Trending Now

John Freund's Posts

3169 Articles

Asertis and KP Law Join Forces to Launch Combined Legal Services Venture

By Harry Moran |

In recent years, the alternative business structure (ABS) model for law firm ownership is one that has mostly been discussed in relation to the US, where individual states have relaxed restrictions on these kind of hybrid legal services models. However, a new company launched in the UK demonstrates that this jurisdiction may still be leading the way for innovative partnerships between funders, law firms, insurers and legal marketing services.

Exclusive reporting by Bloomberg Law covers the launch of the new legal funding venture Legatus Holdings Limited, whose subsidiaries include Asertis, KP Law, Toremis Speciality, and Cavis. This new business aims to provide a holistic approach to the funding of mass tort and group claims, with funding, legal services, insurance, and claims marketing and acquisition contained under one organisation. Whilst this new group will allow for these services to be aligned, the subsidiary businesses are reportedly not required to work exclusively within the Legatus business.

Speaking with Bloomberg Law, Legatus’ CEO Philip Holden said that the new company is unique within the UK in having “those four subsidiaries vertically integrated into legal assets.” Holden emphasised that “each operating business is led by market-leading professionals with established pedigrees in their respective fields”, and that forming this new venture will allow Asertis “to grow more rapidly”.

With the launch of Legatus, the internal structure and leadership of these subsidiary companies is evolving. As mentioned above, Holden has taken on the chief executive duties at Legatus, having previously joined Asertis in 2022 as general counsel for the funder. Duncan Hedar, partner at KP Law, will be assuming the role of CEO at Asertis, whilst the previous incumbent Ian Madej, will be taking on the position of chief commercial officer at Legatus. Nathan Hull, previously head of contingent and litigation risk at Vale Insurance Partners, will be leading the insurance services component in Toremis Speciality. Whilst, Neil Gee will be doing the same for the new mass tort marketing arm, Cavis.

Legatus’ newly launched website does not provide any additional details on the venture, but provides a registered address for Brabners LLP in Manchester.

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Paolo Grandi, Partner, RPLT RP Legalitax

By John Freund |

Paolo Grandi is an accomplished legal expert specializing in commercial and corporate law. He advises on corporate investments, business unit transactions, capital operations, and joint ventures, taking a multidisciplinary approach to contract drafting and negotiations across sectors like energy, hi-tech, manufacturing, fashion, and real estate.

Paolo also handles litigation and arbitration in these fields, offering tailored solutions for civil, corporate, and commercial disputes. With expertise spanning environmental law, intellectual property, and technology-related crimes, he represents clients in judicial, arbitration, and mediation processes domestically and internationally. His team excels in litigation funding, risk assessment, and dispute resolution strategies.

He joined RPLT RP legalitax in 1997 and became a Partner in 2007. Beyond his legal practice, he has made notable contributions to the field, authoring publications on civil procedure, IT consultancy contracts, and hardware and software maintenance agreements. He is also a member of the Commission on Commercial Law and Practice at the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC).

Company Name and Description: RPLT. Where RP is RP Legal & Tax Professional Association, a firm founded in 1949 and present in Italy with six offices. And LT is Legalitax Studio Legale e Tributario, founded in 2013 and active in Rome and Milan. RPLT RP legalitax is the result of the merger that took place in 2023.

RPLT is a full-service reality in the legal and tax sector – and have assisted and advised dozens of companies, corporations, groups, investment funds, financial intermediaries, entities and administrations, in Italy and abroad. The partnership gives voice to the intention to combine our strategic skills and expertise to offer even more competitive, specialized and valuable professional assistance, while maintaining – in RPLT positioning idea – that matrix of independence that unites the company.

RPLT has 200 professionals including lawyers and accountants; more than 25 practice areas; 5 international desks covering Europe, Asia and Africa. RPLT adhere to the most influential international networks.

Company Website: https://www.rplt.it/en/

Year Founded: 1949

Headquarters: Turin

Other offices: Milan, Rome, Bologna, Aosta, Busto Arsizio

Area of Focus: Litigation, Commercial and Corporate Law

Member Quote: “Skill may spark success, but collaboration turns success into greatness. True victories are built on teamwork and shared vision."

NorthWall Capital’s Founder Shares Insights on Legal Assets Strategy

By Harry Moran |

Although litigation funding has grown into an increasingly mainstream sector of the broader legal services industry, the strategies that shape funders’ business models are often quite opaque to those outside the funding market.

A recent episode of the Alternative Fund Insight (AFI) podcast provided useful insights from Fabian Chrobog, founder of NorthWall Capital, who discussed the firm’s approach to legal assets and their strategy for scaleability in a wide-ranging discussion.

In the interview, hosted by Will Wainewright, Chrobog outlined NorthWall’s overall legal assets strategy: “We’ve had a lot of fun running that strategy, it’s been hugely successful. It’s generated some fairly outstanding returns for LPs and it’s something we continue to be very active in. So really what we are looking for, what we are good at, is the underwriting of complex collateral. Sometimes it’s a situational complexity, it could be these asset-backed situations which are fairly complex. 

In this case we provide loans to law firms that are secured by very large pools of potential proceeds from legal assets claims. These could be litigations that could generate in some cases hundreds of millions of revenues per case or over a dozen different cases. So, what we do is we can provide working capital to the law firm without taking security over any specific case, just saying we will get paid back from the first one, two, three cases you win or settle. 

This is not exactly rocket science because you can tell which cases are most likely to settle, because there is a lot of legal precedent or there might have already been settlement discussions. So, you provide that working capital and you effectively just underwrite the cases that you have a high degree of confidence could be successful, you zero everything else, and then you severely haircut the cases that you believe could be won or settled, and you lend against those at a very low loan to value.

At the end of the day, you just have to believe that one, maybe two, of these cases resolve and sometimes these dockets have 12, 15, 20 different cases where you should have a very high degree of certainty that you’re going to get repaid. We got into this because we started looking at one of these situations and we realised there was more to do, and we’ve been very successful in originating deal flow here.”

Asked by Wainewright about NorthWall’s decision-making process when it comes to choosing which legal situations to focus on, Chrobog said: “You’re trying to remove yourself from having to be right more frequently than you’re wrong. You’re trying to create a situation where there is really a very asymmetric risk-reward profile.

But then the way that you do it is, and what is different about NorthWall and how we approach this space, is that we’re credit investors predominantly. We’re looking at how can we reduce our downside. We always pair a credit analyst with a lawyer internally, and then we get external litigation advice to help us with the individual cases.

The credit analyst’s job is to make sure the firm doesn’t run out of money, the lawyer’s job is to make sure that we really truly understand these cases, and then the investment committee’s job is to make sure that we’ve been conservative in our underwriting process.”

Prompted by Wainewright on this being an example of the idiosyncratic strategy that you find within alternatives, Chrobog went on to expand on how NorthWall’s ensures its approach is attractive to investors.

“What you have to remember is that scalability is important. Scalability is important because the people that we have are very good and they expect to be compensated, so it’s a relatively expensive strategy to run. But our investors don’t want to invest small capital, they want to invest substantial amounts of money and they want to see it deployed. 

So, what we are really focused on is we only finance large portfolios of cases because it provides downside protection, a diversification of potential revenue streams, but it also allows for a certain element of scalability. There’s no point being in a niche strategy that you can’t scale to be meaningful.”

The full interview is available on the AFI website.

German Funder FORIS AG Highlights Strong Demand for Funding in 2024

By Harry Moran |

Whilst Germany is not a jurisdiction that is traditionally seen as a prime market for third-party legal funding, one litigation funder based out of Bonn is reporting that it has continued to see plentiful demand for dispute funding in 2024.

In an overview of its 2024 activities, Foris AG revealed that it has financed 29 new cases from almost 450 financing requests, maintaining the funder's average volume of funded cases over recent years. These new funded cases were from a range of different dispute areas including medical malpractice, inheritance, corporate and commercial contracts. The funder also saw a rise in the number of cases resolved, rising from 24 in 2023 to 33 in 2024, with FORIS AG's CEO, Frederick Iwans stating that around 80 percent of these cases reached successful resolutions.

In order to support this growth in the number of cases that FORIS AG is financing, the litigation funder and its partners launched a fund for professional investors. The fund, which has a target volume of 50 million euros, has already received its first subscriptions with Iwans saying that the high level of interest in the fund shows that litigation financing has struck a chord with potential investors.

The funder also announced that the submission of the annual report of FORIS AG with the audited annual results for 2024 is scheduled for March 28, 2025.

Legal-Bay Lawsuit Funding Announces Commercial Litigation/Breach of Contract Lawsuit Filed Against Developer Hart Lyman Companies

By Harry Moran |

Legal-Bay, a leading presettlement lawsuit funding company, announces a commercial litigation / breach of contract lawsuit filed against Hart Lyman Companies. The prominent Syracuse-based real estate developer was sued late Tuesday in New York State Supreme Court, Onondaga County. FILED: ONONDAGA COUNTY CLERK 01/07/2025 05:48 PM INDEX NO. 000134/2025

The plaintiff, Jonathon Geller, a longtime investor with Hart Lyman Companies, is suing for delinquent payments on investments and inspection of books and records of eight separate entities, which he alleges the companies have not complied with. Hart Lyman Companies is currently working on the largest development in central New York history, the Great Northern Mall, whose purchase was predicated upon its close proximity to the future site of Micron Technologies. Micron has committed $100 billion toward developing multiple chip fabricating facilities in Clay, NY. The plaintiff is also an investor in the Great Northern Mall project.

The plaintiff is represented by the LAZARE POTTER GIACOVAS & MOYLE LLP law firm in New York City by Robert A. Giacovas, Esq.

Chris Janish, CEO of Legal-Bay, commented, "Our firm is familiar with breach of contract and other commercial litigation such as this, and we do our best to work with plaintiffs who are having financial difficulties litigating matters against larger defendants.  Cases of this nature can take a long time to work their way through the courts and recover funds, regardless of the nature of the claims.  Due to the importance of the Great Northern Mall project for residents of central New York, we will continue to monitor updates of this case."

If you're looking for pre-settlement cash from your commercial litigation lawsuit or need a cash advance from your anticipated settlement for any other type of lawsuit, please visit the company's website HERE or call 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by to hear about your specific case. 

Legal-Bay funds commercial litigation and breach of contract cases, as well as many other types of lawsuits such as wrongful imprisonment, whistleblower or Qui-Tam, wrongful termination, personal injury, slips and falls, car, boat, or construction accidents, medical malpractice, wrongful death, dog bites, police brutality, sexual assault, sexual abuse, judgment or verdict on appeal, contract dispute, False Claims Act, patent litigation, copyright infringement, and many more. Legal-Bay has recently secured additional capital for these and other types of cases, and encourages plaintiffs or attorneys that have been denied funding in the past to apply with Legal-Bay.

Legal-Bay's loan for settlement funding programs are designed to provide immediate cash in advance of a plaintiff's anticipated monetary award. While it's common to refer to these legal funding requests as settlement loans, loans for settlements, lawsuit loans, loans for lawsuits, etc., the "lawsuit loan" funds are, in fact, non-recourse. That means there's no risk when it comes to loans in lawsuit settlements because there is no obligation to repay the money if the recipient loses their case. Therefore, terms like settlement loan, loans for lawsuit, loans on settlement, or law suit loan funds don't necessarily apply, as the "loan on lawsuit" isn't really a loan at all, but rather a stress-free cash advance.

Legal-Bay is known to many as the best lawsuit funding provider in the industry for their helpful and knowledgeable staff, and one of the best lawsuit loan companies overall for their low rates and quick turnaround, sometimes within 24-48 hours once all documents have been received.To apply right now for a loan settlement program, please visit the company's website HERE or call toll-free at: 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by to answer any questions.

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight:  Nicole Clark,  Co-Founder and CEO, Trellis

By John Freund |

Nicole Clark is a business litigation and labor and employment attorney who has handled litigation in both state and federal courts. She’s worked at a variety of law firms ranging from mid-size litigation boutiques to large firms, and is licensed to practice law in three states. She has defended corporations and employers in complex class action and wage and hour disputes, as well as individual employment matters ranging from sexual harassment to wrongful termination.

Additionally, Nicole is the CEO, and along with Alon Shwartz, are the founders of Trellis, an award-winning solution that uses AI and machine learning to provide legal teams with strategic legal intelligence and analytics. Nicole has an intuitive understanding of technology and is deeply committed to helping legal teams leverage technology to gain a competitive advantage and achieve a more favorable outcome for their clients.    

Company Name and Description: Trellis is an AI-driven state trial court legal research, insights and productivity platform. The company makes the fragmented U.S. state trial court system searchable through a single interface, offering comprehensive insights into judges, cases, and opposing counsel.

Trellis offers an extensive suite of tools, including its newly released Trellis AI to automate litigation tasks, detailed judge bios and analytics, insights into law firms, company litigation history, daily filings reports, customizable alerts, court comparison analytics, and more.  With Trellis, litigation finance professionals will never miss out on a massive opportunity again by effortlessly tracking lawsuits across states and staying updated with ongoing litigation documents.

To learn how Trellis can help your team succeed, visit www.trellis.law or request a demo today.    

Company Website: www.trellis.law    

Year Founded: 2018    

Headquarters:  Los Angeles, CA    

Member Quote: “Trellis allows Litigation Funders to conduct due diligence, identify opportunities and set alerting across the United States state trial court system – the largest court system in the world.”

University of Utah Research Shows Effects of Funding Disclosure Orders on Patent Litigation

By Harry Moran |

The changing landscape of patent litigation in Delaware’s federal court is being driven by Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly’s standing order requiring the disclosure of third-party funding involved in these lawsuits. That is according to research conducted by Jonas Anderson, a professor at the University of Utah’s S.J. Quinney College of Law, which studied third-party litigation funding in Delaware and New Jersey. 

An article in Bloomberg Law examines the paper, ‘From Patents To Guns: Examining Third-Party Litigation Funding’, which found that in the two years following Judge Connolly's standing order from April 2022, the number of patent cases filed has totaled 1,121. This is a significant drop from the previous two-year period, which saw 1,899 patent lawsuits filed in the Delaware court. Similarly, in the New Jersey district court that also requires disclosure, Anderson found that since June 2021, only 88 cases out of 40,000 had disclosed that they were backed by third-party funding. 

Commenting on his findings, Anderson said that “from the evidence we’ve amassed, there’s a pretty good argument here that what’s going on is litigation funders don’t like disclosure.” He also noted that the result of this drop in cases being filed in Delaware resulted in an inverse rise in the number of patent suits filed in two district courts in Texas where there is no mandatory disclosure requirement for outside funding.

Michael Gulliford, managing partner and co-founder at litigation funder Soryn IP Capital Management, suggested that one of the reasons for a drop in the volume of cases in Delaware could be the court’s backlog of processing these suits. Gulliford explained that “the ability to get to trial in a speedy period of time” is a priority for funders, and that court backlogs in Delaware and other jurisdictions could pose a significant obstacle for litigation funders. William Marra, director at Certum Group, said that Anderson’s research supported his first-hand experience that “only a very small percentage of cases” are backed by litigation funders.

The full research and paper from Mr Anderson can be found here.

Balance Legal Capital Funding Australian Class Action Against General Motors

By Harry Moran |

A new class action in the Federal Court of Australia is targeting General Motors Australia and New Zealand over the alleged sale of Holden vehicles with faulty transmissions. The class action is being brought on behalf of consumers who purchased certain models of Holden vehicles between 1 January 2011 and 24 December 2024.

Reporting by 9News covers the class action, which is being led by Maurice Blackburn. Balance Legal Capital is providing litigation funding for the claim. The vehicles allegedly affected include a range of 13 models that were equipped with GM 6L 45, GM 6L 50, or GM 6L 80 transmissions. The claim alleges that General Motors engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct in the sale of these vehicles, and that it failed to meet the guarantee of acceptable quality under the Australian Consumer Law.

Kimi Nishimura, principal lawyer and executive director at Maurice Blackburn, stated: “Through this class action, we are seeking to recover compensation for those consumers who experienced loss and damage related to the transmission system in the affected vehicles.”

In response to the reporting, General Motors Australia and New Zealand did not provide a comment on the class action, with a spokesperson reiterating that “GM does not comment on ongoing litigation.”

Detailed information on the Holden Transmission Class Action can be found on Maurice Blackburn’s website.

Exton Advisors Appoints Senior Finance Professional Timothy Mayer

By Harry Moran |

Leading global advisors in disputes finance, Exton Advisors, today announces the appointment of experienced funder and lawyer Timothy Mayer to its team, marking the start of an exciting year for the firm.

Called to the Bar in 1997, Timothy has over sixteen years’ experience in the disputes funding market, having spent time at some of the leading global dispute’s funders. He has managed multi-million investments across a broad range of disputes, with particular focus on international arbitration, and has been consistently recognised in the directories, including as a Global Leader in Legal Finance in the Law Dragon Global 100 guide (2020 – 2023) and Chambers and Partners Litigation Support Guide for Litigation Funding (2020 -2024).

Commenting on the appointment, Managing Director John Astill said, “We are delighted to welcome Timothy, and to grow our team in 2025. Timothy brings with him a unique combination of practical legal experience and disputes finance expertise that will be invaluable to our clients and will further strengthen the seamless and efficient approach to disputes finance that Exton Advisors offers.”

Timothy commented, “I am thrilled to join Exton Advisors at an exciting time for the business, and I look forward to the opportunity to be part of a truly unique service spanning the legal and funding spheres. No other disputes funding advisory exists quite like Exton Advisors, and I am keen to continue developing their distinctive approach to disputes financing.”

Exton Advisors deliver expertise in every aspect of the unique and complex disputes financing asset class. They advise corporate legal teams, their private practitioners and their funding partners in order to make the most of litigation assets.

About Exton Advisors

Exton Advisors deliver expertise in every aspect of the unique and complex litigation financing asset class. They advise corporate legal teams, their private practitioners and their funding partners in order to make the most of litigation assets.

Omni Bridgeway Backs Australian Class Action Targeting Johnson & Johnson

By Harry Moran |

A class action was recently filed in the Federal Court of Australia, targeting Johnson & Johnson over allegations that a number of its oral cold and flu medications are ineffective when taken orally. The claim covers 20 separate products sold by Johnson & Johnson across three brands of medication: Codral, Sudafed, and Benadryl.

An article in Lawyers Weekly covers the class action being brought by JGA Saddler, with funding for the case provided by Omni Bridgeway. The pharmaceutical giant is accused of falsely marketing and selling these products as effective treatments, with the claim seeking to represent any Australian customer who has bought one of these products since 2005.

Rebecca Jancauskas, director at JGA Saddler, stated that “Johnson & Johnson has manufactured and marketed a medication that decades of evidence have shown doesn’t work as claimed.” She also emphasised the importance of the claim in seeking compensation by saying, “customers should be able to confidently buy medicines that work as advertised and when they don’t, the company involved should be held accountable.”

Niall Watson-Dunne, investment manager at Omni Bridgeway, said that “for around 19 years, Australians have been sold cold and flu products to relieve their symptoms, despite studies and scientific evidence showing their key ingredient phenylephrine is ineffective when taken orally.”

More information about the class action can be found on Omni Bridgeway’s website.

Qanlex Refines its Latin America Strategy

By Harry Moran |

Qanlex is one of the few litigation funders focused on providing third-party financing in Latin America, with a dedicated presence in the region. The funder leverages a sector-specific strategy for targeting lucrative case types.

Speaking with América Economía, Qanlex’s general counsel for Latin America, Juliana Giorgi, emphasised that in order to gain a foothold in the competitive litigation funding market, the firm has leveraged “the development of technology.” Giorgi goes on to explain that its in-house software “searches for cases in judicial databases that might interest us due to the value of the claim or the nature of the process”, allowing Qanlex to find suitable claims to finance in the different countries it operates in.

Beyond the use of technology to refine its strategies, Qanlex has also chosen to focus on specific sectors that generate valuable disputes in Latin America. Whilst the construction sector has been a particular area of interest, Qanlex has also found opportunities for niche areas within different jurisdictions. As Giorgi explains: “In Ecuador we have several energy cases that include thermoelectric plants; in Costa Rica, cases of tourist real estate development; in Colombia, oil and energy cases."

Regardless of the sector, Gorgi acknowledges that Qanlex is “open to analyzing and financing any range of cases as long as they include a liquid asset transfer at the end of which the fund can take the remuneration.”

Litigation Funding Found to be “Not Relevant” in E. Jean Carroll’s Sexual Abuse and Defamation Case Against Donald Trump

By John Freund |

The Second Circuit upheld the $5 million verdict in Carroll v. Trump, rejecting President Trump’s claims of trial court errors, including the handling of litigation funding evidence. Trump’s legal team argued that litigation funding for E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuit, provided by an anonymous nonprofit, was relevant to her credibility and potential bias. The court disagreed, emphasizing that such evidence had minimal probative value.

As reported in Reason.com, the court noted that Carroll’s case was primarily taken on a contingency fee basis, with supplemental funding obtained by her legal team in 2020. Carroll had little involvement with the funding arrangement, learning about it after the fact and having no subsequent discussions with her counsel about it for years. The appellate court agreed with the trial court’s finding that Carroll’s lack of engagement with the funding made it irrelevant to assessing her credibility.

Trump’s team had argued the funding demonstrated bias or a politically motivated agenda, but the court dismissed this, highlighting that Carroll publicly accused Trump of sexual assault long before the funding was secured. Additionally, Carroll and her key witnesses had openly acknowledged their political opposition to Trump, making the funder’s potential political affiliations redundant in establishing bias.

The court emphasized that litigation funding rarely impacts credibility and that introducing such evidence risks unfair prejudice and jury distraction. This decision reinforces the judiciary's cautious approach to litigation funding disclosure in trials.

Emmerson PLC Obtains $11M in Funding for Moroccan Dispute

By John Freund |

Emmerson PLC, the mining company focused on the development of the Khemisset potash project in Morocco, has secured $11 million in legal funding for its dispute against the Moroccan government.

As reported in Business Insider, Emmerson obtained the funding from an unnamed legal funder. The proceeds will be used to commence with arbitration proceedings, with white shoe law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP being appointed litigation counsel.

LFJ recently reported on Emmerson's search for litigation funding, including that it is pursuing an investment dispute over the government’s alleged breaches of a bilateral investment treaty (BIT) between Morocco and the United Kingdom. Emmerson is seeking to establish itself as a low-cost, high-margin supplier of potash on the African continent.

We will keep you updated as this story progresses.

Tribeca Lawsuit Loans To Provide Legal Funding To Transferred FCI Dublin Prisoners

By John Freund |

Two lawyers, Susan Beaty and Kara Janssen, have been actively advocating for the women of FCI Dublin and have uncovered alarming reports of sexual harassment and assault. The incarcerated women have since been relocated to various federal prisons across the country, including a facility in Aliceville, Alabama.

Tribeca Lawsuit Loans provides pre-settlement funding to empower the FCI Dublin victims to pursue justice during this difficult time.

Abuse Persists After FCI Dublin's Closure

Earlier this year, the FCI Dublin was shut down due to the pervasive sex abuse scandal involving prison staff. As a result, the women incarcerated were relocated to different federal prisons nationwide, including Aliceville in Alabama. Instead of finding relief and rehabilitation, more reports of abuse and retaliation have emerged for speaking out against the past misconduct that occurred in Dublin.

According to Beaty and Janssen, multiple women relocated to FCI Aliceville experienced harassment because of their affiliation with the Dublin scandal. Additionally, several women came out claiming that they were sexually assaulted by the guards at Aliceville.

These series of abuses and their nature deeply ingrained within the system highlights the flaws within the Bureau of Prisons (BOP). Although the BOP has conducted investigations and mass interviews, this did little to give security and restore trust among incarcerated women. Reports of poor confinement conditions and lack of access to mental health services only make it harder for these women to deal with the trauma.

Tribeca's Commitment to Human Rights

Tribeca Lawsuit Loans is deeply committed to respect for human rights, including the right to safety and dignity even in correctional facilities. Understanding the need for justice in these circumstances, Tribeca introduces its initiatives to provide lawsuit loans for the victims of abuse at FCI Dublin and other federal prisons.

Legal battles against large institutions like the BOP can be a huge undertaking and could require significant resources. Most of the victims and their families don't have the financial means to pursue their cases, especially in instances of mistreatment and abuse.

Tribeca Lawsuit Loans aims to empower the victims by aiding them financially to secure skilled legal representation and cover necessary expenses without upfront costs.

Tribeca Lawsuit Loans to Provide Legal Funding for Prison Abuse Victims

Tribeca Lawsuit Loans extends financial assistance to prisoners at FCI Aliceville and other related facilities through lawsuit cash advances, also known as pre-settlement loans, based on the class action lawsuit filed against the Bureau of Prisons. This legal action addresses the allegations of misconduct and abuse within federal prisons, emphasizing cases of sexual abuse involving prison staff.

Tribeca's dedication extends beyond financial support. It is a catalyst for systemic change within the federal prison. By collaborating with victims, lawyers and advocacy groups, Tribeca hopes to bring these injustices to the forefront and hold the responsible parties accountable.

If you or someone close to you require financial support in the middle of an ongoing case, don't hesitate to reach out. Call us now at (866) 388-2288 or apply online via our secure online form.

ABOUT US: TRIBECA Capital Group is a litigation finance company funding those across the nation involved in lawsuits, and need an upper hand financially to level the playing field.

Funders Assess Challenges and Opportunities in 2025

By Harry Moran |

Leading funders in the US and UK have been asked to identify the challenges that they are facing, as well as the opportunities they are looking towards in 2025. Respondents included senior executives at Omni Bridgeway, Therium, Parabellum Capital, Harbour Litigation Funding, Balance Legal Capital, Burford Capital, and Bench Walk Advisors.

An article in Legal Business explains that the continued calls for tighter regulation and oversight of litigation finance were top of mind for many of the funders interviewed. This was particularly highlighted in the United States, where opposition to third-party funding was characterized by Therium’s Neil Purslow as “a hostile approach to the industry from US corporates”. Matthew Harrison of Omni Bridgeway and Dai Wai Chin Feman from Parabellum were both clear in saying that the actual regulators are not inherently adversarial towards funders, with Feman stating that “there is a lot of noise but there is always noise” from those who would seek to restrict third-party funding.

Meanwhile, UK funders are growing increasingly frustrated with the new government’s gradual approach to resolving the impact of the Supreme Court’s PACCAR decision, as the industry must now wait until the completion of the Civil Justice Council’s report next year. Purslow lamented the government’s inaction and pointed towards the previous parliament’s Litigation Funding Agreements (Enforceability) Bill as the obvious solution, arguing that “there was a fix available and it could and should be done”. Oliver Hayes from Balance Legal Capital similarly described the current situation as “undesirable”, but expressed hope that “the government provides a fix which clarifies the position and resolves the questionable challenges being run by defendants around the legality of funding agreements.”

Looking ahead to the opportunities open to funders, Omni Bridgeway’s Harrison suggested that the perception of funding has shifted away from only being a solution for ‘David versus Goliath’ situations, as “many CFOs, GCs, and big firms understand that litigation finance is a very valuable risk and cost mitigation tool.” As funders continue to look to diversify their investments, Mark King at Harbour noted that in the UK, “we are seeing an increased interest in credit finance facilities with law firms”.

CJEU Judgment Prohibits Outside Investment in Law Firms

By Harry Moran |

A recent judgment from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) ruled that EU member states can block law firms from accepting external investment in order to protect lawyers’ independence and comply with their professional obligations. The court found that EU directives governing the freedom of establishment and free movement of capital, “must be interpreted as not precluding national legislation” that prohibits third-party ownership of law firms.

Reporting in Legal Futures explains that the ruling arose following preliminary questions submitted by a German court which was overseeing a dispute between law firm Halmer Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft and the Rechtsanwaltskammer München (Munich Bar Association). Halmer had informed the Munich Bar Association that it had sold 51 of its 100 shares to an Austrian company called SIVE Beratung und Beteiligung GmbH (SIVE). The bar association responded by informing HR that the transfer of shares was prohibited under the German Federal Lawyers’ Code, and subsequently revoked Halmer’s registration with the bar association. 

The Court of Justice’s ruling on these questions found that it was permissible for member states to block this kind of outside investment, noting that “economic considerations focused on a purely financial investor’s short-term profit could prevail over considerations guided exclusively by the defence of the interests of the law firm’s clients.” André Haug, vice-president of Germany’s Federal Bar Association, welcomed the European court’s decision and highlighted that its ruling concurred with the German government’s position that “the ban on third-party ownership is justified in order to guarantee the independence of lawyers.”

The case that came before the court was of sufficient significance that it attracted attention from member states across the continent, with observations submitted on behalf of the German, Spanish, French, Croatian, Austrian and Slovenian Governments.

The CJEU’s full judgment can be found here.

CAT Rules in Favour of BT in Harbour-Funded Claim Valued at £1.3bn

By Harry Moran |

As LFJ reported yesterday, funders and law firms alike are looking to the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) as one of the most influential factors for the future of the UK litigation market in 2025 and beyond. A judgment released by the CAT yesterday that found in favour of Britain’s largest telecommunications business may provide a warning to industry leaders of the uncertainty around funding these high value collective proceedings.

An article in The Global Legal Post provides an overview of the judgment handed down by the CAT in Justin Le Patourel v BT Group PLC, as the Tribunal dismissed the claim against the telecoms company following the trial in March of this year. The opt-out claim valued at around £1.3 billion, was first brought before the Tribunal in 2021 and sought compensation for BT customers who had allegedly been overcharged for landline services from October 2015.

In the executive summary of the judgment, the CAT found “that just because a price is excessive does not mean that it was also unfair”, with the Tribunal concluding that “there was no abuse of dominant position” by BT.

The proceedings which were led by class representative Justin Le Patourel, founder of Collective Action on Land Lines (CALL), were financed with Harbour Litigation Funding. When the application for a Collective Proceedings Order (CPO) was granted in 2021, Harbour highlighted the claim as having originally been worth up to £600 million with the potential for customers to receive up to £500 if the case had been successful.

In a statement, Le Patourel said that he was “disappointed that it [the CAT] did not agree that these prices were unfair”, but said that they would now consider “whether the next step will be an appeal to the Court of Appeal to challenge this verdict”. The claimants have been represented by Mishcon de Reya in the case.

Commenting on the impact of the judgment, Tim West, disputes partner at Ashurst, said that it could have a “dampening effect, at least in the short term, on the availability of capital to fund the more novel or unusual claims in the CAT moving forward”. Similarly, Mohsin Patel, director and co-founder of Factor Risk Management, described the outcome as “a bitter pill to swallow” for both the claimants and for the law firm and funder who backed the case.

The CAT’s full judgment and executive summary can be accessed on the Tribunal’s website.

Sandfield Capital Secures £600m Facility to Expand Funding Operations

By Harry Moran |

Sandfield Capital, a Liverpool-based litigation funder, has reached an agreement for a £600 million facility with Perspective Investments. The investment, which is conditional on the identification of suitable claims that can be funded, has been secured to allow Sandfield Capital to strategically expand its operations and the number of claims it can fund. 

An article in Insider Media covers the the fourth capital raise in the last 12 months for Sandfield Capital, with LFJ having previously covered the most recent £10.5 million funding facility that was secured last month. Since its founding in 2020, Sandfield Capital has already expanded from its original office in Liverpool with a footprint established in London as well. 

Steven D'Ambrosio, chief executive of Sandfield Capital, celebrated the announced by saying:  “This new facility presents significant opportunities for Sandfield and is testament to our business model. Key to our strategy to deploy the facility is expanding our legal panel. There's no shortage of quality law firms specialising in this area and we are keen to develop further strong and symbiotic relationships. Perspective Investments see considerable opportunities and bring a wealth of experience in institutional investment with a strong track record.”

Arno Kitts, founder and chief investment officer of Perspective Investments, also provided the following statement:  “Sandfield Capital's business model includes a bespoke lending platform with the ability to integrate seamlessly with law firms' systems to ensure compliance with regulatory and underwriting standards.  This technology enables claims to be processed rapidly whilst all loans are fully insured so that if a claim is unsuccessful, the individual claimant has nothing to pay. This is an excellent investment proposition for Perspective Investments and we are looking forward to working with the management team who have a track record of continuously evolving the business to meet growing client needs.”

Australian Google Ad Tech Class Action Commenced on Behalf of Publishers

By Harry Moran |

A class action was filed on 16 December 2024 on behalf of QNews Pty Ltd and Sydney Times Media Pty Ltd against Google LLC, Google Pte Ltd and Google Australia Pty Ltd (Google). 

The class action has been commenced to recover compensation for Australian-domiciled website and app publishers who have suffered financial losses as a result of Google’s misuse of market power in the advertising technology sector. The alleged loss is that publishers would have had significantly higher revenues from selling advertising space, and would have kept greater profits, if not for Google’s misuse of market power. 

The class action is being prosecuted by Piper Alderman with funding from Woodsford, which means affected publishers will not pay costs to participate in this class action, nor will they have any financial risk in relation to Google’s costs. 

Anyone, or any business, who has owned a website or app and sold advertising space using Google’s ad tech tools can join the action as a group member by registering their details at www.googleadtechaction.com.au. Participation in the action as a group member will be confidential so Google will not become aware of the identity of group members. 

The class action is on behalf of all publishers who had websites or apps and sold advertising space using Google’s platforms targeted at Australian consumers, including: 

  1. Google Ad Manager (GAM);
  2. Doubleclick for Publishers (DFP);
  3. Google Ad Exchange (AdX); and
  4. Google AdSense or AdMob. 

for the period 16 December 2018 to 16 December 2024. 

Google’s conduct 

Google’s conduct in the ad tech market is under scrutiny in various jurisdictions around the world. In June 2021, the French competition authority concluded that Google had abused its dominant position in the ad tech market. Google did not contest the decision, accepted a fine of €220m and agreed to change its conduct. The UK Competition and Markets Authority, the European Commission, the US Department of Justice and the Canadian Competition Bureau have also commenced investigations into, or legal proceedings regarding, Google’s conduct in ad tech. There are also class actions being prosecuted against Google for its practices in the ad tech market in the UK, EU and Canada. 

In Australia, Google’s substantial market power and conduct has been the subject of regulatory investigation and scrutiny by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) which released its report in August 2021. The ACCC found that “Google is the largest supplier of ad tech services across the entire ad tech supply chain: no other provider has the scale or reach across the ad tech supply chain that Google does.” It concluded that “Google’s vertical integration and dominance across the ad tech supply chain, and in related services, have allowed it to engage in leveraging and self-preferencing conduct, which has likely interfered with the competitive process". 

Quotes 

Greg Whyte, a partner at Piper Alderman, said: 

This class action is of major importance to publishers, who have suffered as a result of Google’s practices in the ad tech monopoly that it has secured. As is the case in several other 2. jurisdictions around the world, Google will be required to respond to and defend its monopolistic practices which significantly affect competition in the Australian publishing market”. 

Charlie Morris, Chief Investment Officer at Woodsford said: “This class action follows numerous other class actions against Google in other jurisdictions regarding its infringement of competition laws in relation to AdTech. This action aims to hold Google to account for its misuse of market power and compensate website and app publishers for the consequences of Google’s misconduct. Working closely with economists, we have determined that Australian website and app publishers have been earning significantly less revenue and profits from advertising than they should have. We aim to right this wrong.” 

Class Action representation 

The team prosecuting the ad tech class action comprises: 

  • Law firm: Piper Alderman
  • Funder: Woodsford
  • Counsel team: Nicholas de Young KC, Simon Snow and Nicholas Walter

Report Highlights ‘Substantial Benefits’ of Litigation Funding for Consumer Justice

By Tom Webster |

The following was contributed by Tom Webster, Chief Commercial Officer for Sentry Funding.

Litigation funding provides ‘substantial benefits’ to claimant organisations, and robust funding mechanisms are ‘essential’ to secure justice for consumers, an authoritative report found last month.

The report, Justice Unchained, by European consumer organisation BEUC, also found many of the common criticisms of litigation funding were not backed up by evidence.

The study found that consumer organisations across Europe face significant financial challenges to starting collective redress actions. It noted that initiating a collective action is ‘complex, risky, and expensive’, often involving lengthy proceedings that need significant resources.

The report said: ‘Without sufficient funding, important cases will remain unaddressed and risk making the Representative Actions Directive (RAD)2 an empty shell’.

BEUC said that as public funding, membership fees and donations were often insufficient or unavailable, litigation funding had emerged ‘as a solution to bridge a funding gap’. Benefits for the claimant included access to necessary resources, risk transfer, and ‘a more equal playing field between consumer organisations and powerful defendants’, it said.

The report added that frequent criticisms of litigation funding, such as ‘the risk of frivolous litigation, undue influence by funders, or targeting competitors’ were ‘not well-substantiated’, and ‘insufficiently evidenced by specific cases’.

According to the report, the potential risks of litigation funding in the context of collective redress are already addressed by the Representative Actions Directive, which requires member states to establish a framework that includes procedures to prevent conflicts of interest and undue influence, with judicial oversight to ensure compliance.

The report found that additional regulation of litigation funding at EU level should therefore only be considered if it is necessary. It said: ‘Two-thirds of EU Member States have opted not to regulate [litigation funding] beyond the RAD’s requirements, finding these safeguards sufficient to govern [litigation funding] effectively for collective redress actions. Besides, [litigation funding] can be managed through judicial oversight, as is the case in several Member States with a longer history of using [it]’.

The BEUC report suggested that a set of ‘best practices’, jointly established and agreed by funders, claimant organisations and others, may provide for ‘a balanced solution, ensuring [litigation funding] remains viable while promoting fairness and transparency.’

It said such best practice could encompass transparency over the funder’s sources of capital; full decision-making autonomy for the consumer organisation and its legal counsel; clear agreements on all expenses covered by the funder; clearly defined funder’s remuneration; assurance of the funder’s financial adequacy to meet obligations; strict compliance with transparency requirements set by the law; effective detection and disclosure of any conflicts of interest; well-defined conditions for termination of the funding; and a robust dispute resolution mechanism.

Rockpoint Legal Funding Shines at Consumer Attorneys of California Annual Convention

By Harry Moran |

Rockpoint Legal Funding proudly participated in the annual conference hosted by the Consumer Attorneys of California (CAOC), showcasing its commitment to supporting legal professionals and their clients. As the only funding company endorsed by CAOC, Rockpoint Legal Funding leveraged this premier event to connect with new and prospective partners reinforcing its position as a trusted funder within California's legal community.

The CAOC is a prestigious network of attorneys dedicated to protecting the rights of California consumers. Each year, the organization hosts its annual convention, bringing together some of the brightest legal minds and innovators in the industry. For Rockpoint Legal Funding, this event was an invaluable opportunity to demonstrate its unwavering dedication to empowering attorneys and their clients through tailored legal funding solutions.

During the convention, Rockpoint operated a booth where team members engaged with attendees, offering insights into the company's services and how they benefit both legal professionals and consumers seeking justice. From new attorneys looking for funding solutions to established firms aiming to streamline their case workflows, Rockpoint provided personalized advice and showcased its comprehensive suite of legal funding options.

"Rockpoint is proud to partner with the Consumer Attorneys of California. We take a lot of pride in serving the attorneys and their clients of this prestigious organization," said Ramtin Ghaneeian, Founding Partner of Rockpoint Legal Funding. His statement highlights the company's commitment to strengthening its collaboration with CAOC and continuing to support its mission of safeguarding the rights of California consumers.

President of Rockpoint Legal Funding, Maz Ghorban, emphasized the value of building strong relationships at events like this, stating, "It's a privilege to connect with our law firm partners at the CAOC convention each year while ensuring our values align with protecting California consumers through legal recourse."

Rockpoint's presence at the CAOC annual convention underscores its dedication to fostering meaningful connections within the legal community. By being the only CAOC-endorsed funding company, Rockpoint reinforces its credibility and reliability in the legal funding landscape. This endorsement is a testament to Rockpoint's shared vision with CAOC in championing consumer rights and providing critical support to those navigating the justice system.

For attorneys and law firms, Rockpoint Legal Funding offers a variety of non-recourse funding solutions, ensuring clients have the financial support they need during ongoing litigation. This commitment aligns perfectly with CAOC's mission to advocate for justice and fairness for California consumers.

As Rockpoint continues to deepen its relationships with legal professionals, events like the CAOC annual convention remain a cornerstone of its outreach efforts. The company looks forward to future collaborations and furthering its impact within the legal community.

For more information about Rockpoint Legal Funding and its services, visit Rockpointlegalfunding.com or call (855) 582-9200.

About Rockpoint Legal Funding

Rockpoint Legal Funding is a leading provider of non-recourse legal funding solutions, serving attorneys and their clients with unparalleled expertise and care. With a mission to empower justice and support favorable case outcomes, Rockpoint is committed to providing financial assistance during critical times, ensuring no one is denied access to legal recourse due to financial constraints.

Ares Management Enters Agreement with Omni Bridgeway for 150+ Ongoing Investments

By Harry Moran |

Omni Bridgeway has entered into an agreement with Ares Management Corporation, for the alternative investment manager to acquire a stake over 150 of Omni Bridgeway’s ongoing investments. The agreement will see the creation of ‘Fund 9’ as a continuation fund to contain these investments, with Ares investing A$310 million for a 70% interest in the fund whilst Omni Bridgeway will retain a 30% interest.

An article in Bloomberg Law covers the news that “Ares has the option to acquire up to a A$35m equity stake in Omni Bridgeway through the issuance of warrants at an agreed strike price.”

Raymond van Hulst, Managing Director and CEO of Omni Bridgeway stated: “I am very pleased with this transaction as it delivers on all of our stated strategic objectives at once: validating the fair value of our book and the quality of our underwriting and valuation methodologies, improving the cost coverage rate, reducing debt to zero, and enforcing our position as the leading and institutional grade funds management platform for legal assets.”

Jan-Paul Kobarg, Partner at Ares Management added: “Leveraging our scale, structuring capabilities and flexible capital base, we are pleased to invest alongside OBL in this innovative structure for the asset class. During our due diligence process, we were impressed with the experience and quality of the OBL team. We believe this transaction accelerates OBL’s transition to a capital light funds management model in a growing asset class where it is a recognised global leader.”

More detail about the agreement between Omni Bridgeway and Ares can be found in the full announcement.

Pathways to Improve Alignment Between Funders and Claimants in Funding Structures

By Harry Moran |

Omni Bridgeway’s Gian Kull and Simon Latham explore the topic of ‘funding structures in opt-out CAT proceedings’, identifying key methods to improve alignment between litigation funders and claimants whilst ensuring a sustainable future for UK litigation funding.

In their LinkedIn post, Kull and Latham frame their analysis by stating that an optimal funding structure is one that “must balance the interests of funders, legal representatives and claimants, as well as consider the perspectives of defendants such that settlement is not impeded or overcomplicated.” 

The article lays out the following three options that funders could explore to improve this alignment:

  1. The Case for Funders Charging a Percentage of Damages
  2. Introducing Damages-Based Agreements in the CAT
  3. Making Invested Capital and Contingent ATE Premia Recoverable from Defendants

Kull and Latham explain not only the differing advantages of each of these options, but also suggest areas where safeguards or additional requirements could be introduced to ensure efficiency and protect claimants. With these options detailed, the authors conclude that a “hybrid approach, combining capped percentage-based funding with DBAs for legal fees and third-party funding for ancillary costs, alongside the recovery of invested capital and contingent premia from defendants, may offer the most balanced solution.”

The full analysis from Kull and Latham can be read here.

CAT Judgments and CJC Review to Define UK Litigation Funding in 2025

By Harry Moran |

An article in CDR looks ahead to the UK litigation landscape in 2025, speaking with funders, litigators and barristers to see what these industry insiders view as the most likely trends for the upcoming calendar year. When it comes to funding, the issues highlighted were the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), the funding of group actions and the highly-anticipated Civil Justice Council (CJC) review into third-party funding which is expected to be completed in the summer of next year.

Gian Kull, investment manager at Omni Bridgeway, noted the headwinds around the “availability of capital in the UK has reduced because several funders have stopped funding new cases.” He also explained that the ongoing impact of the Supreme Court’s PACCAR decision is that funding has become more expensive, due to the required “change of pricing structures”. Moving forward, Kull emphasised that the most important thing was to gain “clarity from the CAT” through judgments handed down next year, which he suggests will “confirm whether it is a fundable pathway”. 

Sarina Williams, partner at Linklaters, described the CJC review as “the single biggest driver of how class actions develop in the UK”, with the CJC’s recommendations set to shape the government’s legislative approach to the PACCAR issue. Williams argues that if funders get their way and the CJC “says that self-regulation is working well”, then it is likely that the UK will continue to be “an attractive jurisdiction for funders.”

5 Ways to Retain Top Legal Talent: Why Employees Stay

By Richard Culberson |

The following article was contributed by Richard Culberson, CEO of Moneypenny & VoiceNation, North America.

The legal profession is evolving rapidly, and so is the workforce driving it. This makes retaining top talent critical to ensuring continuity, quality of service, and avoiding the costs and disruption of frequent recruitment.

According to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, over 47 million Americans left their jobs in 2021 alone, with millions continuing to do so each month. For businesses , this turnover presents both a challenge and an opportunity to understand what employees truly value and how to build a workplace they won’t want to leave.

Here are five steps to guide you in creating a workplace where professionals feel supported, motivated, and committed to growing with your firm.

1. Hire for Culture and Potential

The stakes are high in legal recruitment, and hiring the wrong person can have a ripple effect on morale, productivity, and client relationships. So, let’s slow down and hire right.

Instead of focusing solely on technical skills and qualifications, look beyond the resume for candidates whose values align with your firm's culture and long-term goals. Diversity of thought and perspective is an asset in all business and adaptability is increasingly important. The first step is to revisit your hiring process to ensure you’re asking the right questions and seeking individuals who can not only excel in the role today but also grow with your firm in the future.

2. Invest in Their Professional Journey

Your people are your greatest assets, and just like your clients, they require attention and investment. You’ve spent time hiring right, now, it is time to invest in your choices, ensuring that they are set up to succeed from day one.

Make their onboarding experience seamless and engaging but also show them the culture and career path you promised during recruitment. Then, continue this thinking beyond the onboarding and provide opportunities for professional development through training, mentoring, and clear advancement pathways.

In the competitive legal sector, demonstrating a proactive commitment to employee growth and well-being is key to retaining top talent, ensuring your team feels valued and supported in reaching their full potential.

3. Foster Engagement Through Purpose

We all know that engaged employees are productive employees, but often it is forgotten that engagement starts with clarity. Do your team members understand how their daily work contributes to the firm's overall success?

Lawyers are often driven by purpose—whether it’s delivering justice, protecting client interests, or achieving innovative outcomes. So, make it a priority to connect their individual roles to the bigger picture and, in doing so, celebrate their contributions, involve them in decision-making, and foster an environment of trust and open communication.

By aligning their goals with the firm's mission, you create a workplace where everyone feels invested in the outcomes.

4. Lead with Empathy and Kindness

The legal world is often synonymous with high pressure and long hours, but that doesn’t mean kindness should take a backseat. Empathy and understanding go a long way in fostering loyalty and trust. It is important, therefore, to recognize achievements, whether big or small, and make time to connect with your team on a human level. From writing a personal thank-you note for a job well done to ensuring flexible working arrangements during challenging times, it’s often the little things that make the biggest difference.

Kindness isn’t a sign of weakness—it’s a powerful tool for building a resilient and loyal team.

5. Make Retention a Continuous Process

Retention isn’t a one-time initiative—it’s an ongoing commitment. Law is a people-centered business so embed employee well-being, recognition, and development into the core of your firm’s culture.

Create an environment where your people feel genuinely appreciated, understood, and aligned with the firm’s vision. By doing this, you’ll cultivate a culture of loyalty and stability, where your team thrives—and your clients benefit as a result.

Why Employees Stay

In a profession where your people are your greatest asset, putting them first is essential. A happy, engaged team isn’t just good for employee retention; it directly impacts client satisfaction and the firm’s reputation.

By investing in your employees, fostering connection, and leading with empathy, you can ensure your firm remains competitive, resilient, and ready to face the future with the best team by your side.

Nera Capital Secures Additional $25 million in New Funding Deal

By Harry Moran |

Top litigation finance firm Nera Capital is ending the year on a high with the announcement of yet another successfully closed funding deal, this time securing $25 million to bolster UK consumer protection claims.

The funding, secured through a US-based investment partner, reflects yet another significant milestone for the firm as it continues to build momentum and strengthen its foothold in the market. 

This recently closed funding deal builds on a prosperous year of growth for Nera Capital, further demonstrating its capabilities across the globe. The investment will be directed towards advancing claims that protect UK consumers, enabling greater access to justice for individuals seeking redress.

With offices in Dublin, Manchester, and Amsterdam, Nera Capital has consistently demonstrated its commitment to driving innovation and impact in litigation finance worldwide. This latest funding announcement underscores Nera Capital’s ability to forge strategic international partnerships that deliver meaningful results. 

In 2024, Nera have hit record numbers of settlements, deployment and company profitability but also grown major portfolio positions in Europe and the USA.

Aisling Byrne, Director at Nera Capital, commented on the announcement: “We are happy to have closed yet another significant funding deal, further cementing our position as a leading force in consumer protection litigation. We anticipate this initial facility figure will increase as our partnership strengthens and thrives over time.

She added: “This is not just about financial growth; it’s about expanding our ability to make a difference. With this funding, we are reinforcing our commitment to fairness and justice, empowering consumers, and holding organisations accountable.”

The announcement follows the recent launch of Nera Capital’s £250,000 Access to Justice Fund, aimed at providing legal and financial support to those who may otherwise face barriers to justice.

The firm’s efforts come at a time of heightened focus on consumer rights across the world, driven by evolving legal frameworks, increased attention to data privacy, and growing concerns about sustainability and corporate accountability.

“This funding is another step forward in a year of tremendous progress for Nera Capital,” Aisling continued.

“As we look to 2025, we remain committed to leveraging our resources and expertise to protect consumers and advocate for justice on both sides of the Atlantic.“ 

About Nera Capital 

·       Established in 2011, Nera Capital is a specialist funding provider to law firms.  

·       Provides Law Firm Lend funding across diverse claim portfolios in both the Consumer and Commercial sector. 

·       Headquartered in Dublin, the firm also has offices in Manchester and Holland. 

·       Member of European Litigation Funders Association

.     www.neracapital.com

Key Takeaways from LFJ’s Virtual Town Hall: 2024 Recap & 2025 Outlook

By John Freund |

Last week, LFJ hosted its final virtual town hall of the year which covered an array of key developments and trends in the legal fundng sector. Panelists included Tets Ishikawa (TI), Managing Director of LionFish, Boris Ziser (BZ), Co-Head of the Finance Group at Schulte Roth and Zabel, William Marra (WM), Director at Certum Group, and Sarah Johnson (SJ), Head of the Litigation Investing Team at The D.E. Shaw Group. The panel was moderated by Rebecca Berrebi (RB), Founder and CEO of Avenue 33, LLC.

Below are the key takeaways from the event.

RB: What are the key changes that have effected the regulatory landscape of litigation finance in 2024, and how do you think those changes have affected deals in the industry this year?

TI: There's been quite a few symbolic moments over the past two years. There was a proposal [The Voss Report] saying that litigation funding should be regulated and there should be a cap on fees. In the UK, there as a Supreme Court decision in the case of PACCAR that considered litigation funding agreements to be damages-based agreements, basically making a lot of litigation funding agreements unenforceable. And that has triggered an industry-wide review of the litigation funding industry in the UK by the Civil Justice Council. And that is ongoing, with a report expected next year, and the government may act on those recommendations and enact legislation.

In addition to all of that, there was a report written by the European Law Institute, which is probably the most interesting thing to focus on. Rather than the usual high level narratives of what's good and bad about litigation funding, it actually proposed principles on the back of research and feedback that it got on all sides of the argument. And it was written by some really highly regarded judges and academics. And the report was quite balanced. But what was really interesting about the report was that it set a tone for the direction of how the UK should really be thinking about litigation funding. The key themes coming out of it are that 1) there is no one size fits all solution-litigation funding has many different parts to it, and 2) that regulation is not just something one does, but there needs to be a real identifiable problem that regulation resolves, otherwise there could be a lot of adverse consequences, and that recognition is key. There is also the recognition that funders do run commercial businesses, so there has to be an economically viable solution.

RB: Deal structures evolve as time goes on, and certainly have evolved in our industry. Boris, can you speak to any particular deal structures that have become less popular this year than they were before, or have started to fall by the wayside?

BZ: I wouldn't say any have fallen by the wayside, I think that there has been a little bit of a shift - if you go back a number of years, you would see there were more debt deals than equity deals, and that was for various reasons, some of it was preference, some was tax-driven, some was based on an analysis of whether you would be splitting legal fees and things like that - and I think over the last couple of years, you have seen more of a shift where more parties are comfortable with equity deals, particularly with the introduction of alternative business structures in Arizona and Utah. So I don't think that anything has gone by the wayside, but there has been more comfort and more development on the equity side of the business.

RB: Will, do you see that too? What do you think about that?

WM: Yeah I think that's right. What's interesting is, there hasn't been that much development on the question of which provisions in litigation funding contracts may or may not be enforceable, or the big question of tax clarity. I think Boris makes a very good point about Rule 5.4, the debate around that has largely settled. So you do see an increase around law firm deals. I think this question is also tied up with the increasing diversification of products available, and if you start too think about insurance, and insurance-backed debt, and debt plus equity in these deals, we're seeing a lot of that. We're also seeing an increase in acquisitions to the extent that claims are alienable and can be acquired. I think that a lot of claim holders are seeing a lot of benefits entering into those sorts of arrangements.

RB: Sarah, what deal structures do you think are growing in popularity, and why do you think that is happening?

SJ: We've seen something similar in the shift from debt to equity. I might characterize it though as a move away from debt to law firms, where your collateral is a lot of cases. I think we've seen those deals - especially the ones that happened before Covid - there were a lot of different risks that were introduced rather than just the underlying litigation. The amount of OpEx that the law firm needed to survive, and when you're debt financing for the whole firm, it gets very complicated. So we've seen a shift away more to - I won't say single cases - but perhaps smaller portfolios with a law firm, so you can target your exposure and share more of the risk and OpEx with the law firms themselves.

We've also seen a bifurcation in terms of the size of deals. We're seeing some more very large deals, like $100MM+ deals, and also small single cases, than perhaps we saw in previous years. We're just seeing a lot of one-off single case deals where funders can share the risk, vs. entire portfolio monetizations.

To view the entire discussion, join the event page on LinkedIn (you must register for the event to view).

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Joshua Libling, Founder & Managing Director, Arcadia Finance

By John Freund |

When not reading fantasy novels or torturing his family with off-key showtunes, Joshua Libling manages Arcadia Finance's operations and financial analytics. For clients, his focus is on translating subjective legal merits assessments into trackable risk data that informs Arcadia’s investment decisions and portfolio construction. It’s a topic he loves to discuss, so don’t ask him what that means if you’re looking for a short conversation.

He is also responsible for modeling and operations at Arcadia. Joshua joined the litigation finance industry at the beginning of 2020, quickly gravitating to risk analysis and control. For his work, he has been recognized among Lawdragon’s “Global 100 Leaders in Legal Finance.” Before co-founding Arcadia in June of 2024 with fellow Managing Directors Ronit Cohen and David Kerstein, Joshua served as a member of the senior leadership at Validity Finance, with primary responsibility for risk analysis and pricing tools. He was previously a litigator at Boies Schiller Flexner, where he was involved in some of the country’s highest-profile and highest-stakes litigations.  

Company Name and Description: At Arcadia Finance, we go beyond traditional litigation finance to provide frictionless funding, empowering clients and partners to achieve their legal goals through customized financial solutions and unparalleled support. Our seamless collaboration, clear deal terms, and broad mandate empower clients to navigate challenges, make informed decisions, and secure capital - fast.

Led by industry veterans with over $425 million invested across 80+ deals, Arcadia Finance offers adaptable solutions for all–from litigation boutiques to AmLaw firms and corporations. Arcadia Finance's mission is to invest in meritorious litigation, and with backing from multiple and flexible capital providers, we find new ways to help clients and law firms finance, monetize, and share risk on their legal assets. Our solutions include everything from traditional single-case funding and law firms portfolios, to purchasing companies or patent portfolios whose primary value is litigation. At every stage from pre-litigation to appeal and enforcement, Arcadia has the experience, flexibility, and capital to assist.

Company Website: arcadiafin.com

Year Founded: 2024

Headquarters: New York, New York

Area of Focus: With a focus on U.S.-based commercial and patent litigation and domestic and international arbitration, Arcadia Finance is open to the full spectrum of litigation-based assets, from mass torts to law firm lending to patent acquisition, including cross-border and offshore matters. We consider cases in all federal and state courts, as well domestic and international arbitrations.    

Member Quote: "At Arcadia Finance, we specialize in helping our partners find the path from a good legal claim to a good legal investment."

Express Legal Funding Launches Custom-Designed Website Redesign

By Aaron Winston |

The following was contributed by Aaron R. Winston, Strategy Director of Express Legal Funding.

Express Legal Funding, a nationally recognized pre-settlement funding company, is proud to announce the launch of its completely redesigned website. Built on a fully custom WordPress theme, the new website reflects the company’s commitment to innovation, usability, and educating clients through high-quality resources.

Custom-Built for an Exceptional Experience

Unlike generic templates, Express Legal Funding's new site is crafted from the ground up to provide a tailored experience for its users. The custom theme ensures superior functionality, faster load times, and an optimized design that serves both plaintiffs and attorneys. Key elements were developed to improve user engagement and make essential resources more accessible.

Highlighting the Blog: A Resource Hub for Legal Education

One of the standout features of the new site is the expanded and enhanced blog section. The blog serves as a comprehensive resource hub, offering expert insights, step-by-step guides, and practical advice for personal injury plaintiffs and attorneys. Articles are carefully curated and optimized for clarity, ensuring visitors gain valuable knowledge about legal funding and related topics.

Recent posts include:

Aaron Winston, Strategy Director at Express Legal Funding, shared, “Our blog has become an indispensable tool for helping consumers make informed legal and financial decisions. With the redesign, we’ve elevated it to a new level, blending visually engaging content with highly relevant information.”

Key Features of the Redesigned Website:

  • Custom Theme Development: Tailored design and functionality to meet the unique needs of Express Legal Funding’s clients and partners.
  • Interactive Case-Type Summaries: A dynamic widget allows visitors to explore various case types and their funding options in detail.
  • Responsive Design: Built with mobile-first principles, ensuring a seamless experience across all devices.
  • Enhanced Blog: A centralized platform for high-quality, SEO-optimized content that provides actionable insights and legal education.
  • Transparent Pricing Comparison: A detailed section highlights how Express Legal Funding’s rates outperform competitors, reinforcing its commitment to affordability and fairness.

A Commitment to Transparency and User Empowerment

The new website demonstrates Express Legal Funding’s dedication to educating and empowering its audience. Each feature is designed with transparency and ease of use in mind, ensuring that clients have the tools and information they need to make confident decisions about pre-settlement funding.

“Our custom redesign reflects who we are as a company—dedicated, transparent, and forward-thinking innovators,” said Winston. “We’re excited to share our new look and continue to be a trusted resource for personal injury plaintiffs and attorneys.”

Visit the New Website Today

The newly redesigned website is now live at ExpressLegalFunding.com. Explore the updated features and discover how Express Legal Funding continues to bridge the gap between lawsuits and settlements through affordability, transparency, and client-centric services.


About Express Legal Funding:

Express Legal Funding is a pre-settlement funding company based in Plano, Texas, offering financial support to plaintiffs during their legal battles. With an emphasis on education, affordability, and transparency, the company empowers clients to cover essential living expenses while pursuing fair settlements.

Delta Capital Partners Welcomes Accomplished Professionals to C-Suite

By Harry Moran |

Delta Capital Partners Management, an SEC registered investment adviser specializing in litigation and legal finance, is pleased to announce as additions to the firm Jason Searfoss as Chief Financial Officer, Elinoar Sofer as Chief Operations Officer, and Michael Ouliel as Chief Intelligence Officer. 

Mr. Searfoss will be responsible for Delta’s finance, accounting, and administrative functions and will oversee all capital market activities, tax and valuation matters. Ms. Sofer will oversee the day-to-day operations and management of Delta, while Mr. Ouliel will assist with business intelligence activities in the firm’s management and monitoring of the cases in its portfolio or under consideration for investment.

Mr. Searfoss, an advisor to numerous startup and growth-stage technology companies, is a Cofounder of and served as Chief Financial Officer and Chief Investment Officer of Boomtown, a leading technology startup accelerator with more than 200 portfolio companies. A veteran of the litigation finance industry, Mr. Searfoss was also the founding Chief Financial Officer, a General Partner, and member of the Investment Committee of Longford Capital, a leading litigation funder. “I have known and worked closely with Chris DeLise and the Delta team for well over a decade and I am excited about the future of the organization. Litigation finance is an attractive and evolving asset class, and Delta’s strengths stand out in the industry,” said Searfoss.

Prior to joining Delta, Ms. Sofer previously served as the Chief Operating Officer of BlackSwan Technologies, a leading global technology AI startup. In this capacity, she scaled the company across six subsidiaries within the US, EMEA and Asia and successfully raised capital and secured valuable commercial partnerships with leading Fintech companies. “I am thrilled to be joining the very talented team at Delta and I am looking forward to collaborating with Chris DeLise and the senior team in building on their ongoing success and executing Delta’s ambitious growth plans,” said Ms. Sofer.

Before his tenure at Delta, Mr. Ouliel founded and acted as the CEO of Ripples Homeland Security Group. Ripples was a global technology company with a focus on building large and complex intelligence and investigation systems for governments and large multinational enterprises globally. Mr. Ouliel was also the founder and CEO of BlackSwan Technologies, where he was named among the Top 50 AI CEOs of 2021 by Technology Innovators magazine. In recent years, Mr. Ouliel has been acting as a special advisor to multiple governments and federal agencies in the area of technology, primarily focused on intelligence, counter terror, HUMINT, and extremism. Mr. Ouliel expressed that he is “thrilled and excited to join the excellent team at Delta” and that the opportunity presented an “outstanding value proposition and business model for which his “skills and expertise will bring unique opportunities to the litigation funding market.”

Christopher DeLise, Delta’s founder, CEO and Co-CIO stated that he is “very proud to have such esteemed professionals join Delta as it is continues its growth and development in dynamic markets and verticals. The litigation finance industry has significantly changed over the past 14 years, which necessitates bringing on board very seasoned professionals to best enable the firm to adapt and profit from these developments. I have known each of Jason, Michael and Elinoar for over a decade, frequently collaborating on one-off projects, and therefore it made great sense to have them join the Delta team on a permanent basis as we embark on our latest set of growth initiatives and new product offerings.”   

About Delta

Delta Capital Partners Management LLC is a US-based, global asset management firm specializing exclusively in litigation and legal finance, judgment and award enforcement, and asset recovery.  Delta creates bespoke financing solutions for professional service firms, businesses, governments, financial institutions, investment firms, and individual claimants to enable them to investigate claims, pursue litigation or arbitration, recover assets, enforce judgments or awards, and more effectively manage their risks, cash flow, and capital expenditures.