responsibility programme. Therium Access dispenses with the criteria of funding for profit and has the sole purpose of facilitating access to justice by funding cases and projects which could not usually be funded on a commercial basis.  Therium Access is a mark of Therium’s wider commitment to the pursuit of justice and the rule of law. Therium Access accepts applications from charities and other entities whose services and projects facilitate access to justice or from those seeking assistance to obtain legal representation on cases (including defence). The applicant’s need and the impact of the grant will be important factors in our review process. The deadline for the submission of the next round of grant applications is 30 August 2019. Applications need to be made by legal representatives or the entity seeking a grant.  The board of Therium Access is assisted by an Advisory Committee which is chaired by Lord Falconer, former Lord Chancellor, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Secretary of State for Justice. Therium Access aims to support access to justice in the broadest terms and considers applications that further the following causes (in no particular order):
  • The right to legal representation or due process;
  • The proper and efficient administration of justice;
  • The advancement of human rights;
  • The promotion of equalityof rights and diversity;
  • The protection of children, the elderly, the disabled, minorities, asylum seekers and other vulnerable or disadvantagedgroups;
  • The advancement of environmental protection or improvement;
  • The promotion of legal educationthat furthers the causes listed above; and
  • Any othercase or project in which a person, group, or entity will not have access to justice without financial assistance.
Therium Access is intended to be a global initiative. Its initial focus is on the UK and it will be rolled out in other jurisdictions in a number of planned phases. About Therium Therium is a leading global provider of litigation and arbitration and specialty legal finance, active in England and Wales since 2009. Over that period, Therium has funded claims with a total value exceeding £34 billion, including many of the largest and most high profile funded cases in the UK.  With investment teams in the UK, USA, Australia, Spain and Norway, Therium has established a track record of success in litigation finance in all forms, including single case litigation and arbitration funding, funding law firms and portfolios of litigation and arbitration claims.  Therium is also a founding member of the Association of Litigation Funders of England and Wales. Therium Access and its not-for-profit funding is the latest innovation from Therium which has consistently been at the forefront of innovation in litigation finance, pioneering the combined use of insurance tools alongside funding vehicles, and introducing portfolio funding products into the UK.  Therium’s ability to develop innovative funding arrangements and bespoke financial solutions for litigants and law firms complements its unmatched experience and rigorous approach to funding a wide range of commercial disputes throughout the world. In Chambers and Partners’ inaugural litigation support directory 2018, Therium was ranked as a Tier 1 litigation funder, and Neil Purslow, the firm’s Chief Investment Officer, was named a leading individual in the litigation funding industry. In February this year, Therium Capital Management was top ranked as one of the two “Leading” litigation and arbitration funding firms in the UK by legal and business directory Leaders League, in their 2019 ranking of litigation funding. Therium was also ranked as “Excellent” in the 2019 US ranking. www.therium.com  About the grant recipients  Law Works- grant for a national and well-known charity to provide funding over 3 years for their secondary specialisation project in welfare benefits law, where volunteer lawyers are trained, supervised and insured to enable them to represent clients on a pro bono basis in the Department of Work and Pensions tribunal. This is an existing project with a 90% success rate in appealing benefit cuts and approximately 270 people will receive assistance as a direct consequence of this grant. https://www.lawworks.org.uk/ Suffolk Law Centre- grant for a regional law centre which was only set up a year ago. It is the only law centre in Ipswich and serves Suffolk, which is a legal aid advice desert. The centre provides varied advice to those who cannot afford legal advice, including on family, immigration, discrimination and housing law matters, it also runs workshops in schools to tackle discrimination and provides support to litigants in person in the local Family Court. In the next 6 months alone, the centre is expected to provide advice and support to 500 people. http://www.iscre.org.uk/legal-services/suffolk-law-advice-centre/ Personal Support Unit (‘PSU’)- grants for a national and well-known charity to provide funding for 1 year for three satellite services in Barnet, Coventry and Southend-on-Sea, and an underfunded and oversubscribed service in Preston, where volunteers provide support to Litigants in Person in court, mostly in respect of family law matters. It is anticipated that these 4 services will provide 3,400 sessions of support in this period. https://www.thepsu.org/ Crosslight Advice- grant for a niche charity to provide funding for 1 year for the costs of a site in a deprived area of West London, where volunteers provide specialist debt advice and support. Many of the charity’s clients are vulnerable, with most having mental health issues and living below the poverty line. They provide a holistic service, with the aim of providing pre-emptive advice to keep people out of the justice system. It is expected that the grant will facilitate in-depth support for around 100 people. https://www.crosslightadvice.org/ Media enquiries Desiree Maghoo Questor Consulting +44 (0)7775 522740 dmaghoo@questorconsulting.com
Read More

Funders and Lawyers Discuss Defense Funding

At the recent General Counsel Forum on Litigation Finance, both funders and lawyers came together to discuss a variety of topics facing the industry. One of those is defense-side funding. What are the options for defense funding? How can defense cases be monetized? Is this really even a thing? The answer to that last question is a resounding 'yes.' Defense-side funding is most definitely a thing - though not as straightforward a thing as plaintiff-side funding. Monetization is clearly an issue for defense funding. A successful defense of a claim often results in a lack of monetization - that is to say, the party wins the case and doesn't pay out a dime. So what incentive is there for funders to take part? Well, there are several creative workarounds here. One option is for a funder to take a percentage of an asset over a select portion of its lifetime. For example, should a funder finance a defense-side IP claim, the funder may accept a percentage of the IP over a certain number of years, or up to a certain clawback benchmark. Additionally, one other (even more creative) option is to redefine what constitutes a 'successful' defense. A firm being sued for $1B, for example, may feel that a $200MM settlement or court award would constitute a success. A funder could finance the claim and take a portion of anything under that 'successful' threshold. In this scenario, there would have to be controls in place to ensure that the client isn't incentivized to take a higher settlement offer, simply in order to avoid paying out the funder's fee capture. Although the most traditional means of defense-side funding remains bundling them into a portfolio of cases. As Reed Oslan of Kirkland & Ellis mentioned, "The only effective way we've found (for defense-side funding) is to pair defense-side with plaintiff-side." Michael German of Vannin Capital was quick to point out that "it's a stretch to call lumping defense and plaintiff-side cases together 'defense funding.' Defense funding is a narrow universe, as there are only a narrow set of cases that can be funded." German may be correct, but that doesn't mean that defense-side funding isn't getting done. Oslan explained that his firm (Kirkland & Ellis) has told clients to give them $50MM of defense work in exchange for $25MM of fees. So the client is saving $25MM off the bat. In return, Kirkland gets a steady stream of plaintiff-side work which they perform on a 100% contingency basis. So it's a win-win for both the firm and the client. The fact that law firms are utilizing alternative fee structures such as this should buoy the hopes of funders looking to get in on the defense funding game. Defense-side funding may take some creativity to get off the ground, but it is certainly a viable tool in every funder's arsenal.

Pravati Capital Names Adam Tubbs Director of Business Development for New York

PHOENIXMay 10, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Pravati Capital, a leading litigation finance and law firm consulting company, announced today it has named Adam C. Tubbs as Director of Business Development for the Company's New York City office.

Mr. Tubbs joins Pravati Capital from Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Skadden), where he was a litigator in the firm's New York office for 10 years. While at Skadden, Mr. Tubbs specialized primarily in mass torts, products liability, class actions, multi-district litigations, and e-discovery, representing Fortune 500 companies in state and federal court.

In his new role, Mr. Tubbs will be responsible for leading the growth and expansion of Pravati Capital's New York office, and working with law firms and corporate clients to evaluate and manage legal risk for potential investments in large, complex legal matters. He will report directly to Alexander Chucri, Chief Executive Officer of Pravati Capital.

"We are extremely pleased to have Adam join us to build our brand and lead our growth initiatives in the important New York market," commented Mr. Chucri. "Adam brings extensive experience and insight as a litigator, as well as deep relationships with major New York law firms and in-house general counsels. He immediately gives us a strong advocate to educate the legal community on the significant benefits of litigation finance - from growth opportunities, to risk management, to increased success rates on recoveries and settlements."

"This is an exciting time for Pravati Capital, as litigation finance continues to gain traction across the legal industry as a competitive business resource," said Adam Tubbs. "Pravati Capital's collaborative team, disciplined underwriting process, and 16 years of experience with all types of litigation enables us to create financing strategies that minimize risk and maximize impact for both law firms and corporations on the most complex matters. I look forward to being part of a dedicated team that is helping to educate and bring positive change to the business of law."

Pravati Capital's primary business is commercial litigation finance, which focuses on providing capital to support both law firms and corporations pursuing high merit cases. Through its law firm consulting group, Pravati Management Group, the company works with law firms to access, deploy, and manage growth capital for partner and practice acquisition and build a scalable financial infrastructure to drive growth.

Adam C. Tubbs, Director of Business Development

Adam Tubbs spent a decade as a litigator in the New York office of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom before joining Pravati Capital. Mr. Tubbs' tenure at Skadden involved managing all phases of litigation – from discovery through trial and appeals – for high profile and complex cases on behalf of the world's largest companies in class actions, multi-district litigations, and individual actions. He has also dedicated a significant portion of his practice to pro bono work on behalf of indigent clients, receiving the New York City Bar Association's Jeremy G. Epstein Award for outstanding pro bono service in 2013.

U.S. Claims Wins First Place in Two Categories in The Daily Report

Delray Beach, FL, May 09, 2019 --(PR.com)-- U.S. Claims (www.USClaims.com), America’s premiere pre-settlement funding company, was recently awarded the top ranking in two “Best Of” categories by readers of The Daily Report, a daily legal newspaper based in Atlanta, Georgia that covers Georgia legal and business news. U.S. Claims will be featured in the “Best Of Edition” of the Daily Report as first place winners, in “Best Consumer Litigation Funding Provider” and “Best Law Firm Funding Provider” categories. “Thank you, Georgia, for your votes and confidence in U.S. Claims as your preferred funding company. We are committed to our mission of providing essential funds to plaintiffs so you, their attorney, has the time to pursue fair settlements,” stated Donna Lee Jones, Esq., VP and Executive Director of U.S. Claims. U.S. Claims, established in 1996, is the longest continuously operating pre-settlement funding firm in the United States and has been consistently voted among the best in the nation. In 2018 alone, U.S. Claims earned first place rankings by the audience of The National Law Journal in several categories including “Best of the Midwest” and “Best Consumer Litigation Funding Provider.” In 2014, the business was acquired by Florida-based specialty finance company DRB Financial Solutions, LLC, a move that has enabled U.S. Claims to assist more customers than ever before. The company offers plaintiffs awaiting a lawsuit settlement the opportunity to receive cash before their case settles with no out of pocket cost and the transactions are non-recourse to the claimant, do not require a credit check, and – best of all – nothing is owed unless the claim is successful. For more information on U.S. Claims pre-settlement funding solutions, please call 1-877-USClaims, or (877) 872-5246. About USClaims: U.S. Claims (www.USClaims.com) provides litigation funding for plaintiffs, attorneys, and surgeries. Its flagship offering is providing non-recourse financial support to personal injury victims, some of whom may have suffered catastrophic injuries from defective products, unsafe premises, motor vehicle accidents, and other types of accidents; this financial support provides the injured plaintiff the means to pay bills and endure the often long and arduous litigation process. About DRB Financial Solutions, LLC: DRB is a leading provider of liquidity solutions for consumers and SMBs. Consumer liquidity solutions are offered through DRB Capital (structured settlement and annuity cash flows) and USClaims (advances for pending personal injury claims). DRB serves SMBs through CRG Financial (bankruptcy claims), Producer Advance (commission advances) and Echelon Medical Capital (medical liens). To learn more, visit www.DRBFinancial.com.
Read More

IMF Bentham-Funded PFAS Class Action Delayed Until Next Year

The class action against the New South Wales Department of Defense, alleging contamination of the chemical PFAS which originated at a nearby Air Force base, has been delayed until next year. IMF Bentham is funding the Shine Lawyers-led claim. As reported by ABC News, the action was supposed to commence in August of this year, with Justice Jagot presiding. However the justice can no longer hear the case, and Justice Lee has taken over in his stead. Justice Lee vacated the trial date for a new one next year, as yet undetermined. The underlying case involves thousands of claimants who allege that a chemical leak at an Air Force based damaged their land and property. A trio of townships are involved in the claim, which is being funded by IMF Bentham and led by Shine lawyers. The Department of Defense has earmarked $50MM to fight the class actions. Meanwhile, angry residents await recompense, and the case is locked up for at least an extra four months longer than originally planned. Since no trial date has been set, there's no telling how long the claimants - along with Shine and IMF - will have to wait for their day in court.
The LFJ Podcast
Hosted By Yoav Navon |
In this episode, we speak with Yoav Navon of Woodford's brand new Israeli office. Woodsford is the first global funder to open an office in Israel, and Yoav tells us about the market for litigation funding there, what types of cases Woodsford is investing in, and how the broader legal and economic environment looks in Israel today. [podcast_episode episode="3851" content="title,player,details"]

In-House Counsel Awash in Concerns Over Litigation Funding

At last week's General Counsel Forum on Litigation Finance, several panel discussions covered a broad array of industry topics. In his opening remarks, co-chair Scott Mozarsky of Vannin Capital promised a diverse set of opinions on the industry - including from those who are skeptical (to put it mildly) of the benefits the industry poses to the broader Legal Services market. The first panel of the day failed to disappoint. The subject was the in-house question: what are the benefits of funding for in-house counsel? After stating the obvious - that costs are skyrocketing and there is downward pressure on legal spend budgets - the panel diverged from a discussion of benefits into one of risk assessment. In the end, panelists highlighted the potential pitfalls of funding from both a private practice and in-house perspective. Matt Atlas of Vannin Capital chaired the panel, which included a diverse cross-section of industry participants: John Salomon, Managing Member of Winchester Consulting Group, Charles Schmerler, Partner at Norton Rose Fulbright, and Linda Zabriskie, VP and Associate General Counsel at Take-Two Interactive Software, a video game developer. And by 'diverse' I don't just mean career-wise; the panel held a contradictory viewpoint on the industry relative to what one would traditionally find at a conference aimed at the funding community. Schmerler illustrated this at the outset by posing the risks associated with funding. He pointed out that just in the past few days, a funding agreement was nullified by the 6th Circuit Court in Kentucky. And even though the 3rd Circuit overturned the nullification of funding agreements in the NFL Concussion Case, the specific language used in the decision left the door open for industry opponents to continue to challenge the validity of the funding agreements in question. These rulings, Schmerler argued, pose a fundamental risk for any corporation who engages with a litigation funder. For even if the case is successful, the funding agreement itself may be voided by the court; a ruling which would then spark a lengthy appeals process, which could in turn delay any settlement or court award payout. Zabriskie added to Schmerler's concern by pointing out there is a concern from in-house counsel regarding issues such as privilege, as well as deeper ethical concerns. "Will conversations with funders come to light in a discovery motion?" she asked. This was a chief concern of her team, given that she once discovered both the existence of a funder and the conversations which took place between plaintiff and funder in a case where Take-Two Interactive was a defendant, after a discovery motion was filed and that information was not deemed privileged. The information discovered "made a difference in the outcome of the case," according to Zabriskie (although not in their case strategy going forward). Additionally, Zabriskie posited another chief concern: "Will plaintiffs counsel use a funder as a way to make an hourly fee for the next two years?" In other words, what is the possibility that your law firm essentially turns into a broker, only bringing the case and delivering motion after motion because the whole thing fully-funded, not because the chances of winning are particularly stellar? When questioned by Atlas as to whether that tension exists anyway, regardless of the presence of a funder, Zabriskie affirmed that indeed it does, "But funding can amplify that risk." Given that her team deals heavily with IP claims, which are already quite time-consuming and costly, Zabriskie is extra sensitive to any potential issue that might elongate a case. Zabriskie also pointed out that there exists a cultural reticence in the Gaming industry towards bringing IP litigation against other players in the space. It is a small world, after all, and the company wants to focus on its core strategy of developing games, not targeting competitors with litigation. That said, there will always be a need for funding in any industry - Gaming included - by small players in the space, thanks to high cost of litigation. After all, the David v. Goliath context is how litigation funding first gained shape, and even though the industry has since broadened its horizons, the need for funding by the David's of the world remains a structural foundation within any industry. Schmerler then capped off the discussion of risk assessment by highlighting the issue of control. He worries that funders may include restrictions in the funding agreement, whereby if a funded party rejects a reasonable settlement offer, the funder has rights to terminate the agreement. Of course, what is considered 'reasonable' may be up for debate. Schmerler argues that if funders experience a pattern of what they deem to be non-cooperation from their client, they may exit the case. He further posited that if a lawyer were to accept $10MM in funding, "Are you really going to tell the funder you're not going to do what they want?" The question weighed heavy as the panel came to a close. One of the points of this panel - indeed of the entire event - was to expose both funders and industry participants to all sides of the funding coin: the good, the bad, and the downright ugly. It's not like funders haven't already heard and deliberated on these concerns, so discussing them openly and forthrightly with industry skeptics can only be a wonderful thing as the sector matures. The first panel certainly succeeded in illustrating some critical concerns of both private practice and in-house lawyers in regard to litigation funding. Stay tuned for further coverage of the event, including panels on defense funding and the industry's utilization of AI / Legal Tech.

Abu Dhabi Releases Litigation Funding Rules

The Abu Dhabi Global Market Courts (ADGM) has released its Litigation Funding Rules, which explain the requirements a funder must meet in order to be officially recognized by the UAE government. As reported in Mondaq, Abu Dhabi - like Dubai - is cozying up to third party funding as a means of jumpstarting its status as a regional arbitration center. In order for entities to qualify as third party funders in Abu Dhabi, they must have at least $5MM of capital and regularly engage in third party funding (of either litigation or arbitration). Law firms and lawyers are prohibited from owning any part of a funder that is funding their client's case, and funding agreements must not include any terms that might induce a law firm or lawyer to violate the ADGM's professional code of conduct. Several other provisions mandate that funders not move to discover privileged information between attorney and client, and that funders include all termination clauses in the contract. Litigation funding is still in its embryonic phase in the UAE, so it is unclear how a court will react to any challenge of a third party funding document. That said, the ADGMs release of its Litigation Funding Rules goes a long way to assuage any concerns that courts might set aside a funded case's settlement on the grounds that third party funding is in conflict with the UAE's code of conduct.