John Freund's Posts

3076 Articles

Therium launches “Therium Access” to provide not-for-profit litigation funding to improve access to justice in the UK

Therium Group Holdings Limited, one of the world’s leading providers of litigation, arbitration and specialty legal finance, today announced the launch of Therium Access, which will provide not-for-profit litigation funding in order to facilitate access to justice. Therium Access is the first-of-its-kind initiative in the litigation funding industry. Grants awarded by Therium Access are intended to provide access to justice to those who lack the funds necessary to pursue or defend claims, as well as to projects that seek to improve access to justice. 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, and its launch coincides with the firm’s 10th anniversary. John Byrne, Co-Founder and CEO of Therium Capital Management Limited, said: “We are delighted to announce the launch of Therium Access, which is dedicated to improving access to justice by providing not-for -profit litigation funding for cases and projects of public interest. Therium is ten years old this year and the making of the first Therium Access grants in April will be a fantastic way to mark the firm’s 10th anniversary.” Lord Falconer, Chairman of Therium Access Advisory Committee said: “I am delighted to chair this important initiative, which is a first for the litigation funding industry and will hopefully lead the way for further initiatives.  The choking of legal support that we have witnessed in this country as a result of unprecedented cuts to legal aid has had drastic consequences on the vulnerable who are being denied access to justice, and on those individuals and organisations who work tirelessly to support them.  The not-for-profit funding that Therium Access will provide through grants for cases and projects is urgently required to make some contribution towards restoring the right to legal support, which is the bedrock of our justice system.” The first grants will be announced in April. 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 will be assisted by an Advisory Committee which will be chaired by Lord Falconer, former Lord Chancellor, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Secretary of State for Justice. Further appointments to the advisory committee will be announced in due course. 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 will be 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 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
Read More

IMF Bentham stands behind claimants in A$75 million court action against AET (a subsidiary of IOOF)

SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA: 11 MARCH 2019:  Backed by Australia's leading litigation funder, IMF Bentham Limited (ASX:IMF), thousands of Australian retirees, who lost everything after investing in a forestry scheme in the 1980s, will finally get their day in court against IOOF. The Supreme Court of NSW has scheduled the hearing over eight days from 1 July. The investors’ lawyers, Piper Alderman, allege that IOOF subsidiary, Australian Executor Trustees, failed in its duty as security trustee to protect the investors’ interests in the Southern Australian Perpetual Forests (Sapfor) scheme. Investors in Sapfor, known as “Covenantholders”, were promised a safe long term investment into land and trees in Mount Gambier’s green triangle area, but in 2012 saw their investments reduced to nil as a string of corporate blunders allowed the scheme assets to be consumed in the insolvency of Tasmanian forestry giant Gunns. It is claimed AET acted negligently and in breach of trust by prematurely releasing the scheme’s security arrangements before receiving sale proceeds worth $55m. The money was due to the Covenantholders, but never reached them – instead Gunns used it to repay its debts to bankers. Investor Anger Covenantholder Peter Hickson, from Penrith, NSW, said:
  • “I purchased my 1983 covenant in early 1984 and paid it off over several years with some effort. The plan was deliberate to have a long-term investment in what I thought was a reputable company.
  • “I trusted them and feel betrayed. They wouldn’t tell me anything.”
  • “I rang them a lot of times and got absolutely nowhere. There didn’t seem to be anybody in particular looking after the matter. It seemed to float around the office.”
  • “I’m a registered nurse and if I ever stuff up I would have to go before the registration authority. These people should face the appropriate regulating body. They should be held accountable for their actions. They should have their credentials withdrawn.
  • “Following the sale of 30 years of timber plus land valuation naturally I expected a return.”
  • Mr Hickson said he and his family faced hardships in paying off the covenant.  “I had a young family at the time and I struggled to pay it off. I was delighted when I did.  My wife got sick during the middle of it all and then, in 1990, she died.  I didn’t have the money at the time and had two young children (two boys) and had to bring them up.”
  • “I didn’t do anything wrong but lost the lot because they pinched it,” Mr Hickson said.
Another Covenantholder said
  • We were a young couple with three small children and only one wage when we believed the SAPFORagent and his promise of benefits from growing trees which we love…my prayer is that there is justice for the many cheated of their rights”
The Legal Case The Covenantholders are represented by leading law firm, Piper Alderman. Partner Simon Morris said:
  • “This is a remarkably simple case. The bundle of rights that protected Covenantholders’ investment included Covenantholders holding security over the scheme assets.  That security was to remain in place until Covenantholders received the proceeds from the sale of their assets. The negligence is that upon the sale of the scheme assets the security trustee, AET, as advised by Sparke Helmore lawyers, inexplicably consented to the security being released without the Covenantholders also receiving the proceeds from the sale of their assets. The result was the Covenantholders went from being secured for the full value of their investment to losing everything. These Covenantholders have been badly let down by the professionals whose job it was to look after their commercial interests. Fortunately our legal system allows third-party funding so these wronged individuals can afford to ‘have their day in court and achieve some redress’”. 
Providing Access to Justice Oliver Gayner of IMF Bentham said: “Many Covenantholders lost their retirement funds when this scheme went under, but when they tried to enquire what had happened they were met with a ‘wall of silence’. IMF is proud to be standing behind the Covenantholders and Trustee David Kerr at RSM Partners. We hope with our support they will finally see the justice they deserve.” Background  The Sapfor scheme, established in 1926, was marketed to Australian investors as “truly a unique opportunity… your investment is little affected by industrial disputes or temporary economic downturns”.  Subscribing for a Covenant bought an interest in the scheme trees and land, and a right to the proceeds when the trees were felled, milled and sold as timber.  Back in 1964, Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Ltd in Adelaide had been appointed to protect the Covenantholders’ interests by acting as the scheme’s security trustee.  AET registered security instruments known as “encumbrances” which, similar to a mortgage, prevented the land from being sold until the Covenantholders were paid their due proceeds. The genesis of the trouble can be traced to 2008, when Gunns, the Tasmanian forestry group run by controversial businessman John Gay, bought Sapfor and its parent company Auspine in a deal valued at nearly $350 million.  The deal would prove costly as the bottom fell out of the woodchip market following the GFC, and Gunns struggled to pay off its debts. In 2010, two years after acquiring Auspine, Gunns granted fixed and floating charge security over all the Sapfor scheme assets to its lender ANZ Bank as a condition for a new loan of $340m. AET was unaware at the time this had occurred, despite the charge being entered on ASIC’s public register.  As Gunn's cash troubles grew it sought to sell off assets to pay the ANZ back.  A buyer from overseas was found for Sapfor, and in March 2012 – by which time Gunns’ shares had been suspended from trading - a deal was signed with Gunns agreeing to sell the trees and land for $39m and AET agreeing to release its encumbrances with immediate effect.  AET consented for the money to be paid directly to Gunns’ overdraft account, and when only a few months later Gunns went bust the entirety of the scheme’s assets, totalling around $55m, were lost to receivers appointed by ANZ Bank. The Covenantholders say that AET’s duty was to keep this security in place until the Covenantholders were paid their entitlements in full. “Would your bank release its mortgage over your property until you’d paid them back every last cent?  Of course, they wouldn’t.  It’s really that simple.  The trustee had one job to do, and they stuffed it up”, said Mr Hickson. Legal Proceedings The current court stoush began in 2016 when an aggrieved Covenantholder, with backing from IMF Bentham, applied to the NSW Supreme Court to appoint a new trustee to investigate Sapfor’s affairs. In July 2016, David Kerr of RSM Partners in Sydney was appointed additional trustee and a year later, with approval from the Court, Mr Kerr commenced proceedings on behalf of the Covenantholders - believed to number around 4500 in total - to recover the $55m losses plus interest from AET. Court papers show AET sought to defend the case by blaming its then lawyers, Sparke Helmore, for giving allegedly negligent advice.  Meanwhile parent company IOOF has been fighting its own problems, including the Hayne Royal Commission and the Provident Capital class action which it agreed to settle for a reported $44.25m. For Mr Hickson and his fellow Covenantholders, many of whom are elderly retirees, the court hearing can’t come soon enough. “We have waited since 1983 for these trees to come and now we have nothing, we are gutted down here”, said one. Others reported their frustration at the “wall of silence” as repeated enquiries to AET and IOOF led to nothing. “It would be wonderful if those responsible are penalised and held to account”. Who is who Sapfor - Southern Australia Perpetual Forests Ltd (ACN 007 872 120) Was set up in 1926 for commercial timber production. For generations, it was marketed as a secure and tax efficient long-term investment suitable for retail investors, who could share in proceeds of timber growing in the green triangle area around Mount Gambier in South Australia and Victoria.  Sapfor later became part of the Auspine forestry group, and then part of Gunns following Gunns’ acquisition of Auspine in 2008. Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Ltd (AET) An Adelaide based subsidiary of the Australian Executor Trustees group, itself part of IOOF. AET’s role was to act as the scheme’s security trustee on behalf of the Convenantholders, overseeing Sapfor’s operation of the scheme, registering security (in the form of encumbrances over land), and ensuring that Covenantholders received their proceeds due from the sale of scheme land and timber. Covenantholders  The mainly retail investors who invested in the scheme via subscriptions for “Covenants”. Gunns  Tasmanian forestry group run by John Gay. Gunns bought Auspine in 2008, and in 2010 granted its principal creditor, ANZ Bank, a charge over the entirety of the Auspine scheme assets as collateral for further borrowing. Became insolvent in September 2012. Piper Alderman A commercial law firm with offices in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Adelaide. It has more than 60 partners and more than 300 staff.  Piper Alderman (partner Simon Morris) act for Mr David Kerr, the additional trustee of the scheme who is bringing the claim on behalf of the Covenantholders, and are instructing Alan Sullivan QC, David Sulan and Sebastian Hartford Davis of the Sydney bar. IMF Bentham (ASX: IMF) Litigation funder backing Mr Kerr and working with Piper Alderman (Investment Manager: Oliver Gayner). Timeline 1926  The Sapfor scheme is established. For generations, it was marketed as a secure and tax efficient long-term investment suitable for retail investors, who could share in proceeds of timber growing the green triangle area around Mount Gambier in South Australia and Victoria. The scheme was operated by two SEAS Sapfor companies, which were part of the Auspine group. 1964 AET appointed as security trustee by a Deed of Trust.  AET’s core duty was to ensure that Covenantholders received their proceeds due from the sale of scheme land and timber. One of the features that helped the stability of the investment was that AET held security instruments called encumbrances (similar in effect to a mortgage) over the scheme land securing Sapfor’s obligation to pay proceeds of timber sales to Covenantholders. Additionally, Sapfor was prohibited from charging scheme timber and land without AET’s consent. January 2008  Auspine is bought by the Gunns Group in a deal reportedly valued at $348m (cash of $279 million with the balance paid in Gunns shares). February 2010 In breach of the prohibition against charging scheme assets, and unbeknown to AET and the Covenantholders, Gunns granted its principal creditor, ANZ Bank, a charge over the entirety of the Sapfor scheme assets as collateral for $340m further borrowing.  The charge was registered with ASIC but its existence was initially not detected by AET. June 2011 Gunns’ Annual Report shows loss of $355.5m. February – March 2012 Gunns’ shares are twice suspended from trading on the ASX. March 2012 In an attempt to repay its massive debts, Gunns sold the scheme trees and land to a third party investor for $39m. As part of the sale of the scheme assets, AET consented to the encumbrances in favour of Covenantholders being discharged, but received nothing in return as the proceeds were paid directly into Gunns’ overdraft account. The consequence was that none of the purchase price for the scheme timber, and other scheme assets totalling around $55m, ever reached the Covenantholders. Instead, the proceeds became subject to the ANZ charge. September 2012 Gunns is insolvent and receivers and administrators are appointed to take over the company. Having had their security forfeited by AET the Covenantholders were rendered unsecured creditors in the Gunns’ liquidation. The result was that 4500 to 5000 Covenantholders lost their whole investment.  With Sapfor insolvent and AET not answering questions, Covenantholders faced a “wall of silence” when trying to understand where their savings had gone. March 2015 High Court rejects AET’s attempts to argue that the receivers did not, in fact, have priority: Korda v Australian Executor Trustees (SA) Ltd [2015] HCA 6. Mid 2015 Simon Morris of Piper Alderman takes up the case after being contacted by an aggrieved Covenantholder, Mr John Armour. June 2016 A new trustee is appointed after Piper Alderman applied to the NSW Supreme Court on Mr Armour’s behalf. The new trustee is Mr David Kerr of RSM.  Mr Kerr is granted access to the books and records of the trust and conducts investigations. June 2017 Mr Kerr receives judicial approval from the NSW Supreme Court (equity division) to commence proceedings against AET for negligence and breach of trust seeking to recover the Covenantholder losses, by now totalling around $75m including interest. November 2017 AET files its defence denying liability and cross-claiming against its then solicitors, Sparke Helmore. for the losses.  Sparke Helmore also refuses to accept liability. February 2019 A date is set down for the case to be heard in the NSW Supreme Court: 1 July 2019 (8 days). ABOUT IMF BENTHAM LIMITED IMF has a highly experienced litigation funding team overseeing its investments. We have a 90% success rate over 184 completed investments and have recovered over AU$1.4 billion for clients since 2001. IMF is one of the leading global litigation funders, headquartered in Australia and with offices in the US, Canada, Singapore, Hong Kong and London. IMF has built its reputation as a trusted provider of innovative litigation funding solutions and has established an increasingly diverse portfolio of litigation funding assets at 31 December 2018, IMF has 80 active investments around the world. For further information  regarding IMF and its activities, please visit www.imf.com.au ABOUT RSM  RSM Partners is one of Australia’s leading professional services firms, with advisers in 30 offices across Australia providing expert corporate financial and advisory accounting services. RSM is a member of the world’s sixth largest audit, tax and consulting network. This global nexus of member firms draws on more than 43,000 people in 800 offices, across 120 countries - including the world’s top 40 major business centres - to help guide clients through business challenges, both locally and seamlessly across borders. RSM member firms offer a wide range of specialist international services, such as wealth management, IT, consulting, legal and risk advisory, forensic accounting, human resource consulting, and global compliance reporting. David Kerr is a Partner of the Restructuring & Recovery division and has over 25 years' experience. He provides advice on and accepts appointments to both corporate and personal insolvency matters. For further information please visit www.rsm.global/australia/ ABOUT PIPER ALDERMAN Piper Alderman is a leading, national law firm, providing commercial legal services across Australia for over 160 years. We have achieved our impressive growth by listening to our clients, responding to their needs and creating practical legal solutions. Piper Alderman Partner, Simon Morris, is leading the claim against AET and Sparke Helmore. Simon is a pre-eminent commercial litigation lawyer. He practises predominantly in complex disputes in the Federal and Supreme Courts and has a particular focus in securities class actions. He is the Head of Piper Alderman’s Sydney office and was formerly the national practice head of Piper Alderman’s commercial litigation division. For further information please visit www.piperalderman.com.au
Read More

LCM TO COMMIT CAPITAL OF A$100 MILLION IN AUSTRALASIA DURING 2019

SYDNEY, 11 March 2019: Litigation Capital Management (“LCM” or “the Company”), a leading international provider of litigation financing solutions, announces its intention to commit A$100 million of capital into Australasian litigation finance projects during 2019. The capital commitment will be invested across all types of litigation finance projects that LCM typically funds, although the Company expects a significant proportion to be allocated to funding corporate portfolio projects across the region. There is a significant growth opportunity for LCM to finance corporate portfolio projects, where funding and risk management solutions are provided directly to corporate entities across a number of cases. This is a market that is still new and largely under-developed in the region and is therefore viewed as key area for LCM’s future growth. LCM’s team includes a number of pioneers in this space, who have significant experience of originating and structuring such transactions, which allow a company to remove the financial risk of undertaking litigation and the detrimental accounting effects that accompany it. Patrick Moloney, CEO of LCM, said: “The success of our listing on the AIM component of the London Stock Exchange means that we are able to commit capital on a larger scale to high-quality litigation finance projects. Our heritage is in Australasia, a market we have operated in for over 20 years, and we are pleased to announce a commitment of A$100 million in capital to this key region for LCM. Whilst we see strong growth potential across all types of projects that we finance, we are particularly excited about the opportunities in the corporate portfolio space. “Our team includes some of the most experienced practitioners globally in developing corporate portfolio transactions, which are nuanced and complex, with different value drivers and success factors to single-case litigation finance projects. However, they make complete sense for the client and elevate the funders position to one of being a true corporate finance provider.” About Litigation Capital Management (LCM) Litigation Capital Management ("LCM") is a leading international provider of litigation financing solutions. This includes single-case and portfolio; across class actions, commercial claims, claims arising out of insolvency and international arbitration. LCM has an unparalleled track record, driven by effective project selection, active project management and robust risk management. Headquartered in Sydney, with offices in London, Singapore, Brisbane and Melbourne, LCM has been listed on AIM (part of the London Stock Exchange) since December 2018, trading under the ticker LIT. www.lcmfinance.com    
Read More

Financial Poise™ Announces “Commercial Litigation Funding,” a New Webinar Series Premiering March 13th at 3:00 PM CST through West LegalEdcenter™

The first episode in this series is titled "An Introduction to a New Yet Old Funding Alternative " and is co-produced by West LegalEdCenter™. It will feature Jeremy Waitzman (Sugar Felsenthal Grais & Helsinger LLP); David Spiegel (GLS Capital, LLC); Ken Epstein (Bentham IMF); and Evan Fried (Greybridge Capital LLC). CHICAGO (PRWEB) March 06, 2019 About the Series: This three-part series is geared towards educating attorneys and clients on legal/ethical, strategic, and business decisions when considering litigation funding, and investors seeking to learn about an increasingly mainstream asset class. About the Episode: Litigation funding is an increasingly-popular tool for attorneys and clients to share the risk and reward of litigation with third-party investors, and for investors to capitalize on the uncorrelated returns generated by legal-driven revenue. This webinar is intended to provide an overview of the topic generally, touching on the "who," "what," "where," "when," "why" and "how's" behind litigation funding. To learn more, click here. The webinar will be available on-demand after its premiere. As with every Financial Poise Webinar, it will be an engaging and plain English conversation designed to entertain as it teaches. About Financial Poise  Financial Poise has one mission: to provide reliable plain English business, financial and legal education to investors, private business owners and executives, and their respective trusted advisors. Financial Poise content is created by seasoned, respected experts who are invited to join our Faculty only after being recommended by current Faculty Members. Our editorial staff then works to make sure all content is easily digestible. Financial Poise is a meritocracy; nobody can "buy" their way into the Financial Poise Faculty. Start learning today at https://www.financialpoise.com/
Read More

Legal-Bay Lawsuit Funding Reports Recent Medical Malpractice Caps Ruled Unconstitutional In Florida

TALLAHASSEE, Fla.March 7, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Legal-Bay, the premier Pre Settlement Funding Company, announced today that they are preparing for huge growth in their medical malpractice department.
An economic reward in a medical malpractice lawsuit provides financial compensation to injured patients. Non-economic awards can offer compensation above and beyond any medical costs, including any pain and suffering the patient may be dealing with. Usually, payout caps are put in place to minimize such cash settlements. North Dakota, for example, places a strict limit on any non-economic payouts, meaning that regardless of an individual's circumstances, the most they could hope to receive in damages would be $500,000California's non-economic damages are capped at $250,000. There are many other states with similar medical malpractice caps.
However, payout caps have recently come under fire as being outdated and unconstitutional. In 2015, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that damage caps are in violation of the law under their state Constitution. While the decision only applied to Florida's specific laws, other states are utilizing the ruling to reconsider their own caps. Legal-Bay expects that with higher damages, there will be a spike in lawsuit cash advance funding for medical malpractice cases, whether against a hospital, surgery center, doctor or surgeon. Chris Janish, CEO, commented, "The Florida ruling was long overdue since most of these caps were enacted many years ago and don't even reflect fair value in today's economy. However, the issues go deeper in regard to constitutionality and protecting victims. We are hopeful that other states will take notice and enable victims to sue for fair value of their injuries." Legal-Bay's non-recourse pre-settlement funding programs are not a lawsuit funding loan, lawsuit loans, presettlement loan, presettlement loans, pre-settlement loan, or pre-settlement loans as many clients may think. Pre-settlement funding is merely an immediate cash allowance given in advance of a plaintiff's impending monetary award. The cash advance is risk-free, as the money does not need to be repaid should the recipient lose their case. To apply right now, please go to the company's website at: http://lawsuitssettlementfunding.com or call the company toll-free at: 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by. SOURCE Legal-Bay LLC

Related Links

http://lawsuitssettlementfunding.com
Read More

Litigation Support Leaders LexShares and GLG Law to Partner, Will Cross-Promote Services to Clients

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--LexShares, a leader in commercial litigation finance, and GLG Law, a leader in expert witness services, today announced an exclusive new partnership under which they will offer their litigation support products to one another’s clients. Together, LexShares and GLG Law have worked with more than three quarters of the AmLaw 100 and are trusted partners of hundreds of law firms globally.
The agreement brings together two firms in adjacent segments of the legal field with the goal of creating a more integrated experience for attorneys and their clients. GLG Law clients will receive access to LexShares’ litigation funding services. Similarly, LexShares’ clients will have access to GLG Law’s industry-leading expert witness services. The newly forged relationship creates an innovative offering in the legal industry and aims to add value to clients of both LexShares and GLG Law. “Aligning with the premier expert witness service in the legal industry was a compelling opportunity for us. We’re confident that direct access to highly qualified experts will provide a substantial benefit to our clients,” said Jay Greenberg, Chief Executive Officer at LexShares. “Where capital is the fuel often necessary to litigate effectively, engaging with the right litigation support partners is equally critical for a successful resolution.” “GLG Law connects our clients with the most qualified, experienced, and reliable expert witnesses – a critical component of winning a case,” said David Solomon, General Manager of GLG Law. “We’re excited that we now have a strategic relationship with a leading litigation funder. We anticipate LexShares will add immediate value to our clients interested in pursuing financing options.” About LexShares LexShares is a leading litigation finance firm, with an innovative approach to originating and financing high-value commercial legal claims. LexShares funds litigation-related matters through both its online marketplace and dedicated litigation finance fund. Founded in 2014, the company is privately owned with principal offices in Boston and New York City. For more information, visit lexshares.com. About GLG Law GLG Law is a division of GLG (Gerson Lehrman Group), the platform that connects professionals to insight. GLG Law serves leading law firms and corporations around the world, including 8 of the top 10 American law firms, delivering expert witness and consultant recommendations and solutions by leveraging GLG’s membership of more than 650,000 experts around the world. Visit glg.it/law.

Contacts

LexShares Matt Burke, +1 603-315-0618 mattdavidburke@gmail.com
Read More

Canadian innovator JL Energy Transportation Inc. obtains funding from leading litigation funder Bentham IMF Capital Limited for infringement action against major Canada/US pipeline and gas processing companies

CALGARYMarch 6, 2019 /CNW/ - JL Energy Transportation Inc. ("JETI", more: www.jlenergy.com) announces that it has obtained third-party funding from Bentham IMF Capital Limited ("Bentham"), the Canadian arm of leading global litigation funder IMF Bentham (ASX:IMF), for license and patent infringement claims against an alliance of major Canadian and US pipeline and gas processing companies.
The defendant companies currently include: Alliance Pipeline Limited Partnership, Alliance Pipeline Ltd., Alliance Pipeline L.P., Alliance Pipeline Inc., (collectively, "Alliance"), Aux Sable Liquid Products LP (formerly known as Alliance Pipeline NGL, LP) and Aux Sable Liquid Products Inc. (formerly known as Alliance Pipeline NGL Inc.)(together, "Aux Sable"). JETI is claiming significant damages as a result of Alliance and Aux Sable's alleged infringements of JETI's licenses and intellectual property rights.
Background In the early 1990s a team led by John Lagadin, the founder of JETI, invented a novel and innovative method for more efficiently and cost-effectively transporting enriched natural gas via a single pipeline carrying both natural gas and natural gas liquids ("NGLs") from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin to the lucrative US mid-western natural gas and NGL market (more). It was a ground-breaking invention that caught the eye of 22 producers, including some of North America'slargest energy companies. These companies subsequently formed the "Alliance Pipeline" which went into service December 1, 2000. JETI licensed the technology (subsequently patented in a number of jurisdictions around the world) to the Alliance and Aux Sable companies, who between 1996 and 2000 planned and constructed a 3,848 km pipeline from BC and Alberta to Chicago as part of an integrated energy system to export Western Canadian enriched natural gas to be processed at the US market hub in a world class processing facility. The Alliance Pipeline was one of the most significant infrastructure projects in North America at the time. It has since delivered an average of 1.6 billion cubic feet of enriched gas every day to the Chicago market (more than 1/5th of Canada's natural gas exports). This major success story of Canadian innovation, built on the entrepreneurialism of the JETI team, has provided Canada access to a valuable export market and contributed billions of dollars to Canada's GDP and Alberta's royalty revenues. What has happened JETI alleges that Alliance and Aux Sable have in recent years used its proprietary and patented technology to transport and process rich natural gas on additional pipelines in British Columbia, Alberta and North Dakota without license or authorization. What is being done Bentham has agreed to fund JETI's action against Alliance and Aux Sable filed under Alberta Court of Queen's Bench Court File No. 1601-06322, as well as JETI's defence of Aux Sable's subsequent challenge of one of JETI's patents (Federal Court File No. T-1612-16). Aux Sable's Federal Court challenge is scheduled to commence on March 11, 2019 in Calgary, Alberta. JETI is represented by MLT Aikins LLP. Bentham's funding of JETI helps level the financial playing field for a private company taking on significantly larger entities with greater resources. John Lagadin, President of JETI, said: "We are very pleased to have Bentham on board to fund our court actions as their significant due diligence, capital at risk, and proven track record, clearly validates our confidence in our long standing claims against Alliance et al. This funding allows us to continue our already lengthy quest for justice, and we look forward to a successful outcome once the courts have been presented with the facts in the case." About the Defendants The Alliance Pipeline system consists of an approximately 3,848-kilometer (2,391-mile) integrated Canadian and US natural gas transmission pipeline system, delivering rich natural gas from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin and the Williston Basin to the Chicago market hub. The Alliance system delivers, on average, about 45.3 million standard cubic metres (or 1.6 billion standard cubic feet) of natural gas per day. More: www.alliancepipeline.com. Alliance Pipeline Limited Partnership (Alliance Canada) owns the Canadian portion of the Alliance Pipeline system. Alliance Pipeline L.P. (Alliance U.S.A.) owns the U.S. portion of the Alliance Pipeline system. Alliance is represented by Rose LLP. Aux Sable commenced operation as part of the Alliance Pipeline and Aux Sable dense phase gas system. At that time, two companies were established, one in the United States, and one in Canada, to manage the natural gas liquids business associated with the Alliance Pipeline. In 2010, a second U.S. company, Aux Sable Midstream (ASM) was established to focus on other midstream developments in the United StatesAux Sable owns and operates a world-scale natural gas liquids extraction and fractionation facility in Illinois near the terminus of the Alliance Pipeline. The facility is currently capable of processing 2.1 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas and can produce approximately 107,000 barrels per day of specification natural gas liquid products. Aux Sable's rich gas premiums provide market access to rich gas producers in Canada and the U.S. that cannot be realized through conventional field extraction and local NGL sales. Aux Sable is represented by McCarthy Tetrault LLP. About Bentham IMF Bentham IMF Capital Limited is the Canadian arm of IMF Bentham Limited (ASX: IMF), one of the leading global litigation & dispute financiers, headquartered in Australia and with offices in Canada, the US, SingaporeHong Kong and London. IMF has built its reputation as a trusted provider of innovative litigation funding solutions and has established an increasingly diverse portfolio of litigation & dispute financing assets. IMF has been a leading pioneer of litigation financing in Australia since 2001, playing a significant role in the initial steps towards a globalized industry via its international expansion in Canada, the US, Asia and Europe. IMF has a highly experienced litigation funding team overseeing its investments delivering a 90% success rate across 179 completed cases (at 30 September 2018). More: www.benthamimf.ca. SOURCE JL Energy Transportation Inc. View original content: http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/March2019/06/c4638.html
Read More

Litigation Capital Management (AIM:LIT): Appointment of Jonathan Moulds as Chairman

Litigation Capital Management Limited (AIM:LIT) (LCM), a leading international provider of litigation financing solutions, today announces that it has appointed Jonathan Moulds as Non-Executive Chairman effective 29 March 2019.

This follows Jonathan’s appointment to the Board as Non-Executive Director of LCM in December 2018, when the Company listed on AIM. Jonathan takes over the role of Chairman from David King, who will remain on the Board as a Non-Executive Director.

Jonathan brings extensive experience in the financial services industry. He was previously the Chief Operating Officer of Barclays PLC. Prior to his role at Barclays, he was head of Bank of America’s European business until 2013 and became the Chief Executive Officer of Merrill Lynch International following the merger of the two institutions in 2008.

Patrick Moloney, Chief Executive Officer of LCM, said:

As we expand LCM’s international focus, we’re thrilled to have further strengthened our team with the appointment Jonathan as Chairman. This announcement follows a series of exciting and significant operational developments at LCM including several new board and management team hires, and our expansion into London and Singapore as key growth markets. Together with the rest of the Board, I am looking forward to working with Jonathan and the wider team to realise the clear growth opportunity that LCM offers.

“I would also like to thank David for his support as Chairman over recent years. We will continue to benefit from his expertise on the Board.”

Jonathan Moulds, Chairman of LCM, said:

“I’m delighted to take on the role of Chairman at LCM. It’s a privilege to be involved with one of the litigation finance industry’s most established and exciting players at this pivotal time in its development.

“This is an interesting time for the litigation funding sector globally as it enters a period of rapid expansion and LCM is well-positioned to take advantage of this given its significant international presence, its team’s outstanding track record and the quality and depth of its pipeline of future litigation projects.”

Litigation Capital Management

Patrick Moloney, Chief Executive Officer

Nick Rowles-Davies, Executive Director

Hawthorn Advisors                                             lcm@hawthornadvisors.com

Lorna Cobbett / Zinka MacHale                          Tel: 020 3745 4960

About Jonathan Moulds

Jonathan has held a number of senior leadership roles at major financial institutions, most recently at Barclays plc, where he was the Group Chief Operating Officer until 2016. He was previously the head of Bank of America's International business and became the Chief Executive Officer of Merrill Lynch International following the merger of the two institutions in 2008. Jonathan has a strong financial markets background and was responsible for Bank of America International’s Global Markets business prior to the merger. He has worked in most major financial centres, including the U.S., the U.K. and Asia during his career.

Jonathan has served widely on key industry associations including as chairman of the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) from 2004 until 2008 and as a director of the Association for Financial Markets in Europe (AFME). He remains a member of AFME's Advisory Board. Jonathan was a member of the Capital Markets Senior Practitioners of the UK Financial Services Authority and the Global Financial Markets Association.

Jonathan is currently a Non-Executive Board member for IG Group Holdings PLC and is a member of the Board Risk Committee and Remuneration Committee.

About LCM

Litigation Capital Management (“LCM”) is a leading international provider of litigation financing solutions. This includes single-case and portfolios across class actions, commercial claims, claims arising out of insolvency and international arbitration. LCM has an unparalleled track record, driven by effective project selection, active project management and robust risk management. Headquartered in Sydney, with offices in London, Singapore, Brisbane and Melbourne, LCM has been listed on AIM since December 2018, trading under the ticker LIT. www.lcmfinance.com

Read More

Native American Venture Fund (NAVF) to Speak at the 4th Litigation Funding Conference in Florida on March 8, 2019

Ticonderoga Ventures, Inc. announces that Native American Venture Fund (NAVF) will speak at the Litigation Funding Conference ( https://litigationfundingconference.com ) on March 8, 2019, in Delray Beach, FL. John Cataldi directs the investment and fund strategies of the Native American Venture Fund Family (NAVF) as its co-managing partner. He will speak on best practices of venture finance, investment, syndication and strategies to unlock new capital pools of investment. Moreover, Cataldi will discuss his personal experiences in managing portfolio returns and investor expectations.  Lastly, he will announce NAVF’s Opioid Litigation Fund, which will focus on pharmaceutical company oversupply while seeking economic and injunctive relief to prevent future abuses to North American Indigenous Communities. Video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFDr_9-abVY ABOUT NATIVE AMERICAN VENTURE FUND NAVF is series of impact investment funds that promote Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) development activities for indigenous tribes throughout North America. Under Cataldi’s leadership, the fund leverages contracting preferences, tax incentives and other distinct competitive advantages legislatively granted to federally recognized tribes. NAVF’s portfolio focuses across multiple industries to include Carbon Sequestration, Pharmaceutical importation/distribution, FinTech, E-Commerce, and Government Contracting. For more information visit:  http://www.NAVF.net . ABOUT THE LITIGATION FUNDING CONFERENCE The Litigation Funding Conference is the leading networking and business event for the industry.  Corporate counsel and attorneys from significantly sized law firms seeking finances for high-value claims meet directly with third-party litigation funding firms, venture capitalists and hedge funds.  Financial professionals and investors representing significant resources attend to fund suits they are expressly interested in. Time, the most valuable commodity at the event, is designed for maximum efficiency in introducing attorneys with those that provide funding to identify the best opportunities and begin the deal-making process quickly. Registration for the event can be made at https://litigationfundingconference.com/register-miami-2019.php For more information, please visit the website https://www.litigationfundingconference.com or contact: Ticonderoga Ventures, Inc. Marketing and Logistics Representative Tel/ Fax: USA +1 (212) 722-1744 E-mail:  info-21@litigationfundingconference.com Twitter:  @LITIGATIONFUND1 This press release may contain forward-looking statements, particularly as related to the business plans of the company, within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and are subject to the safe harbor created by these sections. Actual results may differ materially from the company’s expectations and estimates.
Read More

Gowling WLG Partner James Foster to Join Augusta Ventures

Augusta, the largest litigation and dispute funding institution in the UK – with £150m of capital and a team of 70 in London – today announces the appointment of James Foster as Head of Commercial and Bilateral Investment Treaties Arbitration. He will be based in Augusta’s London office from April 2019. James joins from international law firm Gowling WLG (formerly Wragge Lawrence Graham) where he heads the Middle East Arbitration and Construction Disputes practice, having started the Lawrence Graham office in Dubai in 2007. James has consistently been ranked by the Chambers Global Directory as one of the UAE’s leading construction disputes lawyers and is Vice-Chairman of the Society of Construction Law (Gulf). He has taken a keen interest in the development of funding solutions for international arbitration both in the Middle East and more widely and he is the lead author of the UAE chapter in the Guide to Litigation Funding, a global survey of the law and practice of third-party funding. Before moving to Dubai James also spent over 10 years focusing on dispute resolution in the South East Asia region. Commenting on the appointment, Louis Young, Managing Director at Augusta said: “We’re delighted to welcome James to Augusta. With his wide experience of high value international arbitration claims, James will play a key role in developing our involvement in this important and growing sector”. James Foster commented: “I am very pleased to be part of the continued expansion of Augusta’s operations given the exciting opportunities for further development of the arbitration funding market both in the UK and internationally. I am very much looking forward to working with Augusta’s capable team in this area and to helping develop a market leading practice”. About Augusta Ventures
  • Established in 2013, Augusta is the largest litigation and dispute funding institution in the UK – with £150m of capital and a team of 70 in London and 85 worldwide. Augusta’s scale enables us to make decisions in market-leading timeframes and fund cases of any size.
  • Augusta is organised into a series of specialist practice groups: Arbitration, Class Action, Competition, Consumer, Intellectual Property and Litigation, and sectors including Financial Services and Construction & Energy.
  • By the end of 2018, Augusta had funded 197 claims with a market leading win ratio of 80%.
Read More

Vannin Capital Expands With Three Additions in New York and Washington

Vannin Capital, the global expert in legal finance, announces today its continued U.S. expansion with two new Managing Directors and an Associate Director in New York and Washington, D.C.

Matthew Atlas joins as a Managing Director and Melissa Feig as Associate Director in New York City. Arthur “Ted” Farrell joins as a Managing Director in Washington, where his litigation expertise will expand Vannin’s local offering, which had previously focused on arbitration.

Scott Mozarsky, Regional Managing Director with overall responsibility for Vannin’s North American business, comments: “The addition of Matthew, Ted and Melissa marks a significant step in Vannin’s growth in North America. Their diverse backgrounds, depth of knowledge and their subject matter expertise add to our already strong foundation of litigation funding capabilities and position us to capitalize on strong market opportunities associated with geographic and product expansion.”

Matthew joins from the Colgate-Palmolive Company, where he was Chief Litigation Counsel for the past five years, managing the company’s litigation matters both globally and in the U.S. Prior to this, he was Vice President and Assistant General Counsel for JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA, supporting the defense of class actions and other litigations involving significant potential liability for the company’s retail financial services units. Matthew began his legal career at Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer, & Feld LLP.

Matthew Atlas notes: “Corporations are becoming increasingly aware of the benefits that funding presents, not only as a risk management tool but also as a key part of their strategy to deliver value and growth. I am excited to join Vannin, one of the leaders in litigation finance, at a time when the industry is rapidly expanding in the U.S.”

Prior to joining Vannin, Ted was a Partner at Ruyak Cherian LLP where he represented plaintiffs and defendants in antitrust, intellectual property and other complex commercial disputes in the technology sector. He also advised on merger clearance matters before United States and Foreign Competition Authorities. First joining Ruyak in 2015, Ted has had a successful career as a litigator also practicing at Winston & Strawn LLP and Baker Botts LLP in Washington, D.C.

The addition of Ted to its Washington D.C. team enables Vannin to better service firms and companies in the Mid-Atlantic states including the rapidly growing Research Triangle in North Carolina. Ted Farrell said: “I was drawn to Vannin’s reputation as a market leader in the litigation funding industry and its commitment to strategic growth in the U.S. and internationally. I look forward to helping build out the company’s presence and offering in Washington.”

Melissa joins Vannin’s New York office as an Associate Director, supporting the litigation funder’s team in the U.S. Prior to joining Vannin, Melissa practiced at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP where she focused on complex commercial and distressed asset litigations, consumer class actions, internal and white-collar investigations, regulatory defense and arbitration.

Melissa Feig added: “Vannin is an ambitious and innovative business that is well positioned to capitalize on the continued growth of the litigation funding industry. I am excited to join the team and look forward to contributing to its continued success.”

About Vannin Capital

Established in 2010, Vannin Capital is a global expert in the provision of funding to support individuals, corporate clients and law firms in the successful resolution of high-value litigation and arbitration claims. From single case funding to portfolio finance, we offer creative capital solutions that are tailored to our clients’ needs.

Our global team of legal and financial experts cover the key commercial litigation and arbitration centres from our offices in London, Jersey, Paris, Bonn, New York, Washington, Sydney and Melbourne.

More than just capital, we combine global experience with local knowledge to deliver a high standard of service and expertise to our clients around the world. A major player in the legal finance market, we are a member of the Association of Litigation Funders of England and Wales (ALF), conducting our business to a high standard in line with its code of conduct.

Vannin Capital Holdings Limited Registered in Jersey No. 121561 Registered Office Address: 13-14 Esplanade, St Helier Jersey, JE1 1B vannin.com

Read More

How Litigation Funders Are Leveraging Legal Tech

Both plaintiff and defense have a clear vested interest in the outcome of their litigation. For litigation funders, however, the interest is in prospective claims - thousands of them - which are reviewed using a due diligence that combines legal expertise with financial analysis. Given the ROI component that litigation funders are faced with, there is a growing tendency to rely on legal technology to properly aggregate and analyze all of that raw data. But to what extent are litigation funders - and the broader legal community - relying on AI and Legal Tech to inform their decision making? As reported in the latest edition of Vannin Capital's bi-annual Funding in Focus series, Legal Tech is evolving into a core component of the broader Legal Services industry. According to a recent Law Firm Leaders survey, 95% of UK-based managing and senior partners expect to increase their investment in Legal Tech over the next decade, the majority of whom said the investment would be 'substantial.' Of course not all Legal Tech is created equal. In such a nascent field, there are plenty of competitors out there, and the winners and losers of the space have yet to be clearly defined. That said, there are some clear trend lines that are noticeably emerging. One such trend is the utilization of eDiscovery platforms. eDiscovery has been at the foundational level of the Legal industry for many decades - it's simply much easier to catalog cases, motions and rulings on a computer than in a giant file cabinet. That said, advancements in the space are making production, collation, storage and review all the more efficient. Cloud-based storage and processing, visual analytics which group related documents, and AI/machine learning tools that assist in data analysis have catapulted eDiscovery from a decades-old timesaver into a powerful instrument for any legal expert. eDiscovery platforms can now identify and map key phrases within related (or seemingly unrelated) documents, visualize data so researchers can better understand key trends and highlights, automatically redact sensitive information, and even track user accuracy so companies can monitor their reviewers' progress. As a result, the global eDiscovery market is worth an estimated $20B. Advancements in cloud computing have not only made eDiscovery a more streamlined and efficient process, but a cheaper one as well. Average storage costs have decreased from $40/GB/month to around $20/GB/month; sometimes much less if volumes are large enough. And with big names like Amazon Web Services and Google Cloud offering improved text-searching and data extraction services, the quality and efficiency of eDiscovery is bound to continue to improve. Perhaps even more germane to the funding industry is the ability of Legal Tech to help predict case outcomes. Big Data analysis can help funders predict judicial rulings, the size of jury awards based on case type and jurisdiction, time-to-settlement, and whether arbitrators tend to favor plaintiffs or the defense. Some Legal Tech platforms even leverage 'unstructured data,' which is a term used to encapsulate all data that cannot be easily quantifiable. For example, a platform may scrape all of a judge's or arbitrator's public comments, rulings, and social media posts to infer via language and syntax what proclivities and/or biases he or she possesses. Such is the granular new reality we all find ourselves in when every aspect of life is reduced to an algorithm. That said, granularity is a wonderful thing when you're tasked with analyzing the potential return on a multi-million dollar investment. Of course, these Legal Tech tools can only provide the data - they can't tell you how to interpret or act on it. That decision is up to the humans who control the purse strings. Additionally, as we all know, past performance is not always an indicator of future performance, so there remains some question as to just how 'predictive' this technology truly is. Prominent legal technologist, Professor Richard Susskind recently affirmed: “I have no doubt that the work of courts around the world will increasingly be conducted online. Here indeed will lie the key to providing greater access to justice."  Indeed, from case initiations to online courts and tribunals, to virtual mediation rooms to the eventual (albeit somewhat far off) advancement of end-to-end AI dispute resolution, the entire legal landscape is bound to be disrupted by the transformative power of technology. While it remains to be seen exactly which Legal Tech firms rise to prominence as 'the cream of the crop,' their collective impact is already being experienced in all facets of the industry.

Litigation Capital Management (AIM:LIT): Interim Results

Litigation Capital Management (LCM) Limited (AIM:LIT), a leading international provider of litigation financing solutions, announces its reviewed interim results for the six months ended 31 December 2018.

Note: All financial results based on cash accounting methods, as opposed to fair value methods. Any gains or losses are only recognised in LCM’s accounts when a successful judgement or settlement has been determined.

Highlights

  • Adjusted profit before tax of A$2.72 million – increase of 268% (H1 2018: adjusted loss $1.62 million)
  • Adjusted revenue of A$11.71 million – increase of 11,498% (H1 2018: A$0.10 million)
  • Continued strong litigation project performance, with three projects completing in the period, and consistent with existing track record:
    • Portfolio IRR of 78% (on a cumulative basis since FY 2012, including losses)
    • ROIC of 117% (on a cumulative basis since FY 2012, including losses)
  • Strong pipeline of potential future litigation projects, diversified by litigation type and geography - 64 pre-qualified projects with estimated investment of A$409 million
    • Diversification in pipeline across geography (Australia, EMEA and Asia Pacific) as well as across single case, portfolio and corporate transactions
    • Future litigation projects include class action, commercial claims, insolvency, international arbitration, and corporate transactions
  • Funded first corporate portfolio transaction in October 2018 in the building and construction sector. Corporate transactions represent a growth opportunity for LCM, as the Company is currently considering eight significant corporate portfolio transactions as part of its pipeline of investment opportunities
  • LCM is now a truly global litigation finance provider following the launch of offices in London (covering EMEA) and Singapore (covering Singapore and Hong Kong), with both regions representing a significant growth opportunity for LCM going forward
  • Completion of listing on AIM in December 2018 and delisting from ASX
  • Significant strengthening to management team and board through the appointments of Nick Rowles-Davies as Executive Vice Chairman, Stephen Conrad as Chief Financial Officer and Jonathan Moulds as Non-Executive Director

Patrick Moloney, CEO of LCM, said:

“We are delighted to present our first set of financial results as an AIM-listed company. The strength of our performance is reflective of the consistent approach and focus we have ensuring that we continue to deliver strong returns across our existing portfolio. We have significantly expanded our operations to create a truly global platform for LCM.

“Our listing on the London Stock Exchange was a key milestone for the company and raised necessary capital to help fund future litigation projects and investments. Since LCM has become a London listed company, we have already seen a notable increase in the litigation funding products that we offer across the mix – including single case, portfolio and corporate transactions.

“Our geographical expansion, with new offices in both London and Singapore, has naturally seen the team grow and industry leading experienced individuals have been added to the Board and senior management team. This has created a strong foundation for LCM to continue to pursue exciting growth opportunities and maintain its position as a leader in the growing litigation finance market.”

About LCM

  • LCM is a leading international provider of litigation financing solutions
  • This includes single-case and portfolio; across class actions, commercial claims, claims arising out of insolvency and international arbitration
  • LCM has an unparalleled track record, driven by effective project selection, active project management and robust risk management
  • Headquartered in Sydney, with offices in London, Singapore, Brisbane and Melbourne, LCM listed on AIM in December 2018, trading under the ticker LIT
Read More

Canadian Court Approves Third Party Funding in Class Action Claim Against Tim Hortons

A Canadian court has approved the usage of third party financing in a class action claim being brought by Tim Hortons franchisees against the parent company. As reported in Canadian Lawyer, the case of JB & M Walker Ltd v. TDL Group could become a watershed. In Canada, the court must approve third party funding in all class actions, and the court in this case found that the funder did not seek to exert control, was well-capitalized, and was not being overcompensated. Therefore funding was approved for the class action. Litigation funding is relatively new in Canada (compared to say, the UK and Australia), so laws and legal precedents aren't as easy to come by. The court in this case found that litigation funder Galactic TH Litigation Funders LC, met the aforementioned criteria. The funder has assets of $33MM and net equity of $29MM, and is collecting between 22-26% of any proceeds. So Galactic are well-capitalized and not to be overcompensated. They also agreed to pay any security for costs issued against the plaintiff. The Tim Hortons franchisees had been originally funded by the Great White North Franchisee Association, but last summer that financing dried up, and the franchisees could not afford to continue the case on their own.

New Zealand Wary Over Increase in Litigation Funding After Mainzeal Judgment

In a recent decision by a New Zealand High Court, the directors of failed construction company Mainzeal - including former Prime Minister Jenny Shipley - were ordered to pay $36MM to creditors. The claim was funded by litigation funder LPF, and many in New Zealand are concerned that the big win will herald a litigation funding revolution - much like what is currently taking place in neighboring Australia. As reported in Newsroom, the New Zealand court found that the directors allowed the company to continue operations for several years, despite being "balance sheet insolvent." Shipley and the other directors argued they had an asset in the form of millions of dollars of debt owed to Chinese parent company Richina Pacific, yet no money from the China parent company ever trickled down to New Zealand. When the company couldn't afford to pay its bills, contractors lost out on $45.5MM, and creditors on $110MM. Justice Cooke found that the Mainzeal directors had not put in place any proper risk assessment measures, and failed in their corporate governance duties. Of the four directors involved, Shipley and one other owe $6MM each, while the remainder is to be paid by Richina. The quartet have Directors & Officers (D&O) insurance totaling $20MM, though it isn't clear how that money is to be allocated. D&O insurance has exploded in cost in neighboring Australia, where litigation funding is helping fuel a number of prominent class action claims. With the big win coming in the Mainzeal case, which was funded by LPF, many New Zealand legal experts are considered about a similar rise in claims, and the resulting impact on insurance costs.

Legal claim launched against rail companies after millions double-pay for fares in London

A claim has been launched in the UK’s specialist competition court by Justin Gutmann, formerly of Citizens Advice, on behalf of millions of passengers who have paid twice for part of their journeys on Southeastern and South Western routes.  

  • Passengers who have held a Travelcard in the period since October 2015 and bought another ticket for a rail journey that is partially covered by their Travelcard have effectively paid twice for part of their rail journey
  • The claim is estimated to be worth around £93 million in damages
  • Millions of passengers who have travelled in and around London may be eligible for compensation

London, February 27th, 2019

A claim on behalf of millions of rail passengers has been filed in the Competition Appeal Tribunal against the operators of the South Western and Southeastern rail franchises.

First MTR South Western Trains, Stagecoach South Western Trains and London & South Eastern Railway are alleged to have not made “boundary” fares readily available for Travelcard holders to purchase, nor making passengers aware of their existence. The rail companies’ failures have left customers with little option but to buy a higher fare than they would have needed because their Travelcard already entitled them to travel for part of their journey.

Boundary fares allow passengers who own a Travelcard to travel beyond the zones covered by their Travelcard without doubling up on payment. Independent research has shown that boundary fares are not readily available through online platforms or over the telephone from South Western or Southeastern and are rarely offered at ticket counters unless expressly requested by passengers. This imposition of an unfair price for fares is an abuse of the companies’ dominant position and in breach of UK and EU competition laws.

The opt-out collective action is being led by Justin Gutmann, an experienced campaigner on both consumer issues and the transport sector.

Gutmann said:

“Passengers in London already pay a lot of money for trains that are often delayed or not even running. Now following extensive research, we have found that some passengers are paying twice for parts of their rail journeys.

We are launching this legal action to ensure that the money that South Western and Southeastern have made from this is returned to those train users.

Millions of rail passengers could be eligible for compensation. Let’s put this right and stop train companies taking passengers for a ride.”

Who is eligible?

Passengers who owned a Travelcard at any time from 1 October 2015 and also purchased a rail fare from a station within the zones of their Travelcard to a destination outside of those zones may be eligible for compensation. Millions of passengers are thought to be affected.

Dorothea Antzoulatos, Director of Charles Lyndon, said “Charles Lyndon has worked extensively with Mr Gutmann to develop this case which seeks to recover compensation for millions of rail passengers who have overpaid as a result of what we believe is the behaviour of the defendants. We are delighted to be working together with Hausfeld & Co to represent Mr Gutmann in what will be the first stand-alone collective action in this country.  A case such as this would not have been practicable before the introduction of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 and we hope that as a result of this action millions of rail passengers will be able to recover the compensation that is due to them.”

Anthony Maton, Managing Partner at Hausfeld & Co LLP said: “This claim is about rail passengers being able to recover what is rightfully due to them. This is only the fifth collective action in the Competition Appeal Tribunal and the first brought without the benefit of an underlying regulatory decision. We’re very pleased to be co-counsel for Mr Gutmann on this ground-breaking case.

Will there be any cost be for class members?

There is no cost for class members. This action is being funded by Woodsford Litigation Funding, a specialist litigation funder. By absorbing both the costs and risks associated with a claim of this size, Woodsford is enabling the claim to be brought and ensuring that as many rail passengers as possible benefit from this legal action.

Woodsford’s Chief Investment Officer, Charlie Morris, stated: “Third party funding facilitates access to justice and is an integral part of bringing collective actions such as this boundary fares claim. Woodsford is looking forward to helping millions of rail passengers achieve the compensation they are entitled to."

What next?

The Tribunal will now determine whether or not Mr Gutmann’s claim is allowed to proceed.  If the claim is permitted to go forward then those affected will not have to pay any legal fees, nor contact lawyers.

Affected passengers who live in the UK will be automatically included in the claim although they can choose to opt-out in due course. Affected passengers who do not live in the UK will also be eligible to join the claim but must proactively opt-in. As the case progresses, we will provide more detail as to what rail users will be required to do to either opt-in, or opt-out.

Anyone who would like to receive further information about the claim, can visit the claim website, BoundaryFares.com, to sign up for updates.

Further information

The claim’s website and social media channels are available from the day of launch, at BoundaryFares.com where affected passengers can sign up to receive further information on the legal proceedings.

Justin Gutmann represents the passengers bringing this legal case against South Western and Southeastern. He is aiming to ensure that the train companies have to pay back the money which they earned from passengers paying twice for part of their journeys. This is estimated to be in the region of £93 million.

Mr Gutmann has a wealth of experience working in the consumer rights sphere and he has strong expertise in the transport sector. He has spent a large part of his professional life dedicated to consumer welfare, public policy and market research.

Mr Gutmann’s final job prior to retirement was as Head of Research and Insight at Citizens Advice.

Mr Gutmann also spent eight years working for London Underground as a Market Planning Manager.

Justin Gutmann is represented by Charles Lyndon and Hausfeld & Co LLP.

Read More

Vannin Capital Names UK Regional Managing Director

Vannin Capital, the global expert in legal finance, has today announced that Rosie Ioannou has been appointed as UK Regional Managing Director.

 Rosie joined Vannin in 2014 as a Managing Director and has since been a driving force behind its growth and development, as well as the evolution of the litigation funding industry in the UK and around the globe. In her new role, she will have overall responsibility for Vannin’s UK business, leading the team of UK Managing Directors. Her appointment underscores Vannin’s ambitious growth objectives for the years ahead, and the role that the UK litigation market will play in realising those ambitions.

Highly regarded for her experience in funding claims in areas such as insolvency, competition and UK group actions, Rosie has been recognised as a Leading Individual in the UK for her work by Chambers & Partners. Prior to joining the Vannin team, she worked for magic circle law firm Allen & Overy.

Commenting on the announcement, Vannin Capital CEO Richard Hextall said: “Rosie has been fundamental to Vannin’s growth since joining the team in 2014, and her breadth of experience and reputation in the market is second to none. She is a natural choice to lead the UK team to the next stage of its growth, as we look to capitalise on the developing market in the UK and internationally.”

Rosie Ioannou said: “This is a really exciting time for Vannin as the London market for litigation funding continues to grow. The business is very well positioned to continue to diversify its portfolio and capitalise on the myriad opportunities that exist. I look forward to tackling this new challenge and helping to lead our talented UK team into the future.”

About Vannin Capital

Established in 2010, Vannin Capital is a global expert in the provision of funding to support individuals, corporate clients and law firms in the successful resolution of high-value litigation and arbitration claims.

From single case funding to portfolio finance, we offer creative capital solutions that are tailored to our clients’ needs. Our global team of legal and financial experts cover the key commercial litigation and arbitration centres from our offices in London, Jersey, Paris, Bonn, New York, Washington, Sydney and Melbourne. More than just capital, we combine global experience with local knowledge to deliver a high standard of service and expertise to our clients around the world.

A major player in the legal finance market, we are a member of the Association of Litigation Funders of England and Wales (ALF), conducting our business to a high standard in line with its code of conduct.

Read More

DealFlow Announces The Litigation Funding Forum 2019 Agenda

New York, NY, Feb. 22, 2019 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- via NEWMEDIAWIRE -- DealFlow Events is pleased to announce the agenda for The Litigation Funding Forum 2019 coming up April 4 in New York City. The complete agenda and panel speakers: https://litigationfundingforum.com/agenda/ Here is just some of the information our slate of experts will cover during this must-attend event:
  • Latest trends in the litigation funding marketplace
  • Challenges facing legal counsel with litigation funding
  • Benefits to investors in litigation funding
  • Growth prospects in the marketplace: Leveling the legal playing field
  • What counsel should look for in identifying the right litigation financing firm for clients
  • How litigation funders determine cost to ROI
  • Contracts and risk management
  • Litigation funding in patent and intellectual property cases
The conference keynote speaker is New York State Sen. Rob Ortt, who introduced the Litigation Funding Act. Whether you are a funder, an attorney or a litigation finance consultant, The Litigation Funding Forum 2019 is a can’t-miss event. Panels of experts are ready to answer your questions regarding litigation finance, while exploring the latest legal trends, best practices and insights to maximize the benefits of litigation finance while avoiding challenges that have tripped up others. Corporate sponsors of The Litigation Funding Forum 2019 include Validity Finance, RRBB Accountants + Advisors, and Armadillo Financial Partners. Learn more about the forum at https://litigationfundingforum.com/. This event will likely sell out. Get your tickets today at https://litigationfundingforum.com/tickets/. Questions? Contact DealFlow at (516) 876-8006 or email Charlie Napolitano at charlie@dealflow.com. About DealFlow When it comes to the business of finance, the tag line “A DealFlow Event” is widely recognized as a symbol of quality. We’ve produced over 200 conferences, seminars, and webcasts on a variety of financial topics over the last 16 years. These events are the signature programs in their respective markets, offering high-quality content and unequaled professional networking opportunities. For more information about our events business, visit www.dealflowevents.com. For more information about some of our other projects, visit www.dealflow.com.
Read More

Collaboration between law firm, litigation funder and insurance brokerage creates access to justice enhancing product for owners of intellectual property

Debenhams Ottaway LLP in association with Sparkle Capital Ltd, Sybaris Legal & IP and Acasta Europe Limited have today launched a product to fund claims brought in the Intellectual Property and Enterprise Court (“IPEC”). The product follows collaboration between the innovative law firm, who last year set up a litigation funding panel and Sparkle Capital, a litigation funder. Sybaris Legal & IP, an insurance broker operating in the intellectual property arena will operate one of the distribution channels for the product and Acasta will provide the After The Event insurance. The product can cater for claims valued from £50,000 to £500,000. The fixed recoverable costs in IPEC limit the recoverable costs in stages up to £50,000 (save in some circumstances in which a party beats a Part 36 offer). The IPEC regime is therefore attractive to litigation funders and ATE insurers because it limits exposure for adverse costs particularly where the Arkin cap[1] is under threat from developing jurisprudence. The product is aimed both at the SME market and IP portfolio holders such as brand owners, musicians and the pharmaceutical industry. It covers a variety of different types of Intellectual property claims ranging from trade mark infringement and passing-off to copyright, design right and patent infringement claims.  It combines a discounted conditional fee agreement with Debenhams Ottaway within a funding package from Sparkle Capital to meet the discounted element of the fees and disbursements. The cost of the funding is low by market standards because it is based on a fixed interest rate rather than the market standard “share of the award”. And it is non-recourse as it is covered by the relevant After the Event and Financial Guarantee Insurance provided by Acasta. Commenting on the launch of the product, Debenhams Ottaway lead litigation and dispute resolution Partner, Luke Harrison, who also serves as Chairman of the Commercial Litigation Association said: “The IPEC funding product is essentially an access to justice tool. It enables those who have suffered a legal wrong to obtain redress whilst avoiding the risks associated with litigation. Intellectual property is an intangible asset which is easy for third parties to exploit and profit from. Whilst there are a number of ways IP may be protected, enforcing those rights in practice through the Courts is often the only tool available to protect that value.” Senior Associate and lead Intellectual Property disputes Lawyer at Debenhams Ottaway, Rosie Patterson said: “The IPEC funding product should go some way to addressing the imbalance in resources that we often see between parties in IP disputes, an imbalance that frequently acts as a barrier to Claimants bringing actions to protect their rights.” Tets Ishikawa, Director at Acasta and Senior Adviser at Sparkle Capital, commented: "Acasta and Sparkle are delighted to partner with our forward-looking partners, Debenhams Ottaway and Sybaris Legal & IP, in launching this IPEC Funding Product. The delivery of real access to justice can only progress with a solutions-led approach that lead to products meeting the actual needs of legal claims. This is the result of that approach and is part of our overall strategy to deliver innovative, relevant insurance and funding products to the litigation market."  Commenting on the launch of this new product, Ian Wishart, a director of Sybaris Legal & IP and himself an experienced patent attorney and an inventor, said: “This new funding product will benefit potential litigants before IPEC who have been unable to pursue good claims, sometimes against much larger firms, because of a lack of resources.  It levels the playing field, and enables IPR owners to retain value and leverage those rights.” Notes
  1. Debenhams Ottaway LLP is a leading law firm with offices in Hertfordshire and a London space. The firm acts for high net worth individuals, entrepreneurs and established businesses including, in specialist fields, a number of household brand names. The firm’s litigation and dispute resolution team is known for its entrepreneurial and collaborative approach and fastidious approach to delivering value to clients. The firm also boasts the leading contentious intellectual property team in the northern home countries lead by former city lawyer Rosie Patterson.
  2. Sparkle Capital Ltd was founded in 2014 as a third-party commercial litigation funding business. We are a privately-owned company belonging to the family of Fred Done, who is best known for founding BetFred and various other business interests, including real estate and insurance. We are administered by Acasta Europe Limited, an ATE insurance provider.”
  3. Acasta Europe Ltd provides administrative services to Acasta European Insurance Company Ltd, an insurer founded in 2006 and active in 12 European countries across 9 classes of insurance. We are an active provider of legal expenses insurance in the UK being one of the most trusted and innovative ATE insurance providers in both delegated authority Personal Injury and bespoke commercial, clinical negligence and insolvency cases. We have a core base of loyal partners that we work closely with to provide innovative solutions that enhance their businesses.
  4. Sybaris Legal & IP is a trading identity of Sartorex Group Ltd, which is an accredited Lloyds broker. Sybaris Legal & IP has been broking specialist legal and IP risks for over six years, and has a team of highly experienced brokers and IP specialists, who have been assisting micro-businesses to £100+M turnover companies with IP insurance, After the Event insurance and litigation funding
[1] Whereby funders are ordered to pay adverse costs, but only up to the level that they invested in the case.
Read More

Lawsuit Funding Company Earns Top Rating from TopConsumerReviews.com

TopConsumerReviews.com recently awarded their highest five-star rating to Prime Case Funding, an industry leader in lawsuit funding companies.

Lawsuit funding companies help people with pending lawsuits to access funds prior to the settlement of the case. In other words, these services extend a no-risk loan based on the assumption that their client will win their case. When the case is decided in the client’s favor, the loan is repaid from the proceeds of the lawsuit, plus a predetermined amount of interest. On the other hand, if the client loses the case, there is no obligation to repay the loan.

The deciding factor in securing this time of lending is, naturally, the likelihood of the client eventually winning the case. For that reason, the process typically involves discussions with the attorneys representing both the plaintiff and the defendant, collection of court documents, and so forth. There are a number of trustworthy lawsuit funding services that can help clients get the cash they need now, while waiting for the lawsuit to be concluded.

“Prime Case Funding is the nation’s best source of lawsuit funding,” according to Brian Dolezal of TopConsumerReviews.com, LLC. “As an accredited, “A+” rated company with the Better Business Bureau, PCF can be trusted to handle applications quickly and accurately. They can fund loans from $500 to $1,000,000 and more, on cases ranging from personal injury to false imprisonment. Customers particularly appreciate PCF’s lightning-fast turnaround time on loans, with some receiving payouts in as little as one business day. Because of their ironclad reputation, reasonable pricing, and excellent customer service, Prime Case Funding is our highest-ranked provider of Lawsuit Funding in 2019.”

To find out more about Prime Case Funding and other Lawsuit Funding companies, including reviews and comparison rankings, please visit the Lawsuit Funding category of TopConsumerReviews.com at https://www.topconsumerreviews.com/lawsuit-funding/.

About Prime Case Funding Prime Case Funding is a national full service legal funding firm serving both attorneys and their clients. They work to understand your situation and strive to tailor a financial solution that will meet your specific needs. Litigation financing can reduce financial stress and hardship that results from being in a lawsuit. Prime Case Funding’s service can empower you to “win the waiting game” and get the settlement you deserve.

About TopConsumerReviews.com TopConsumerReviews.com, LLC is a leading provider of reviews and rankings for thousands of consumer products and services. From Lawsuit Funding to Personal Loans and Debt Relief, TopConsumerReviews.com delivers in-depth product evaluations in order to make purchasing decisions easier.

Read More

Republican Senators Reintroduce Litigation Funding Disclosure Bill

A group of Republican Senators has reintroduced a bill that would mandate disclosure in class action and MDL contexts. The Senators first introduced the Litigation Funding Transparency Act (LFTA) last year, but it went nowhere. Now they are making another push with the same legislation. As reported in Law.com, Senators John Cornyn of Texas, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, and Ben Sasse of Nebraska all proposed the legislation that seeks to mandate disclosure of third party financing in class actions and MDLs. The bill stipulates disclosure within 10 days of a case being filed, or 10 days after a litigation funding agreement is signed, assuming the agreement comes mid-case. The bill would also require disclosure in the consumer legal funding context, as plaintiffs seeking cash advances against the outcome of their cases would also have to disclose their funding agreements. Last year, the House of Representatives passed a narrower version of the bill, which stipulated disclosure only in class actions. Subsequent to that, the GOP Senators introduced the LFTA. That bill failed to make any traction, and that was during a GOP-led Congress. Now that the Democrats have taken control of the House, any push for regulating the legal industry is seen as having even less chance to reach approval. Many are viewing the bill's reintroduction as the result of a continued push by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to regulate the litigation funding industry. Lisa Rickard, president of Chamber's Institute for Legal Reform, recently issued a statement supporting the bill. "When litigation funders invest in a lawsuit, they buy a piece of the case; they effectively become real parties in interest. Defendants (and courts) have a right to know who has a stake in a lawsuit and to assess whether they are using illegal or unethical means to bring the action," the statement reads.

Vannin Capital Managing Director, Michael German, had this to say: "The proposed Act is another example of special interest groups using their reach in Washington to implement legislation that goes well beyond the issue they purport to address. Vannin has been a vocal proponent of disclosure of (i) the fact that a litigant is funded and (ii) the identity of the funder. Any disclosure in excess of these facts is an overreach that does far more than solve the potential conflicts raised by Senator Grassley and his counterparts. Instead, the proposed Act would unfairly permit defendants facing legitimate lawsuits to gain an improper advantage, and force the parties and the courts into an irrelevant sideshow regarding funding terms."

The bill's reintroduction comes on the heels of the shock letter issued by GCs and senior litigators from 30 companies, asking the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules to mandate disclosure of all funding agreements in civil actions. Companies like Microsoft, General Electric, AT&T and Home Depot were all signatories of the letter.
Read More

3rd Circuit to Decide Judicial Authority Over Third Parties in MDLs in Ruling on NFL Concussion Case

The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals has a heavy decision to make: just how much authority (if any) can a court exercise over a third party (non-party) in a class action or MDL claim? Judge Anita Brody voided the funding contracts between three consumer funders and thousands of ex-NFL players who were suing the league for injuries sustained during their playing years. But did Judge Brody have the authority to void those contracts? That's what the 3rd Circuit must decide. As reported in Reuters, a trio of consumer legal funders - RD Legal, Thrivest, and Atlas Legal Funding - all had funding agreements with ex-players in place. The funding agreements provided players upfront money to pay for lifestyle or medical bills while they awaited their settlement in the NFL concussion case. That settlement eventually came - to the tune of $1 billion. However, Judge Anita Brody voided the funding contracts, claiming in part that the anti-assignment provision of the settlement nullifies the funding contracts. But does a court's authority over the disposition of a settlement extend to third parties, or non-parties in the claim?  Perhaps a court only retains power over a settlement for as long as that court oversees the claim itself, and once the claim is settled and the money is to be disbursed, any funding contracts already in place are beyond the scope of the court's discretion? That is what the 3rd Circuit must now decide, as the funders - led by RD Legal - have appealed her ruling. Thrivest also contends that in voiding the contracts, Judge Brody ignored an arbitration provision in its funding agreements that all disputes between players and funders be brought to arbitration. They claim her lack of deference to the arbitration agreement violates the Federal Arbitration Act. The funders argue that MDLs and class actions are large enough as is, and there must be some boundary placed on them. There is some room for agreement on this point, as class counsel Samuel Issacharoff seemed willing to concede that a court's discretion can't extend into infinity. However, Issacharoff argues that Brody does retain the authority to void contracts that were entered into during the administration of the settlement, even if she maintains no oversight of the monetary disposition. This is a key point, and one that the 3rd Circuit will have to wrestle with. The court is loathe to "stretch the outer bounds of Article III,' according to Judge Bibas of the 3rd Circuit. If the appeals court is to uphold Judge Brody's decision, that may very well be what they end up having to do.

Legal-Bay Announces Expanded Funding For Sexual Abuse Victims

ALBANY, N.Y.Feb. 11, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Legal-Bay, the premier pre-settlement lawsuit funding source, reports that Governor Cuomo assisted in passing a legislation to extend filing deadlines for sexual abuse survivors in the state of New York (A.8401-C/S.8977).
The new legislation, also known as The Sexual Assault Victim Bill of Rights, provides survivors with information regarding their care and treatment, affords them health care services at no cost, and allows them to receive updates regarding any DNA test results, evidence kits, and status of their case. Notifying victims of their legal rights will help ensure survivors receive the information they need to navigate complicated medical and criminal justice systems.
Chris Janish, CEO of Legal-Bay says, "The new law in NY is long overdue and was highly contested by the Catholic Church for years. We applaud NY for finally getting this done to protect all victims of past sexual abuses – and holding predators accountable both criminally and civilly." The law will take effect this summer and will enable sexual abuse victims to file criminal charges until they reach age 28 and civil cases until age 55. Because of this landmark decision, Legal-Bay predicts an influx of new filings into NY courts by the end of 2019. Legal-Bay has been a leader in assisting victims of sexual abuse get the pre settlement funding they need while they fight their cases. Legal-Bay estimates over a million adolescents have been subject to sexual abuse in the last 30 years. Legal-Bay's funding programs include car and truck accidents, slip and fall cases, medical malpractice, construction accidents, wrongful termination and discrimination cases, and all other personal injury cases. Their pre settlement programs are non-recourse, no-risk lawsuit cash advances, also known as case funding. None of the programs should be considered to be a settlement loan, settlement loans, lawsuit loan, lawsuit loans, pre-settlement loans, or a pre-settlement loan, as the money does not need to be paid back if you ultimately lose your case. To apply now for lawsuit settlement funding go to the company's website at: http://lawsuitssettlementfunding.com or call the company's toll free intake line at: 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by. SOURCE Legal-Bay LLC

Related Links

http://lawsuitssettlementfunding.com
Read More

German Court Rules Litigation Funder Cannot Collect Earnings in Telecomm Case

Germany has been at the forefront of litigation funding in the EU for some time. Ever since FORIS-AG became the first dedicated funder there, numerous global funders, including Burford Capital which recently partnered with the law firm Hausfeld on a portfolio funding arrangement, have made inroads into Germany. But a recent decision by a German court places doubt as to the circumstances in which litigation funders can collect earnings on cases they finance. As reported in JD Supra, in September of last year, the German Federal Court of Justice ruled that a litigation funder cannot claim earnings in a "confiscation of profits" claim against a telecomm company. "Confiscation of profits" is a type of claim under German law where an entity - in this case, a consumer rights advocacy group - seeks to compel the court to confiscate the profits of a company it claims obtained those profits under unlawful means. The trial court did find that the telecomm company in question indeed acted unlawfully, and ordered profits to be confiscated. However, the Federal Court ruled the trial court's finding inadmissible, given that the non-profit consumer rights group used litigation funding to finance its case, and therefore a portion of the profits collected from the telecomm company would go to the litigation funder. While the Federal Court's finding does not endanger the use of litigation funding in civil proceedings - which remains fully legal in Germany - it does send a message to all funders operating in the jurisdiction that they should not attempt to finance a 'confiscation of profits'  claim brought by a non-profit organization.

SPONSORED POST: No Loan? No Problem. Law Firm Funding to the Rescue!

“The more money our clients invest in advertising, the bigger their firms get, and (consequently) they keep returning for more capital.”

- Joshua Collins, Chief Investment Officer of Attorney Capital Funding, on why his company is currently experiencing such massive growth.

Since its inception in late 2005, Attorney Capital Funding (in conjunction with the Xpress Capital Group family of companies) has procured $160MM in financing for over 11,000 customers. The company generates opportunities for small and large law firms, as well as solo attorneys who can’t seek out traditional financing via a bank or credit union. Some have been declined by their banks, and others simply need a way to obtain financing without tapping their personal credit profile. We empower these attorneys by allowing them to collateralize their portfolios based on future valuation, instead of limiting them by their historical income. In short, we care more about where you’re going than where you’ve been. Question: “How is a bank better than you guys?” Clearly, banks charge less than a family office, hedge fund or other private equity group would. So, I always tell attorneys that if they can get approved by their banks, ‘OF COURSE, don’t use us or any alternative finance vehicle.’ We do not and never will attempt to compete with banks. They are good at what they do. Banks offer a small percentage of applicants less funding than what they request; but it costs less to use a bank than alternative financing. However, if you can get approval for traditional financing, don’t use any of us in this space. Question: “Who benefits the most from your funding?” Most attorneys report that they can see $7 or $8 back for every dollar invested in advertising. Attorneys who understand advertising/marketing should take advantage of our funding solutions. So, even though our funding costs more than that of a bank, at the end of the day it’s worth it because a) attorneys are going to write off their cost, and b) attorneys are receiving back a multiple of what they are investing. Also, an attorney who wants to expand his or her practice can benefit from investing in new staff members, or by opening a new location in order to handle more new business. Question: “How are your funding solutions better than those of a bank?”  Our intimate knowledge of the Legal Services industry allows us to base our client’s funding size on our future valuation of their portfolio, in contrast to banks that use past performance. Legal Services is an asymmetric industry – revenue is not realized consistently. So when attorneys need to raise funds, it can benefit them to leverage the future valuation of their pipeline of cases, which can be substantially larger than past performance. We also allow attorneys to pledge some or all of their cases, so in the event they don’t prevail in a single matter, they have the assurance that they have multiple opportunities to make good on their commitments. Question: “How does the process work, and how long does it take to get approved?” The first step is to take 3-5 minutes and complete the Due Diligence Questionnaire (or “application”) at AttorneyCapitalFunding.com. The 2nd step is to complete our NDA. After the NDA has been fully-executed, we hold a brief introductory call in order to get to know you and your firm better. The final step is to go over any last-minute supporting documents before closing and initiating the wire transfer. After a client submits an application (Due Diligence Questionnaire, which takes 5-10 minutes to complete) and the NDA (which takes 1-3 minutes to complete), underwriting typically takes 3-4 business days. After approval, it takes just 1-2 business days to release the wire, dependent upon the time the law firm sends in their final, signed documents. Need New Portfolio Investment Opportunities? If you are an investment firm seeking investment opportunities regarding our client's portfolios, we would love to partner with you! In order to discuss working with us, please send an email to investmentopps@attorneycapitalfunding.com. We look forward to meeting you all. If you require any additional information, you may call Attorney Capital Funding at 877.927.4448. Additionally, you may text or call either of the contacts listed below, and either Joshua or Michael will be happy to discuss your funding options. Joshua Collins Chief Investment Officer jcollins@attorneycapitalfunding.com Cell: 850.485.0599 Michael Kellison Chief Personal Assistant mkellison@attorneycapitalfunding.com Cell: 727.225.4480 Attorney Capital Funding 13801 N. Florida Avenue Suite C Tampa, FL 33613 877.927.4448
Read More

Litigation and Disputes funder Augusta launches Canadian practice

Augusta, the largest litigation and dispute funding institution in the UK – with £150m of capital and a team of 70 in London, today announces its expansion into the Canadian market with the opening of an office in Toronto. This complements Augusta’s existing operations in Sydney and London. As the market for funding of litigation and disputes has come into maturity around the world, there is growing acceptance of third-party funding as a route for claimants to seek justice, for lawyers to ensure certainty of fee income and to maximize flexibility of working capital. And with increasing geopolitical uncertainty, activity around litigation and disputes has grown also. The non-recourse nature of third-party funding provides certainty and peace of mind to claimants and their lawyers in otherwise unstable times. These trends on the ‘demand side’ are echoed on the ‘supply side’, with an increase in litigation funders joining stock markets and receiving substantial commitments from investors who recognise the specialist skills of such organisations. Augusta, for example, raised £150m in 2018, and all indications are that investment into well-managed funders will continue to increase in 2019, enabling more claims to be pursued with third-party support, at lower costs than were once tenable. Augusta’s Toronto office will be headed by Max Doyle, who re-joins Augusta. Max will be supported by several experienced members of Augusta’s London team. Louis Young, Managing Director of Augusta said: “We’re delighted to launch our Canadian operations today. 2018 was a strong year for Augusta, where we funded a record number of successful claims and raised significant capital. Our business model and operating platform allows us to finance claims of all sizes, and our underwriting discipline allows us to be a price leader in the markets that we operate in. We have been involved in the Canadian market for several years and we see Toronto as a logical first step in our growth plans for 2019.” Max Doyle, Head of Augusta Canada said: “I am delighted to be part of the expansion of Augusta’s operations into Canada where there is a growing and exciting litigation funding market. The company has been hugely successful in the UK, Europe and Australia and opening an office in North America was a logical next step. Augusta looks forward to introducing its creative and flexible funding solutions to the Canadian market. I am delighted to be part of this phase of the company’s growth.” About Augusta Ventures
  • Established in 2013, Augusta is the largest litigation and dispute funding institution in the UK – with £150m of capital and a team of 70 in London and 85 worldwide. Augusta’s scale enables us to make decisions in market-leading timeframes and fund cases of any size.
  • Augusta is organised into a series of specialist practice groups: Arbitration, Class Action, Competition, Consumer, Intellectual Property and Litigation, and sectors including Financial Services and Construction & Energy.
  • By the end of 2018, Augusta had funded 197 claims with a market leading win ratio of 80%.
Read More

Vannin Capital Expands in Sydney With New Managing Director

Vannin Capital, the global expert in legal finance, has today announced the appointment of Steven Taylor as a Managing Director in its Sydney office.

Steven joins Vannin from one of the pioneer companies of the global litigation funding industry, where he worked as a Litigation Manager responsible for managing funded claims to a resolution – work which entailed reviewing funding applications and negotiating funding agreements.

In addition to his expertise in legal finance, Steven holds extensive knowledge of the Australian corporate and commercial litigation landscape from his time spent as an Associate at Piper Alderman and Senior Associate at Squire Patton Boggs, where he was involved in several high-profile insolvency and class action cases, including claims against Lehman Brothers Australia Limited, on behalf of noteholders of the Octaviar Group and acting for applicants and group members in City of Swan & Ors v McGraw Hill Companies Inc in respect of alleged misrepresentations made by ratings agency, Standard & Poor’s.

Steven’s appointment marks the fifth senior addition to Vannin’s Australian team since its establishment in 2015. He joins a strong team of legal finance experts, including Regional Managing Director Patrick Coope – a former insolvency litigator who had established Australia’s first professional litigation funder in 1998 – as well as Tom McDonald, Pip Murphy and Adam Silverman who all joined as Managing Directors.

Commenting on the announcement, Vannin Capital CEO Richard Hextall said: “Steven’s appointment marks yet another step forward for Vannin’s growth in the Australian market. His impressive range of experience in litigation and legal finance means that he is ideally suited to playing an important role in helping to further develop our already first-class offering. We look forward to welcoming him to the team.”

Steven Taylor said: “The growth of the Australian litigation finance market in recent years has been remarkable, and Vannin’s impressive portfolio underscore its ambitions for growth in the region. I am excited to be joining a world-class team and to help the business continue on an upward trajectory.”

About Vannin Capital

Established in 2010, Vannin Capital is a global expert in the provision of funding to support individuals, corporate clients and law firms in the successful resolution of high-value litigation and arbitration claims.

From single case funding to portfolio finance, we offer creative capital solutions that are tailored to our clients’ needs. Our global team of legal and financial experts cover the key commercial litigation and arbitration centres from our offices in London, Jersey, Paris, Bonn, New York, Washington, Sydney and Melbourne.

More than just capital, we combine global experience with local knowledge to deliver a high standard of service and expertise to our clients around the world. A major player in the legal finance market, we are a member of the Association of Litigation Funders of England and Wales (ALF), conducting our business to a high standard in line with its code of conduct.

Vannin Capital Holdings Limited Registered in Jersey No. 121561

Registered Office Address:

13-14 Esplanade, St Helier Jersey, JE1 1BD

vannin.com

Read More

Global International Arbitration Centers Discuss Growth of Third Party Funding

Third party funding is now a global phenomenon, due mainly to its usage in international arbitration matters. But what exactly do the international arbitration institutions think of this rapidly-evolving Legal Services instrument? Read on to find out... As reported in Vannin Capital's latest Funding in Focus series, global arbitral institutions are continuing to recognize the lightning-fast growth of the industry. International arbitration centers from Spain to Brazil to Sweden to Colombia have all acknowledged growth in both the number of third party-funded cases being filed, as well as the enhanced awareness amongst counsel of the industry and its evolution. Two interesting drivers of this growth: an uptick in third party funding in investor-state disputes over the last five years, as well as the emergence of defense-side funding. Those two can even overlap, as was the case in Philip Morris v. Uruguay. The Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre predicts that defendants will continue to leverage third party funding in increasing numbers. Some institutions - like the London Court of International Arbitration - have adopted a 'wait and see' approach to third party funding, by choosing not to provide any comprehensive viewpoint on the practice. Other arbitration centers, however, including those in Paris and Dubai, have elected to take a proactive stance on the matter. The ICC France even went so far as to issue a best practice guide for industry adoption. It's worth noting that on the topic of disclosure, general consensus seems to be that a funder's identity should be disclosed in order to avoid any potential conflicts of interest, yet the funding agreement need not be disclosed. Of course, specific rules for each jurisdiction will vary. As pertains to another key issue of note - security for costs - no major arbitral institution has yet declared that the existence of a third party funder is grounds for an automatic security for costs application. Hong Kong has stated that courts 'may' take the existence of third party funding into consideration, but are under no obligation to issue a security for costs order. In sum, there seems to be a split amongst institutions on how best to handle the costs issue, with some openly declaring that third party funding should not automatically translate into a costs order, and others preferring a more hands-off approach, leaving it to the courts' discretion. As third party funding continues to evolve globally, arbitral institutions will evolve in tandem, given that the practice is so embedded in international arbitration, especially investor-state disputes. It will be interesting to see how each individual arbitral center responds to the most pressing issues relating to the rise of third party funding. At this point at least, there seems to be broad acceptance, general agreement on best practices, along with some differentiation on how proactive to be when issuing rules or guidelines.

Russian Businessman Ordered to Put Up £1.5MM in Security for Costs to Protect Identity of Litigation Funder

Russian businessman Alexander Tugushev is suing the billionaire owner of Russia's largest fishing company, Norebo, claiming he should be granted 1/3 ownership of the estimated $1.5B company. Tugushev has been ordered by a London High Court to put up £1.5MM in security for costs to avoid disclosing the identity of his litigation funder. As reported in Undercurrent News, Tugushev is suing Vitaly Orlov, Owner and CEO of Norebo. For his part, Orlov has been claiming that Tugushev has ties to criminal organizations, including the leader of a Chechen organized crime gang. In October, 2018, Orlov issued a disclosure notice to the court seeking to ascertain exactly who is paying Tugushev's legal bills. Orlov's argument was that he wished to make a security for costs issuance directly against the funder. After a pair of hearings in December, Tugushev was ordered to put up £1.5MM - roughly half of what Orlov had been seeking - as security for costs. If Tugushev meets the deadline imposed by the court, he'll be able to keep the identity of his funder a secret. If Tugushev fails to put the £1.5MM up in time, his funder's name and address must be disclosed. Orlov maintains that Tugushev is trying to appropriate a portion of a successful business that he does not own - which many well-connected Russian oligarchs have been known to do in the past. The Russian offices of Norebo have been raided by police several times, and Orlov claims that he has faced a slew of death threats and harassment.  

General Counsel from 30 Corporations Take Stand Against Litigation Funding

General counsel and senior litigators from 30 companies have come out against the litigation funding industry, asking the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules to mandate disclosure of all funding agreements in civil actions. 30 corporations have signed a letter which was sent to the Secretary for the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure. The letter proposes an amendment to the Federal Rules on Civil Procedure 26(a)(1)(A) "to require in civil actions the disclosure of agreements giving a non-party or non-counsel the contingent right to receive compensation from proceeds of the litigation." The signatories argue that when a funder backs a lawsuit, it effectively becomes a 'real party' in the case, and that both defendants and the court have a right to know who has a stake in the lawsuit, and if ethical means of achieving success are being utilized. The signatories asset that they are not attempting to regulate litigation funding, and that "no harm would flow from requiring such basic transparency about who has invested in a lawsuit and the terms of that investment, at least none that could not be protected by the court, as the proposal contemplates." In the letter's final paragraph, the signatories even take a swipe at industry claims that the broader business community has been adopting litigation finance. The letter states: "Finally, we note that some litigation funders have contended that major companies are generally indifferent or opposed to such a disclosure requirement because corporate use of TPLF is allegedly widespread. No evidence has been proffered to support that assertion. Nor is it consistent with our experience." Below is a list of companies who signed the letter:
  • Allstate
  • AT&T
  • Bayer U.S.
  • BP America Inc.
  • Charles Schwab
  • Chevron
  • Comcast Corporation
  • CVS Health
  • Eli Lily and Company
  • Ford Motor Company
  • General Electric
  • GlaxoSmithKline LLC
  • Google
  • Home Depot
  • Honeywell
  • ITT Inc.
  • Johnson & Johnson
  • Liberty Mutual Insurance
  • MassMututal
  • Merck & Co., Inc.
  • Microsoft
  • Phillips66
  • RiverStone Group
  • RPM International, Inc.
  • Shell Oil Company
  • State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
  • Verizon Wireless
  • Westfield
  • Zurich North America