Trending Now

All Articles

3215 Articles
The LFJ Podcast
" />

Episode 16 — Tom Glasgow; Investment Manager (Asia), IMF Bentham

In this episode, Tom Glasgow of IMF Bentham discusses Third Party Litigation Funding in East Asia. What types of cases are being looked at, and what can we expect down the road? How do Hong Kong and Singapore compare and contrast in their approaches to TPLF? And what does the future of TPLF look like in East Asia? We hope you enjoy the listen-- [podcast_episode episode="2220" content="title,player,details"]
Listen Here
The LFJ Podcast
" />

Episode 15 — Chris Deadman; Founder, Invicta Capital Funding

In this episode, we spoke with Chris Deadman, who broke off from Augusta Ventures to start his own SME-focused commercial litigation funder, Invicta Capital Funding. Chris discussed the SME market in the UK, why he thinks it's poised to grow faster than the large-claims market, his push into portfolio financing, and how Brexit will affect the broader industry. Happy listening everyone! [podcast_episode episode="2163" content="title,player,details"]
Listen Here
The LFJ Podcast
" />

Episode 14 — Michael Weisz; Founder & President, YieldStreet

On this episode, we spoke with Michael Weisz, Co-Founder of YieldStreet. YieldStreet is a platform that allows accredited investors the opportunity to invest in alternative assets, such as commercial real estate and Litigation Finance. Michael explained to us why YieldStreet was founded, how the platform works, how they managed to overcome the challenge of educating investors about niche asset classes through YieldStreet University, and what the future looks like for both YieldStreet and Litigation Finance. [podcast_episode episode="2111" content="title,player,details"]
Listen Here

Will AI Replace Lawyers and Litigation Funders?

Developments in legal technology are allowing for a deeper analysis of court decisions, including how specific judges tend to rule, whether certain motions are accepted or denied, and the specific information contained in dockets or rendered decisions which can then be utilized in case strategy. Such information has always been available, but has never before been compiled and analyzed into a single data set. However legal research and analytics firms such as Ravel Law, Lex Machina and others are spearheading developments in predictive technology. In Vannin Capital's latest edition of Funding in Focus, Managing Director Yasmin Mohammad sat down with Ravel Law's Co-Founder Daniel Lewis to discuss the impact AI is already having on the legal industry, and the potential for even greater impact down the road.
Ravel Law allows users to search caselaw quickly and easily, and discover analytical insights regarding judges, courts, cases, and firms. "For example, a litigator can see what percentage of the time a judge grants a motion to dismiss in a particular type of case (e.g. product liability), and discover the language and cases that the judge commonly uses and is influenced by in such decisions," says Lewis. Attorneys can use Ravel Law to make data-driven decisions about case strategy and potential outcomes. In fact, Lewis' firm is already working on the next logical step in that equation - how to connect analyzing the past with predicting the future. Part of the challenge is deciphering which variable - judge, lawyer, motion type, case type, etc. - is responsible for the given outcome. "Saying two variables are highly correlated does not mean one is causing the other; both could be caused by a third, unidentified variable, or it could be a random correlation, or the dataset could be biased or simply too small. Dispute resolution analytical technology currently consists of identifying correlations. It takes an experienced lawyer to review the data and understand the valuable, actionable insights and random patterns that are irrelevant." So even though companies like Ravel Law are utilizing machine learning to enhance attorney-client outcomes, the days of attorneys being supplanted by fully autonomous AI machines are still a ways away. As far as international arbitration is concerned, there are a pair of hurdles which stand in the way of the widespread usage of machine learning: (1) awards are not public information for the most part in commercial arbitration and only partially in investment treaty arbitration; and (2) while tribunals do look to certain decisions for guidance, they only do so in an informative manner (with the exception of a dozen truly authoritative decisions most often quoted). A lack of recorded precedent decisions means there is a small dataset, which limits the ability of AI to effectively predict future outcomes. However that hasn't stopped some firms from utilizing machines in the field of international arbitration. "In the context of international arbitration, I am aware of various firms that have used AI technology in performing voluminous document reviews," said Sammaa A.F. Haridi, Partner at Hogan Lovells US LLP. "There have been a number of studies on this and the results show that the use of AI can produce reliable results for clients at a lower cost." As LFJ recently reported, Daniel Katz, a law professor at Chicago’s Illinois Institute of Technology, confirmed that it is possible to use historic data to predict, with a high degree of accuracy, the decisions of the US Supreme Court. AI-driven legal research firms like Ravel Law are taking full advantage, and their products could influence the legal landscape for years to come.
Litigation Finance Primer
The LFJ Podcast
Litigation Finance Primer" />

Episode 13 — Noel Edmonds; British TV Presenter & Radio Executive

This week we speak with Noel Edmonds, a UK broadcasting legend, radio executive, and host of 'Deal Or No Deal.' Noel has secured financing from Therium Capital Management for his £60MM claim against Lloyds Bank. Noel shared his thoughts on 'Lliars Banking Group,' why he opted for litigation funding, and the reason he founded an internet radio station - Positively Noel - where all songs relate to his battle with Lloyds. It's a wide-ranging interview, spanning topics from Body Energy to Star Wars... we hope you enjoy listening! [podcast_episode episode="2055" content="title,player,details"]
Listen Here
The LFJ Podcast
" />

Episode 12 — Zachary Krug; Senior Investment Officer, Woodsford Litigation Funding

In this episode, Zachary Krug shares his global perspective on Litigation Finance by discussing the industry's emergence in both Latin America and the Middle East. What is the status of Litigation Finance in those emerging markets? How have local practitioners and corporates responded to the practice? And what are the specific challenges facing global funders in each locale? All that and more, on this episode of the Litigation Finance Podcast... Note -- Link to Zachary's article on "The Steady Rise of Litigation Funding in Latin America" is here [podcast_episode episode="2004" content="title,player,details"]
Listen Here

Litigation Finance and China’s Belt and Road Initiative

By Mauritius Nagelmueller China is building a multi-trillion dollar trade and infrastructure network – a new silk road – and the legal world is preparing for the disputes that will inevitably arise. What is the Belt and Road Initiative all about, and what impact will it have on litigation finance? Being one of the largest infrastructure and investment projects in history, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)[1] will alter the global economy and define China’s role in it. The initiative covers 65% of the world’s population in more than 68 countries, and 40% of the global GDP. An anticipated overall investment of USD 4-8 trillion will connect China with the rest of Asia, Europe and Africa, through six main geographic corridors and a Maritime Silk Road. China’s position is that BRI will improve the infrastructure along the route, providing a network of highways, railways, ports, energy and development projects for trade and cultural exchange. Chinese state-owned banks, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (formed in 2015, but already encompassing 84 approved member states, and with a capital of USD 100 billion – half of the World Bank’s capital), the Silk Road Fund, and investors from the private sector are providing the necessary financing. About USD 1 trillion has already been invested. It seems likely that BRI, if successful, will shift more economic and political power to China. Major concerns surround the environmental impact of the vast project, uncertainties regarding the exact parameters and how much local economies will actually benefit. Security risks along the Belt remain constant. Some even fear a new Chinese “empire”. It remains to be seen which of these fears are justified, but it is interesting to note that China’s president Xi Jinping, who unveiled BRI in 2013 and made the initiative a central tenet of his foreign policy agenda, will likely remain in power, as the Communist Party of China just announced plans to abolish the two-term limit on the presidency. To predict that legal disputes will arise under BRI is to state the obvious, and the legal community in Asia and beyond is preparing accordingly. Jurisdictions are already competing for recognition as the prime venue for BRI related proceedings. In an effort to provide wide-ranging dispute resolution services, China plans to establish an international commercial court in Xi’an for disputes surrounding the land-based transport corridors, another in Shenzhen for the maritime route, and a central court headquartered in Beijing. All three bodies will provide arbitration and mediation services. China’s neighbors share its expectations regarding dispute resolution. In 2017, Hong Kong and Singapore permitted litigation finance in international arbitration, and the legalization for state court procedures may soon follow. Hong Kong passed its law shortly after a BRI Forum in Beijing, and partly also to strengthen its position as a go-to center for BRI related disputes, particularly for the maritime and construction fields. Arbitration institutions around the world, including the ICC (International Chamber of Commerce), SIAC (Singapore), and HKIAC (Hong Kong), encourage the adoption of their rules in BRI deals, and Malaysia’s KLRCA and Seoul’s KCAB are preparing accordingly. Chinese and Singaporean mediation centers (CCOIC and SIMC) have plans to cooperate for BRI related mediation proceedings, while Hong Kong is developing an online arbitration and mediation tool specialized on the initiative. Chinese officials have even publicly floated the concept of an innovative hybrid method combining aspects of arbitration and mediation, with courts playing a central role as well. Many legislators view litigation finance as a vital component in their jurisdiction’s status as a prime dispute resolution center, and litigation finance firms are aggressively seizing on the new opportunities presented. Select funders have already opened offices in Asia, others will soon follow, or plan to be involved from abroad. Entities who plan to invest along the Belt, including many Chinese companies, will not only face complex regulatory challenges, but also disputes with foreign governments, possibly in multiple jurisdictions. In addition to first-rate legal advice, parties will sometimes require external financing to pursue their claims under BRI. Both investors and law firms will utilize the benefits of litigation finance, and seek tailored financing solutions for their cases arising under BRI related projects. This will include single cases, as well as multiple disputes from investments being bundled into portfolios of claims. BRI will have a significant impact on litigation finance in the coming years, as a host of challenges and new opportunities present themselves. As has occurred previously, litigation finance will support meritorious claims which could not be brought without the assistance of external financing, help businesses and law firms diversify and boost their portfolios without increasing risk, and continue to promote access to justice. Litigation finance will benefit from this unprecedented trade and infrastructure initiative. It has already become part of the legal world, and it will soon be part of BRI. [1] Originally called One Belt and One Road Initiative.   Mauritius Nagelmueller has been involved in the litigation finance industry for more than 10 years.
Read More
The LFJ Podcast
" />

Episode 11 — Jason Redlus; Founder & CEO, Litigation Finance Journal

Today marks the 1-year anniversary of Litigation Finance Journal!  To celebrate, we brought in LFJ's Founder and CEO, Jason Redlus. Jason explained why he first started LFJ, how he assesses the Litigation Finance industry from the standpoint of an investor, what funders are doing well (and what they should be doing differently), and what he expects LFJ will look like 1 year from now. We hope you enjoy taking a peek behind the LFJ curtain on this special episode-- [podcast_episode episode="1959" content="title,player,details"]
Listen Here
The LFJ Podcast
" />

Episode 10 — Reid Zeising; Founder & CEO, Cherokee Funding

On this episode of the LFJ podcast, we spoke with Reid Zeising, Founder and CEO of Atlanta-based Consumer Legal Funder, Cherokee Funding. Reid opened up about Cherokee's funding process, the significance of 'rolling contracts,' why plaintiffs should value time over money, and why he believes the Chamber of Commerce and the Consumer Legal Funding industry can and should start working together. [podcast_episode episode="1899" content="title,player,details"]
Listen Here