Trending Now

John Freund's Posts

3138 Articles

Jason Bertoldi Joins Alliant Insurance Services 

By Harry Moran |

Jason Bertoldi, formerly the Head of Contingent Risk Solutions for Willis Towers Watson, announced that he has joined Alliant Insurance Services and taken up the position of Global Team Leader for Litigation & Contingent Risk Insurance.

In a post on LinkedIn, Bertoldi announced that he is joining Alliant from WTW, where he served for the past two years. He also brings experience from both the legal and financial services industries, having begun his career at Susman Godfrey before moving to The D. E. Shaw Group.

Commenting on the move, Bertoldi said: “I'm thrilled to be joining such a talented team, in an industry that I've been lucky to be a part of for these past few years.” 

The First Collective Work on Third Party Funding in Spain is Presented by Ramco Litigation Funding and ICADE University.

By Harry Moran |

The book La Financiación de Litigios en derecho español y comparado: estado del mercado y su regulación, (Thrid Party Funding in Spanish and Comparative Law) published by ARANZADI LA LEY, is being presented by Ramco Litigation Funding and ICADE University. This work provides clarity and reflection on this figure, which is undoubtedly a tool that helps to dynamise the legal sector and provides better access to justice.

This is the first collective book, with 21 leading authors, on Litigation Funding in Spain and is a guide to the status, nature and regulation of this figure in Spain and in Comparative Law. It is aimed at all professionals in the legal sector and includes, in a novel way, in a single work, the perspective of professionals from different areas of the legal sector (professors, lawyers, in-house lawyers, company lawyers, arbitrators, financiers, etc.) both nationally and internationally, on the different aspects of Litigation Funding. The book has been published in Spanish and will be published in English language at the beginning of next year.

Since the first funders entered Spain in 2017, Litigation Finance has seen exponential growth year on year, following the trend observed in other countries. Spain is the fourth country in its use in Europe, after the United Kingdom, Germany and the Netherlands, as indicated in the European Parliament report.

In recent years, the Spanish market has experienced a growing demand from companies, law firms and individuals, who see Litigation Finance as a tool to monetise their legal assets, reduce costs and manage risks.

The book was presented las Wednesday at ICADE's headquarters with the intervention of the Dean of the Faculty of Law and author, Abel Veiga, who stated that a work of this nature was necessary for reflection and debate on this figure in Spain. Urquiola de Palacio, exchairman of the UIA and arbitrator, the book's prologue writer, commented on the importance of the work in Spain, as well as its potential impact in other jurisdictions, and suggested that it should be translated into English in order to be sent to the European Commission in the process of research being carried out on the regulation of Litigation Funding.

The round table was moderated by Diego Agulló (professor of International Law in ICADE)  and the speakers were Antonio Muñoz Murillo, director of litigation at Iberdrola; Paulino Fajardo, partner at HSF Kramer; Ruth Rodríguez Lazcano, lawyer at the Technical Office of the Supreme Court; and Cristina Soler, CEO of Ramco Litigation Funding.

Antonio Muñoz Murillo spoke about the importance of the in-house figure in companies and the need for legal departments to adapt to business structures in order to be proactive, exploring new models that exist in the market to add value to their operations.

Paulino Fajardo insisted on the need to normalise the figure of the litigation funder as just another operator in the market and not as something extraordinary. He stated that lawyers owe it to their clients, and that it is up to their clients to decide whether or not to use these structures, while maintaining the lawyer's total independence.

For her part, Ruth Rodriguez explained the importance of reference works to guide judges and help them to better understand the framework and the use of funders.

Cristina Soler closed the event by thanking all the authors and ICADE, highlighting how important it is for Ramco to have promoted a book of this magnitude to raise awareness of this figure, which continues to grow in Spain with a high degree of user satisfaction, as stated in the recent report published by Ramco in 2023. He insisted that funders do not generate more frivolous litigation, as they study cases in depth and their chances of success; on the contrary, they generate resources for better access to justice.

Ramco will continue to promote valuable activities that provide information and help to improve the understanding of Litigation Finance in a transparent and coherent manner.

For more information: www.ramcolf.com  

UK Competition Court Throws Out Google’s Challenge to £7Bn Consumer Lawsuit, Paving Way for Full Court Showdown

By Harry Moran |

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has certified the £7 billion claim against Google brought by Nikki Stopford, a consumer rights campaigner, on behalf of tens of millions of UK consumers – rejecting Google’s attempt to torpedo the claim early, and adding to the Big Tech firm’s legal and regulatory woes.

The specialist UK court will require Google to defend its longstanding conduct in the search engine market, after approving the landmark legal action brought by Nikki Stopford and legal firm Hausfeld & Co LLP.

The claim accuses Google of exploiting its dominance in the search market to increase advertising costs, which were ultimately passed on to consumers. With certification now secured, millions of UK consumers are poised to pursue compensation for the economic harm caused by Google’s conduct.

The CAT’s decision is the latest in a series of setbacks for Google’s parent company Alphabet, which is fighting to preserve its all-important dominance in online search globally. Earlier this month, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) proposed that the US courts should force Google to sell its Chrome web browser, prohibiting Google from entering into agreements that make it the default search engine on smartphones and browsers, and additional restrictions to ensure its Android smartphone software does not favour Google Search.

The full CAT judgment can be viewed here. The UK court dismissed Google’s arguments in full, including its attempt to have the claim struck out. The CAT held that Ms Stopford had put forward a serious case and authorised her to act as the class representative and permitted the claim to proceed to trial.

Following the CAT’s certification, Ms Stopford will represent all UK-domiciled consumers aged 16 years or over who, during the period from 1 January 2011 until 7 September 2023 (inclusive), purchased goods and/or services from a business selling in the UK, which used search advertising services provided by Google. The action is being brought as an opt-out collective action, meaning that everyone in the UK affected is automatically included as a claimant in the case unless they opt out.

The case against Google

The collective action argues that Google used its dominant position in the UK search engine market to overcharge advertisers and that these costs were then passed directly on to the consumer.

Google forced mobile phone handset manufacturers to pre-install the Google Search and Google Chrome browser apps on devices that used Google’s Android operating system; and

Google paid billions to Apple to ensure that Google was the default search engine on all devices, such as the iPhone, that used Apple’s iOS operating system.

Other proceedings

The DoJ action follows a long legal fight brought by the DoJ and several Attorneys General in the US, culminating in a judgment in August 2024 by the District Court of Columbia, which found that Google’s conduct is anti-competitive and unlawful.

This judgment also supports Nikki Stopford’s claim that Google’s commercial agreement with Apple foreclosed the market for search on iOS devices, as do recent findings by the UK Competition and Markets Authority.

Meanwhile, the European Commission imposed the biggest fine in history on Google for the anti-competitive practices in Android.

It is alleged that the abuses by Google are possible because Google is set as the default search engine account for at least 94% of the mobile device sector, by usage. Google Ads generated over $224 billion in revenue in 2022, accounting for almost 80% of parent company Alphabet’s revenue ($283 billion in 2022).

Nikki Stopford, the class representative in the action, said:

“This green light from the tribunal is a significant victory for UK consumers. Almost everybody uses Google as their go-to search engine, trusting it to deliver quality results at no cost. But its service isn’t genuinely free because its dominance has resulted in increased costs for consumers. Google has been warned repeatedly by competition regulators. Yet it continues to rig the market to charge advertisers more, which raises the prices they charge consumers. This action seeks to promote healthier competition in digital markets, and to hold Google accountable and ensure that consumers are compensated for the harm caused by its conduct.”

Luke Streatfeild, Partner at legal firm Hausfeld & Co LLP, who is leading the litigation, said:

“This judgment is good news for UK consumers, as the case for compensation brought by our client on their behalf can now proceed to trial. The judgment is also helpful in clarifying the standard for assessing exclusionary conduct by dominant companies, in particular in digital markets with high barriers to entry, and it will be a useful reference point in future cases that aim to promote fairer competition and better outcomes for consumers in those marketplaces.”

Further information

The certified claim against Google is being brought at the CAT against Alphabet Inc., Google LLC, Google Ireland Limited and Google UK Limited under CAT Claim No. 1606/7/7/23.

Who is eligible to be part of the claim?

All that is necessary is that a consumer purchased goods or services from a business who advertised using search advertising services provided by Google. It is not necessary for them to have seen the goods or services advertised on Google or used Google to purchase the goods or services. This is because the claim says that these higher prices affected all a business’ products if it advertised on Google.

Those who are interested in finding out more about the claim and signing up for regular updates should visit www.searchclaim.co.uk.

About the class representative

Nikki Stopford is co-founder of Consumer Voice and brings 25 years of experience in advocating and raising industry standards for consumers. She is Chair of the British Standard Institute’s Consumer Forum and a member of its Standards Policy and Strategy Committee. She has held executive leadership roles running successful digital and content-led consumer-facing businesses that have engaged and advocated for millions of consumers. Most notably, she was Group Director of Research and Publishing at Which? – the UK's largest consumer organisation – for more than 10 years.

Additional notes

Affected claimants, on whose behalf the class action is brought, will not pay costs or fees to participate in this legal action, which is being funded by global commercial litigation funder Hereford Litigation. The action is insured, which means that class members have no adverse cost risk in relation to the claim.

Ms Stopford is represented by:

  • Hausfeld & Co. LLP, Partners Luke Streatfeild and Simon Bishop, supported by Counsel Jonothan Broadbent and Stella Gartagani, Associates Natalie Jukes, Ginevra Bicciolo and Lisa Amrani and paralegals Martha Papapostolou and Alice Caroff
  • Charles Rivers Associates, Oliver Latham, Vice President, supported by Director Sam Marden and Senior Associate Liam Connolly
  • Rosamilia Consulting, Davide Rosamilia, co-founder and principal consultant
  • Ben Lask KC of Monckton Chambers
  • Daniel Jowell KC and Colin West KC, both of Brick Court Chambers
  • Mehdi Baiou and (formerly) Andrew Lomas, both of One Essex Court.

High Court Dismisses Claims Brought Against El Husseiny Family by Invest Bank UAE

By Harry Moran |

A press release from the El Husseiny family spotlighted the favourable ruling from the High Court of England and Wales, which dismissed all claims brought by the Sharjah Government-owned Invest Bank UAE against the family and their Swiss wealth advisers. The multi-jurisdictional litigation had involved proceedings across the US, UK and Canada; with the family reporting that the cost of defending these claims reached into the tens of millions.

The High Court ruling came after four years of litigation over allegations that Ahmad El Husseiny acted as a guarantor for credit facilities granted to two UAE companies: Commodore Contracting Company and Al Tadamun Glass and Aluminium Company in 2015 and 2016. Invest Bank UAE also brought a claim against the El Husseiny family under the Insolvency Act 1986 to reverse asset transfers from Ahmad and businesses to other members of the family.

The case is notable as Invest Bank UAE’s claims were funded by Burford Capital, and in ICLG’s reporting on the ruling, the article notes that a former employee of the bank, Sylvia Chandel, is now vice president of the funder’s Dubai office. ICLG noted that whilst the ruling did not suggest any improper conduct by Burford, their role in the case is further complicated by their minority stake in PCB Byrne, the law firm which acted for Invest Bank.

In response to ICLG’s request for comment, Burford spokesperson David Helfenbein said: “Burford Capital is committed to the rule of law and offers asset recovery and asset tracing services to ensure awards are legally implemented, in addition to financing options to help manage the costs and risks associated with recovery.”

The High Court’s judgment can be read in full here.

Computer Weekly Provides In-Depth History of Post Office Horizon Inquiry

By Harry Moran |

The Post Office Horizon IT scandal represented not only one of the most significant cases of institutional malpractice and miscarriage of justice in British history, but also catapulted the use of litigation funding into the public spotlight.

An article in Computer Weekly provides an in-depth summary of the statutory public inquiry into the Post Office Horizon IT scandal, giving readers a detailed account of all the key revelations that emerged across the last three years of the inquiry’s work. The feature breaks down these revelations on a chronological basis, starting in May 2022 with ‘phase one’ of the inquiry’s hearings and going all the way through to ‘phase seven’ in September 2024.

The feature explains how each of these seven phases gathered evidence on different aspects of the scandal, beginning in 2022 with phase one hearing testimonies from the victims, and the phase two investigation into the Horizon IT system itself.

Phase three saw the examination of the Horizon system over the subsequent year, whilst phase four switched focus to assess the activities of lawyers and investigators who participated in the subpostmasters’ prosecutions. Finally, the feature guides us through the inquiry’s work this year, with phases five and six putting the behaviour of directors, politicians and civil servants in the spotlight, before concluding with phase seven that took a broader look at the Post Office’s present and future.

Within the feature, readers can find links to individual articles that provide deep dives into each of these individual phases, cataloguing the most important pieces of evidence unearthed by the inquiry’s hearings. 

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Dr. Detlef A. Huber, Managing Director, AURIGON LRC

By John Freund |

Detlef is a German attorney, former executive of a Swiss reinsurance company and as head of former Carpentum Capital Ltd. one of the pioneers of litigation funding in Latin America. Through his activities as executive in the insurance claims area and litigation funder he gained a wealth of experience in arbitrations/litigations in various businesses. He is certified arbitrator of ARIAS US and ARIAS UK (AIDA Reinsurance and Insurance Arbitration Society) and listed on the arbitrators panel of DIS (German Arbitration Institute).

He studied law in Germany and Spain, obtained a Master in European Law (Autónoma Madrid) and doctorate in insurance law (University of Hamburg).

Detlef speaks German, Spanish, English fluently and some Portuguese.

Company Name and Description:  AURIGON LRC (Litigation Risk Consulting) is at home in two worlds: dispute funding and insurance. They set up the first European litigation fund dedicated to Latin America many years ago and operate as consultants in the re/insurance sector since over a decade.

Both worlds are increasingly overlapping with insurers offering ever more litigation risk transfer products and funders recurring to insurance in order to hedge their risks. Complexity is increasing for what is already a complex product.

Aurigon acts as intermediary in the dispute finance sector and offers consultancy on relevant insurance matters.

Company Website: www.aurigon-lrc.ch

Year Founded: 2011, since 2024 offering litigation risk consulting  

Headquarters: Alte Steinhauserstr. 1, 6330 Cham/Zug Switzerland

Area of Focus:  Litigation funding related to Latin America and re/insurance disputes

Member Quote: “It´s the economy, stupid. Not my words but fits our business well. Dont focus on merits, focus on maths.”

Manolete Partners Releases Half-Year Results for the Six Months Ended 30 September 2024

By Harry Moran |

Manolete (AIM:MANO), the leading UK-listed insolvency litigation financing company, today announces its unaudited results for the six months ended 30 September 2024. 

Steven Cooklin, Chief Executive Officer, commented: 

“These are a strong set of results, particularly in terms of organic cash generation. In this six-month period, gross cash collected rose 63% to a new record at £14.3m. That strong organic cash generation comfortably covered all cash operating costs, as well as all cash costs of financing the ongoing portfolio of 413 live cases, enabling Manolete to reduce net debt by £1.25m to £11.9m as at 30 September 2024. 

As a consequence of Manolete completing a record number of 137 case completions, realised revenues rose by 60% to a further record high of £15m. That is a strong indicator of further, and similarly high levels, of near-term future cash generation. A record pipeline of 437 new case investment opportunities were received in this latest six month trading period, underpinning the further strong growth prospects for the business. 

The record £14.3.m gross cash was collected from 253 separate completed cases, highlighting the highly granular and diversified profile of Manolete’s income stream. 

Manolete has generated a Compound Average Growth Rate of 39% in gross cash receipts over the last five H1 trading periods: from H1 FY20 up to and including the current H1 FY25. The resilience of the Manolete business model, even after the extraordinary pressures presented by the extended Covid period, is now clear to see. 

This generated net cash income of £7.6m in H1 FY25 (after payment of all legal costs and all payments made to the numerous insolvent estates on those completed cases), an increase of 66% over the comparative six-month period for the prior year. Net cash income not only exceeded by £4.5m all the cash overheads required to run the Company, it also exceeded all the costs of running Manolete’s ongoing 413 cases, including the 126 new case investments made in H1 FY25. 

The Company recorded its highest ever realised revenues for H1 FY25 of £15.0m, exceeding H1 FY24 by 60%. On average, Manolete receives all the cash owed to it by the defendants of completed cases within approximately 12 months of the cases being legally completed. This impressive 60% rise in realised revenues therefore provides good near-term visibility for a continuation of Manolete’s strong, and well-established, track record of organic, operational cash generation. 

New case investment opportunities arise daily from our wide-ranging, proprietary, UK referral network of insolvency practitioner firms and specialist insolvency and restructuring solicitor practices. We are delighted to report that the referrals for H1 FY25 reached a new H1 company record of 437. A 27% higher volume than in H1 FY24, which was itself a new record for the Company this time last year. That points to a very healthy pipeline as we move forward into the second half of the trading year.” 

Financial highlights: 

  • Total revenues increased by 28% to £14.4m from H1 FY24 (£11.2m) as a result of the outstanding delivery of realised revenues generated in the six months to 30th September 2024.
    • Realised revenues achieved a record level of £15.0m in H1 FY25, a notable increase of 60% on H1 FY24 (£9.4m). This provides good visibility of near-term further strong cash generation, as on average Manolete collects all cash on settled cases within approximately 12 months of the legal settlement of those cases
    • Unrealised revenue in H1 FY25 was £(633k) compared to £1.8m for the comparative H1 FY24. This was due to: (1) the record number of 137 case completions in H1 FY25, which resulted in a beneficial movement from Unrealised revenues to Realised revenues; and (2) the current lower average fair value of new case investments made relative to the higher fair value of the completed cases. The latter point also explains the main reason for the marginally lower gross profit reported of £4.4m in this period, H1 FY25, compared to £5.0m in H1 FY24. 
  • EBIT for H1 FY25 was £0.7m compared to H1 FY24 of £1.6m. As well as the reduced Gross profit contribution explained above, staff costs increased by £165k to £2.3m and based on the standard formula used by the Company to calculate Expected Credit Losses, (“ECL”), generated a charge of £140k (H1 3 FY24: £nil) due to trade debtors rising to £26.8m as at 30 September 2024, compared to £21.7m as at 30 September 2023. The trade debtor increase was driven by the outstanding record level of £15.0m Realised revenues achieved in H1 FY25.
  • Loss Before Tax was (£0.2m) compared to a Profit Before Tax of £0.9m in H1 FY24, due to the above factors together with a lower corporation tax charge being largely offset by higher interest costs. 
  • Basic earnings per share (0.5) pence (H1 FY24: 1.4 pence).
  • Gross cash generated from completed cases increased 63% to £14.3m in the 6 months to 30 September 2024 (H1 FY24: £8.7m). 5-year H1 CAGR: 39%.
  • Cash income from completed cases after payments of all legal costs and payments to Insolvent Estates rose by 66% to £7.6m (H1 FY24: £4.6m). 5-year H1 CAGR: 46%.
  • Net cashflow after all operating costs but before new case investments rose by 193% to £4.5m (H1 FY24: £1.5m). 5-year H1 CAGR: 126%.
  • Net assets as at 30 September 2024 were £40.5m (H1 FY24: £39.8m). Net debt was reduced to £11.9m and comprises borrowings of £12.5m, offset by cash balances of £0.6m. (Net debt as 31 March 2024 was £12.3m.)
  • £5m of the £17.5m HSBC Revolving Credit Facility remains available for use, as at 30 September 2024. That figure does not take into account the Company’s available cash balances referred to above.

Operational highlights:

  • Ongoing delivery of record realised returns: 137 case completions in H1 FY25 representing a 18% increase (116 case realisations in H1 FY24), generating gross settlement proceeds receivable of £13.9m for H1 FY25, which is 51% higher than the H1 FY24 figure of £9.2m. This very strong increase in case settlements provides visibility for further high levels of cash income, as it takes the Company, on average, around 12 months to collect in all cash from previously completed cases.
  • The average realised revenue per completed case (“ARRCC”) for H1 FY25 was £109k, compared to the ARRCC of £81k for H1 FY24. That 35% increase in ARRCC is an important and an encouraging Key Performance Indicator for the Company. Before the onset and impact of the Covid pandemic in 2020, the Company was achieving an ARRCC of approximately £200k. Progress back to that ARRCC level, together with the Company maintaining its recent high case acquisition and case completion volumes, would lead to a material transformation of Company profitability.
  • The 137 cases completed in H1 FY25 had an average case duration of 15.7 months. This was higher than the average case duration of 11.5 months for the 118 cases completed in H1 FY24, because in H1 FY25 Manolete was able to complete a relatively higher number of older cases, as evidenced by the Vintages Table below.
  • Average case duration across Manolete’s full lifetime portfolio of 1,064 completed cases, as at 30 September 2024 was 13.3 months (H1 FY24: 12.7 months).
  • Excluding the Barclays Bounce Back Loan (“BBL”) pilot cases, new case investments remained at historically elevated levels of 126 for H1 FY25 (H1 FY24: 146 new case investments).
  • New case enquiries (again excluding just two Barclays BBL pilot cases from the H1 FY24 figure) achieved another new Company record of 437 in H1 FY25, 27% higher than the H1 FY24 figure of 343. This excellent KPI is a strong indicator of future business performance and activity levels.
  • Stable portfolio of live cases: 413 in progress as at 30 September 2024 (417 as at 30 September 2023) which includes 35 live BBLs.
  • Excluding the Truck Cartel cases, all vintages up to and including the 2019 vintage have now been fully, and legally completed. Only one case remains ongoing in the 2020 vintage. 72% of the Company’s live cases have been signed in the last 18 months.
  • The Truck Cartel cases continue to progress well. As previously reported, settlement discussions, to varying degrees of progress, continue with a number of Defendant manufacturers. Further updates will be provided as concrete outcomes emerge.
  • The Company awaits the appointment of the new Labour Government’s Covid Corruption Commissioner and hopes that appointment will set the clear direction of any further potential material involvement for Manolete in the Government’s BBL recovery programme.
  • The Board proposes no interim dividend for H1 FY25 (H1 FY24: £nil).

The full report of Manolete’s half-year results can be read here.

LegalPay’s CIO Highlights the Opportunities and Challenges for Defense-Side Funding

By Harry Moran |

As the legal funding industry has matured and become a mainstream feature of many jurisdictions’ legal systems, funders are increasingly looking at ways to diversify their activities.

In an article for Insolvency Tracker, Tanya Prasad, CIO of LegalPay, addresses the niche topic of defense-side funding and examines whether there is potential for this type of legal funding to grow in the same way that plaintiff funding has over recent years. Prasad notes that in an environment where “the demand for risk management tools in litigation grows”, large corporations may look to third-party funders to help supplement legal budgets “while potentially achieving favourable outcomes”.

Prasad acknowledges that compared to traditional plaintiff-side funding, defense-side funding “comes with unique challenges”. Whilst claimants may seek to maximise their financial returns in the form of damages and compensation, a defendant will “generally focus on minimizing loss exposure.” As a result of this difference in goals, Prasad suggests that funders would need to not only “employ creative pricing structures”, but would also need to find new metrics to define success.

The latter point is one that Prasad argues is key to creating a viable defense-side funding ecosystem, noting that “establishing a clear definition of success” may have different parameters for different defendants. Examples of this could include structuring funding agreements to incorporate “avoided loss” measures, which would define success based on “achieving a favorable settlement or dismissal at a lower financial cost than anticipated.”

If these difficulties that Prasad highlights can be overcome, she suggests that “defense-side litigation funding has the potential to redefine legal finance, supporting fair representation for both plaintiffs and defendants and expanding access to justice across the board.” Additionally, Prasad points to a handful of examples where defense-side funding has been successfully employed, such as the Gillette v. ShaveLogic case, where Burford Capital provided funding for the defendant to successfully oppose Gillette’s claims of trades secret misappropriation and unfair competition.

Montero Reaches $27M Settlement with Tanzania in Dispute Funded by Omni Bridgeway

By Harry Moran |

The funding of arbitration proceedings brought by mining, exploration and development companies against nation states continues to be a lucrative area for litigation funders, as the announcement of another settlement in one such dispute demonstrates.

A press release from Montero Mining and Exploration Ltd. reveals that the company has reached a $27 million settlement with the government of Tanzania to end the dispute over the expropriation of Montero’s Wigu Hill rare earth element project. The agreement will see the total settlement sum paid out in three tranches over the next three months, with the first payment of $12 million having already been received. Montero noted that whilst the $27 million settlement only represents 39% of the original claim for $70 million, this agreement “obviates the need for a costly and time-consuming hearing, the risk of an adverse award, enforcement efforts, and finally concludes a near 7-year dispute.’

Montero’s arbitration proceedings against the Tanzanian government had been supported via a funding agreement with Omni Bridgeway (Canada), with the litigation funder set to receive an undisclosed return on its investment from the settlement agreement. Whilst Omni Bridgeway’s share of the settlement has not been disclosed, Montero’s announcement did reveal that the funder would receive a distribution from both the first payment and from the second payment of $8 million that is due to be received on or before 31 January 2025. Montero also clarified that “the net amount of the award after repayment to the funder and legal expenses cannot be estimated with certainty and no assurances can be made.”

Montero’s president and CEO, Dr Tony Harwood, provided the following comment on the settlement: ““I am pleased Montero was able to reach an amicable settlement with the government of Tanzania to bring a mutually beneficial end to this dispute. This resolution allows both parties to move forward, and we wish Tanzania every success in attracting new mining investment. I would like to thank our shareholders, board, management, and our legal and technical teams, for their valuable contribution to this outcome.”

Theo Ai Announces $2.2M Pre-Seed Funding to Bring Predictive Analytics to the Legal Industry

By Harry Moran |

Theo Ai, the first predictive AI platform for litigation, announces $2.2MM in pre-seed funding. The round was co-led by NextView and nvp capital with participation from Ripple Ventures, Beat Ventures, and SCVC Fund. Using a proprietary data model and prediction engine, Theo Ai helps legal professionals make educated decisions about the likely outcome of cases. The funding will be used to further enhance their prediction engine, expand practice categories, and accelerate customer growth.

With over 275,000 new lawsuits filed each day, choosing which cases to take is essential for the legal industry. The average mid-sized firm reviews roughly 650 cases per year, which can take anywhere between 7 to 30 days to manually review. With Theo Ai, that time is compressed into seconds - allowing legal teams to cover more ground and focus on winning cases. Led by Alex Alben (UCLA Law Professor and Tech Executive), Patrick Ip (ex-Google and UCLA Law MLS) and Tiago Luchini (4x CTO/Founder), Theo Ai is the first predictive tool to fully leverage the power of AI. Theo Ai enables customers to identify and predict cases with the highest odds of success, uncover cases they might have missed, and access case summaries and key financial drivers all in a single offering.

"With backgrounds in both law and tech, Theo Ai's leadership team understands the complexities legal firms face and how to leverage advanced technology to address those challenges," says Co-Founder and Partner at NextView, Rob Go. "Their experience allows them to build a platform that addresses the needs of the everyday economy and truly reflects the nuances of legal decision-making, giving customers a significant edge in strategy and case outcomes."

"The legal industry is undergoing significant change and this technology will accelerate the drive towards efficiency and prediction analysis. Theo Ai is perfectly timed to address the increasing demand for next-gen B2B tools," says Dan Borok, Managing Partner at nvp. "With a stellar team that has decades of expertise in both law and tech, Theo Ai is delivering the right solution when firms need it."

"When the Ripple Ventures team first met the Theo Ai team, it was clear they had a deep understanding of customer workflows and pain points, rooted in their extensive legal expertise. Their vision for transforming the legacy legal industry with AI, combined with a proven track record as repeat founders, gave us strong confidence in their ability to execute," says Dom Lau, Partner at Ripple Ventures.

The ability to accurately predict a case's outcome is a game changer for legal professionals. By analyzing similar cases and likely arguments, Theo Ai's data model estimates the probability of winning a case, in addition to predicting the estimated award. Early users of Theo Ai found that the platform's algorithms verified the results of their underwriting and due diligence teams. With Theo Ai, firms have access to a data-driven pipeline using real-time analytics and predictive modeling as new facts and evidence emerge.

To learn more and join the waitlist for Theo Ai, visit: https://theoai.ai/#product

About Theo Ai
Theo Ai is the first predictive engine designed by technical and legal professionals to forecast the outcome of legal disputes. Its AI models are trained on historical case data and incorporate real-time analytics with predictive modeling to deliver accurate and actionable insights. Theo Ai is meeting the most critical need for legal professionals - offering accurate case outcome predictions, backed by data. To learn more and join the waitlist for Theo Ai, visit: https://theoai.ai/#product

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Carlos Ara Triadu, Partner, CUATRECASAS

By John Freund |

Company Name and Description: CUATRECASAS - a leading multi-disciplinary Spanish law firm, providing comprehensive legal services to clients across various industries. With a strong presence in Spain, Portugal, and Latin America, among others, the firm is recognized for its innovative solutions and commitment to excellence.  

Company Website: https://www.cuatrecasas.com/en/spain/

Year Founded: 1917

Headquarters: Barcelona and Madrid (Spain).

Area of Focus: Litigation Funding and Restructuring

International Legal Finance Association Welcomes First Global Director of Growth and Membership Engagement

The International Legal Finance Association (ILFA) today announced the recruitment of Rupert Cunningham as Global Director of Growth and Membership Engagement. In this role, Rupert will work to drive ILFA’s membership growth and retention, provide leadership and management to serve ILFA members, and promote global education and awareness of litigation finance.

Prior to joining ILFA, Rupert served as a Special Adviser to UK Justice Secretary and Lord Chancellor Alex Chalk KC. He advised the Lord Chancellor on courts, sentencing, and legal services policy and shepherded legislation to support the legal finance industry in England and Wales. Before his work in government, Rupert worked as a public affairs and policy consultant, helping build coalitions of clients and trade associations to achieve positive political outcomes.

“We are thrilled to announce the addition of Rupert Cunningham,” said Shannon Campagna, ILFA’s interim Executive Director. “Rupert’s experience working with membership and trade associations to build coalitions across industries and in the UK’s Ministry of Justice makes him uniquely suited for leading ILFA’s global growth and engagement.”

“I am delighted to be joining ILFA, the leading global organization advocating for the legal finance sector,” Rupert Cunningham said. “When I was in the Ministry of Justice, I saw firsthand how important third-party funding is for promoting access to justice, so I am glad to be supporting the industry by expanding ILFA’s membership and helping members amplify their voice with industry stakeholders and policymakers worldwide.” 

Rupert’s appointment demonstrates ILFA’s commitment to expanding legal finance industry representation across continents and extending the industry’s reach with legislative, regulatory, and judicial policymakers worldwide.

About the International Legal Finance Association   

The International Legal Finance Association (ILFA) represents the global commercial legal finance community, and its mission is to engage, educate, and influence legislative, regulatory, and judicial landscapes as the voice of the commercial legal finance industry. It is the only global association of commercial legal finance companies and is an independent, non-profit trade association promoting the highest standards of operation and service for the commercial legal finance sector. ILFA has local chapter representation around the world.  

For more information, visit www.ilfa.com and find us on LinkedIn and X @ILFA_Official.

The Future of Litigation Funding Regulation Under the Trump Administration 

Following this month’s elections in the United States, litigation funding leaders and industry observers have begun to try and predict what the change in government at the federal level may mean for efforts to increase regulation and oversight of the litigation finance industry.

An article in The American Lawyer looks at the issue of increased regulation for litigation funding through the lens of the election, getting the views of industry experts as to what approach the incoming GOP trifecta might take. With one piece of draft legislation focusing on funding disclosure already introduced to the House, courtesy of Rep. Darrell Issa of California, lawyers and funders alike are anxious to see whether the Trump administration will take a more combative approach to third-party funding.

Broadly speaking, the view from industry appears to be split on whether the attitudes of Congress and the White House will be aligned on this issue. Charles Agee, CEO of Westfleet Advisors, said that “regulating the litigation finance industry does not seem to be at the top of the agenda for the Trump administration”. Whilst Dai Wai Chin Feman, managing director at Parabellum Capital, noted that Trump has previously exhibited a trend towards appointing judges with less litigation experience, which may harm the industry as it could “inject more variability in litigation funders' ability to underwrite outcomes.” 

Paul Haskel, partner with Crowell & Moring, agreed that regulating third-party funding may not be a high priority for President Trump, but suggested that the commonly-repeated claim that funding acts as a route for foreign actors to malignly influence US interests could be “an appealing way for this administration to attack it.” Similarly, Mark Behrens of Shook Hardy & Bacon, suggested that over on Capitol Hill, “the new congressional leadership provides a reason for optimism that there will be increased attention paid to the disclosure of commercial third-party litigation financing and the involvement of foreign funders in U.S. litigation.” 

Seeking to gain some insight into any provisional policy position that the new administration might hold, The American Lawyer contacted the Trump transition team for a comment. However, spokesperson Karoline Leavitt did not provide a direct answer to the question, instead emphasizing that Trump had been re-elected “by a resounding margin giving him a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail.”

Legal-Bay Announces Judge’s Intent to Upend $38MM Sex Abuse Valuation in New Hampshire YDC Case

Legal-Bay, The Pre Settlement Funding Company, announced today that a New Hampshire court has just tossed out an initial $38 million award in favor of a paltry $475k payout even the presiding judge is calling "an unconscionable miscarriage of justice."

Plaintiff David Meehan originally filed suit for the 100+ sexual abuse violations he suffered as a minor at a youth detention center in the 1990s. It turns out, he wasn't the only victim. The case has garnered tremendous headlines for the egregious abuses inflicted upon underage boys and girls at that facility for years. As the whistleblower, Meehan was in a unique position to help subsequent victims who came forward with their own claims of abuse, the first of many to testify. One can only imagine the bravery it must have taken to recount in graphic detail the sexual misconduct he endured as a minor. While the case played out online and through the media, the opinion that mattered most was the jury's; they found Meehan credible enough to award him $38 million, citing personal injury and punitive damages.

However, the jury instructions were not clear, and a technicality has now ensued: According to the verdict sheet, the jurors only listed "1 incident" on the jury form returned to the court after deliberations. Meehan's lawyers, Rus Rilee and David Vicinanzo, had argued off the record that there needed to be more clarity to jurors, but to no avail. State law dictates that $475K is the cap per incident.

After hearing of the state's assertion that the verdict was going to be revised down to $475k, several jurors reached out to Rilee to explain themselves regarding the misunderstanding and their intentions. They felt horrible about the lowered settlement amount and expressed how misinformed they were about the jury instructions in the case. Even the judge in a post-trial order felt the weight of the evidence reflected more than purely a lone incident. (Jurors have clarified post-trial that they meant one ongoing incident of PTSD from the abuse, and not one instance of the abuse itself, because clearly, they all believed his account of how he'd been raped multiple times on numerous occasions.)  

Chris Janish, CEO of Legal Bay, commented, "Legal-Bay has been one of the only companies who has been funding YDC cases since the start. So, with full disclosure, it is without question that we have a vested interest in seeing the plaintiffs prevail. However, aside from our personal belief in the veracity of the claims made, this new verdict is one of the gravest civil injustices our company has witnessed in almost twenty years of doing business. David Meehan was the first to report the abuse and win his case at trial, and now others stand to reap more from his courageous efforts than he will. We understand the state's motivation to protect its taxpayers to some extent, but something just seems amiss here. We are optimistic that the civil justice system and politicians who support their local constituents will work out a more reasonable resolution whether through the courts or otherwise. And we hope that not only Meehan, but all the victims will get justice for the atrocities that occurred in the youth detention centers of New Hampshire and across the nation. That seems to be lost on the defense team and state's position throughout all this, which is disappointing."

If you're a lawyer or plaintiff involved in an active sexual abuse lawsuit of any kind and need an immediate cash advance against an impending lawsuit settlement, please visit Legal-Bay HERE or call toll-free at 877.571.0405.

Legal Bay reports that the New Hampshire YDC litigation has over 1400 cases filed to date. When Legal Bay began funding early on—when no other company would—there were just eight plaintiffs. The company says the other victims have David Meehan and Rus Rilee to thank for their courage to take on the state in what has become one of the most egregious criminal and civil violations of children's rights in U.S. History. 

Whatever the ultimate resolution, YDC cases in N.H. look to be winding down. But that is not the situation in many other litigations nationwide. There are tens of thousands of plaintiffs awaiting justice in many youth detention center cases across the country, as well as other similar litigations that will take time to resolve. Some of them include Mac Hall and foster home sex abuse cases in Los Angeles, CA, southern California clergy cases, New York and New Jersey Catholic Diocese church lawsuits, Boy Scouts of America sexual abuse cases, sex abuse at youth correctional facilities, at sports facilities, and by coaches, camp counselors, teachers, and sadly, many more.

YDC is not an isolated problem. Childhood sexual abuse litigations all over the country are emerging, and the psychological damage caused by so many is beyond what everyday society can even comprehend. Legal Bay is at the forefront of each and every one of these litigations, doing their best to support the victims to get their lives back in order and help them receive justice.

If you're a lawyer or plaintiff involved in an active sexual abuse lawsuit of any kind and need an immediate cash advance against an impending lawsuit settlement, please visit Legal-Bay HERE or call toll-free at 877.571.0405.

Settlement amounts for sex abuse survivors vary widely, and appeals are almost immediately filed, holding up payouts indefinitely. Commercial litigation funding is available while plaintiffs wait out a verdict on appeal, and large pre-settlement funding can be obtained while the verdicts go through the appellate process. 

In larger cases involving organizations like the Catholic Church or Boy Scouts of America, settlements could be in the $100K settlement amount range for even the worst abuses. In cases with smaller class actions or mass torts (less than 50 people), settlement ranges for the highest level of sex abuses can be between $500K and $5MM. 

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 lawsuit 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 legal funding company 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.

Amber Cardillo, Legal-Bay's Head of Sex Abuse Funding commented, "We understand the different sex abuse litigations throughout the country better than any other funding company in the industry. Unfortunately, each one is different, and settlement values are based on many factors. We try to work with each victim compassionately and get them the help they need. We welcome all to call and try even if their church is in bankruptcy or if they have been denied additional funding by other companies." 

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.

Sandfield Capital Secures £10.5M Funding Facility to Expand Operations

As policymakers and legal experts debate what the future of UK litigation funding should look like, it is clear that even smaller regional funders continue to attract investor interest as they look to take a larger share of the market.

An article in TheBusinessDesk covers the news that Sandfield Capital has agreed a £10.5 million funding facility from an unnamed Canadian investor, with the deal arranged by Altimapa Capital. This latest deal is reportedly part of Sandfield’s £100 million fundraising effort led by Altimapa, with the debt finance specialist having already secured a £20 million facility in December 2023.

The Liverpool-based funder was founded in 2020 and has since expanded its footprint to include an office in London, secured the new funding facility to support its growth plans both in terms of hiring additional staff and broaden the range of cases it funds. Over the last four years, Sandfield has provided funding for a variety of claims including those targeting brokers for undisclosed commissions, landlords for failures to maintain rental properties, and claims over Military Hearing Loss.

Sandfield Capital’s CEO, Steven D’Ambrosio, said that the funder has witnessed “a dramatic increase in undisclosed commissions and housing disrepair cases following news coverage and increased awareness of the legal remedies available.” D’Ambrosio explained that the £10.5 infusion of capital would allow Sandfield to support these claims and “enable many more people to bring their case to court.”

Pedro Tavares, CEO of Altimapa, provided the following comment on the deal: “We’re pleased to have secured an additional £10.5m credit facility for Sandfield Capital. It underscores our ability to bring international capital to UK businesses and the attractiveness of the civil litigation market to a widening, and increasingly international, panel of investors.”

Trellis Launches Trellis AI to Revolutionize Trial Court Litigation

Today, Trellis launched Trellis AI, a powerful new legal productivity platform designed for the complex needs of trial court litigation. Built on Trellis' industry-leading trial court data foundation—which is the most comprehensive database of its kind in the US—Trellis AI offers tools that empower legal teams to harness data and insights in transformative ways. By automating litigation tasks like motion drafting and case evaluations, Trellis AI transforms the way litigators approach case work with greater accuracy, efficiency, and strategic insight.

Trellis is an AI-driven legal research and insights platform offering access to the largest and most comprehensive US trial court database. This extensive database includes dockets, documents, rulings, judge, law firm, and company analytics, with unmatched coverage across states, counties, and courts.

Trellis AI leverages this extensive data foundation along with advanced language models to deliver precise insights that enhance decision-making, case preparation, and litigation strategy. Designed for legal professionals, it streamlines strategic work like case assessments and motion argument development while automating time-consuming tasks such as motion drafting, client updates, and discovery preparation. These efficiencies free up attorneys to focus on strategic decision-making and client advocacy.

"Trellis is uniquely positioned to support attorneys within the very court system where their cases are filed," said Nicole Clark, CEO and cofounder of Trellis and a former litigator. "Trellis provides access to hundreds of millions of motions and briefs, representing millions of hours of attorney blood, sweat, and tears in research and drafting. It's why Trellis AI stands as the only tool to offer one-click solutions to create work product backed by the entire court system and learnings from every trial court litigator who came before them."

Unlocking New Litigation Strategies

Trellis AI is designed to support every stage of the case lifecycle, delivering impactful work product powered by Trellis' extensive data. Its feature suite tackles common litigation challenges by automating routine tasks and providing strategic insights grounded in the nation's most trusted court data.

For example, "Draft Arguments" is a powerful motion drafting tool that can save hours of work, allowing attorneys to focus on their strongest arguments. Trellis AI uses the details and facts of the case to create tailored draft motions, drawing from its extensive database of similar cases to suggest strategic, fact-supported arguments. Each draft incorporates insights from hundreds of thousands of successful trial court motions, offering attorneys an innovative solution that transforms how they approach motion drafting.

Another tool is "Case Assessment" which evaluates key case elements to guide strategic decision-making. Trellis AI examines case facts, legal claims, and defenses to provide detailed insights into potential outcomes, recommended actions, and risk factors. Each assessment delivers actionable intelligence and recommended next steps to inform decisions on case management, settlement strategies, and trial preparation. This empowers attorneys to keep their clients informed, offer strategic recommendations, and leverage an internal knowledge base of strategies and insights for each case.

The remainder of Trellis AI's tools streamline important tasks like complaint analysis, defense strategy development, argument evaluation, timeline creation, citation extraction, and more. All tools were created and meticulously tested by Trellis' teams of product attorneys and experienced litigators.

Precision and Security at the Core

Trellis AI is designed for ease-of-use without sacrificing security or accuracy. All uploaded documents are encrypted at rest, aligning with SOC 2 standards to protect sensitive information. Additionally, Trellis AI reduces the risk of errors or bias in its outputs, enabling legal teams to concentrate on insights rather than processes. It also provides options for easy verification and source checking, ensuring greater confidence and peace of mind.

"The potential for AI to transform the legal field depends on the quality and depth of data behind it," said Alon Shwartz, CPO and cofounder of Trellis. "Our data foundation is the cornerstone of Trellis AI, providing a wealth of high-quality information that drives actionable recommendations and meaningful insights. By prioritizing data integrity and implementing rigorous security measures, we've built a platform attorneys can trust to streamline workflows and make strategic decisions confidently."

For more information, click here to book a demo or to get started with Trellis AI.

About Trellis

About Trellis

Trellis is the leading provider of state trial court data and insights, serving tens of thousands of law firms and litigators daily with insights and coverage across 3,000+ courts in over 2,500 counties, spanning 45 states. Trellis offers an extensive suite of state trial court intelligence and productivity tools for litigators, including detailed judge bios and analytics, thorough case assessments, argument drafting and generation, litigation insights across both law firms and corporations, daily reports on new filings, customizable alerts, and much more. Explore more or book a demo at trellis.law.

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Philippa Wilkinson, Associate Director, S-RM

By John Freund |

Philippa Wilkinson is an Associate Director on S-RM’s Disputes & Investigations team, which is dedicated to providing investigative support to parties to contentious situations. She has experience managing asset tracing investigations, as well as litigation and arbitration support engagements, associated with complex corporate disputes. While her practice is global, Philippa specialises in matters involving Middle Eastern parties, having spent several years in the Middle East, living and working in Tunisia and the UAE. She previously worked as a journalist covering finance and infrastructure in the GCC and wider Middle East, and subsequently covering European infrastructure funds. Philippa has an MA in Near and Middle Eastern Studies from the School of African and Oriental Studies, and a BA in Modern Languages from Durham University. She is a fluent Arabic, Spanish and French speaker.

Company Name and Description: S-RM is a global risk and intelligence consultancy. Founded in 2005, our staff comprises 350+ practitioners across eight international offices, serving clients across all regions and major sectors. Headquartered in London with offices in Cape Town, Hong Kong, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, New York, Utrecht and Washington, D.C., we support our clients by providing intelligence that informs critical decision-making and strategies.

Our dedicated Disputes & Investigations practice was established to provide specialist support to clients engaged in contentious situations. Our intelligence is deployed in a number of scenarios including litigation, international arbitration, internal investigations and investigations related to sanctions or fraud. We provide a full spectrum of dispute-focused services including asset tracing and enforcement strategy; litigation support; eDiscovery and digital forensics; and strategic intelligence. S-RM’s investigators sit alongside cyber security experts and seasoned crisis managers. Our investigations involve their collaboration on a regular basis, be it for physical surveillance, expert witness support, or digital forensics. Since 2021, our practice has received international recognition by leading legal directories, including Chambers & Partners and Who Who’s Legal (Lexology Index).

S-RM’s research and analysis is provided by six regional teams, which provide expert coverage of a range of jurisdictions globally, from the most prominent to some of the smallest and most obscure. Collectively, S-RM’s analysts and managers speak over 45 languages and have come to the business from a broad range of sectors including intelligence, government, finance, journalism, the military and academia. Each team is adept at locating hard-to-find public records and has built an extensive network of human sources on the ground in their region. On every project, we bring together the most relevant and experienced practitioners from across our business, creating teams designed to address unique problems and complex challenges.

Company Website: https://www.s-rminform.com/

Year Founded: 2005 

Headquarters: 4th Floor Beaufort House, 15 St Botolph Street, London, Greater London, EC3A 7DT 

Area of Focus: Corporate intelligence  

Member Quote: “Through our asset tracing work and enforcement advisory, we make sure a judgment or an award is not just a very expensive piece of paper, but a pathway to recovery.”

LPF Group Appoints Former High Court Judge as Director

By Harry Moran |

In an announcement released earlier this week by LPF Group, the New Zealand litigation funder revealed that it had strengthened its board with the appointment of Judge Robert Dobson KC as a director. Mr Dobson brings a wealth of experience as both a commercial lawyer and judge, having served on the High Court from 2007 to 2020. Mr Dobson briefling returned to the bench as an acting judge on the Court of Appeal in 2022, before returning to his arbitration and mediation practice at Stout Street Chambers.

Phil Newland, founder and director of LPF, said “LPF is delighted to have Mr Dobson, a proven jurist with substantial legal and judicial experience join the board at such an important time for the development of class action law in New Zealand.”

Commenting on his new role, Mr Dobson stated: “Having observed LPF’s role from a different perspective for many years I now look forward to playing a part in continuing the development of litigation funding and assisting access to justice. I am very much looking forward to joining LPF in helping meritorious cases attract funding in the pursuit of justice.”

In addition to the appointment of Mr Dobson, LPF also stated that the company’s current Chairman, Bill Wilson KC, will be moving to the position of Emeritus Chair to provide continuing support to the funder’s board. Newland praised Wilson’s work during his time at LPF by saying “With Bill’s strong support LPF has assisted many thousands of New Zealanders to achieve redress, including in leading cases such as Mainzeal, Kiwifruit and in the recent CBL and Intueri shareholder class actions.”

CAT Chairman: “Funding is Essential” for Collective Proceedings Success

By Harry Moran |

Following the publication of the Civil Justice Council’s interim report on litigation funding, industry leaders and experts have opined on the future direction of UK’s funding market. At a recent industry conference, attendees were treated to the views of the head of one of the country’s most important judicial bodies when it comes to litigation funding.

Reporting by CDR covers remarks delivered by Andrew Lenon KC, chairman of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) at the Global Class Actions Symposium. The keynote speech on the second day of the symposium saw Lenon discuss the current state of the CAT and the involvement of third-party funding, which he described as “essential to the success of the collective proceedings regime.”

Lenon noted that despite the period of uncertainty in the initial aftermath of the PACCAR decision, he suggested that “it seems likely that the UK market for litigation funding and collective proceedings will continue to grow.” Furthermore, Lenon argued that in this growth environment, the result would be the emergence of a “fully functioning competitive market for litigation funding.”

The CAT’s chairman emphasised the tribunal’s role “to clarify the legal principles relating to funding arrangements”, with a focus on ensuring that “collective proceedings do not become a cash cow to funders and lawyers, with minimal returns to class members.” However, in a welcome nod to funders and lawyers alike, Lenon assured that the CAT “will be slow to interfere with funding arrangements freely negotiated between funders and class representatives.”

Whilst he acknowledged that the CAT must keep a close eye to ensure that funder’s fees and legal costs do not spiral out of control, Lenon agreed that it was “entirely legitimate for funders to seek a return on their investment.” In summarising the CAT’s position on interfering with litigation funding agreements, Lenon said that “the tribunal should therefore be slow to second guess.”

Which? Files £3 Billion Cloud Claim Against Apple, Funded by LCM

By Harry Moran |

The growth of multinational technology corporations has provided years of product innovation and a mass availability of affordable consumer electronics. However, the resulting monopolies that have risen to dominate these markets have also created space for the potential for anti-competitive behaviour that harms consumers. In this environment, it is unsurprising we are seeing more and more claims being brought against these tech giants, with the legal proceedings supported by third-party litigation funders.

An article in TechCrunch covers the announcement of a new collective action being brought against Apple by the UK consumer rights group Which?, representing up to 40 million consumers over allegations that Apple breached competition law by overcharging users of the iCloud service. The opt-out proceedings, valued at approximately £3 billion, claims that Apple abused its monopoly position to favour iCloud over competing cloud storage providers and locking in customers to the iCloud services, thereby preventing them from switching to a competitor and enabling Apple to charge increasingly higher fees.

The application for certification was filed with the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) on 8 November 2024, with the claim seeking to represent any UK consumer who used an iOS device or iCloud services from 1 October 2025 onwards. This nine year time period is particularly relevant as it follows the introduction of the Consumer Rights Act from that date. The claims is being funded by Litigation Capital Management (LCM), with litigation risk insurance having been secured to cover Apple’s legal costs if the claim is not successful

More information about the collective proceedings can be found on the Cloud Claim website.

In response to this new legal action being brought, Apple spokesperson Tom Parker provided the following statement: “Apple believes in providing our customers with choices. Our users are not required to use iCloud, and many rely on a wide range of third-party alternatives for data storage. In addition, we work hard to make data transfer as easy as possible — whether its to iCloud or another service. We reject any suggestion that our iCloud practices are anticompetitive and will vigorously defend against any legal claim otherwise.”

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Obaid Saeed Bin Mes’har

With over 26 years of extensive experience in Telecommunications Management and more than 15 years specializing in Dispute Resolution and Financial Claims, Obaid Bin Mes’har is a distinguished leader and expert in both fields. As the founder of Taswiyah Consultancy and Settlement of Claims in Dubai, UAE, he has established a strong reputation for resolving complex commercial and civil disputes.

Obaid's expertise encompasses acting as an Arbitrator, Mediator, Negotiator, Counsellor, and Legal Representative, focusing on Mediation, Arbitration, Financial Settlement Claims, Debt Purchase, and Litigation Funding across national and international sectors. His professional journey has touched industries such as Telecommunications, Utilities, Construction, and Finance, as well as Mergers & Acquisitions in the International Markets.

Company Name and Description: WinJustice is the first UAE-based firm dedicated exclusively to litigation funding, established to empower individuals and businesses in their pursuit of justice. With a clear vision to transform the legal landscape, we provide innovative financial solutions that enable our clients to navigate complex legal proceedings without the burden of financial constraints.

Company Website: https://winjustice.com/

Year Founded: 2024

Headquarters: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

Area of Focus:  WinJustice focuses on delivering tailored litigation funding solutions that empower diverse clients, from individual claimants to SMEs and multinational corporations. Our expertise spans supporting arbitration cases, commercial litigation, and financial settlements. We prioritize access to justice for clients facing financial constraints, enabling them to pursue strong legal claims without the burden of legal expenses. This includes assisting financially stressed firms, the manufacturing and industrial sectors, and service-oriented businesses in overcoming the challenges of complex legal disputes.

Member Quote: “Litigation funding is not just a financial solution; it’s a powerful tool for justice. At WinJustice, we believe that everyone deserves the chance to pursue their legal rights without the fear of financial barriers.”

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Guillermo Ruiz Medrano, Attorney, CUATRECASAS

By John Freund |

Guillermo Ruiz Medrano is a Spanish lawyer based in Barcelona, specializing in advising local and international clients on litigation finance deals and restructuring transactions, with a focus on international and cross-border deals, and engaged in the implementation of cutting-edge litigation funding structures.

Company Name and Description: CUATRECASAS - a leading multi-disciplinary Spanish law firm, providing comprehensive legal services to clients across various industries. With a strong presence in Spain, Portugal, and Latin America, among others, the firm is recognized for its innovative solutions and commitment to excellence.  

Company Website: https://www.cuatrecasas.com/en/spain/

Year Founded: 1917

Headquarters: Barcelona and Madrid (Spain).

Area of Focus: Litigation Funding and Restructuring

Member Quote: Litigation funding in Spain is experiencing a dynamic transformation, making it an exciting jurisdiction for both national and international players. With the market expanding rapidly and new regulations on the horizon, particularly for consumer cases, Spain offers a fertile ground for innovative funding solutions. This burgeoning landscape ensures that litigation funding here is not only robust but also poised for sustainable growth, making Spain a premier destination for legal investment.

Pegasus Legal Capital Completes $74 Million Securitization to Fuel Growth

Pegasus Legal Capital, LLC ("Pegasus") (mylawfunds.com), a prominent pre-settlement legal funding company in the United States, announced today that it has successfully completed a $74 million litigation finance securitization. This achievement marks Pegasus' second securitization transaction in the asset class and another significant milestone in its capital market journey. The proceeds from this transaction will further propel Pegasus' growth across key markets in the United States.

Pegasus Managing Director, Alexander Khanas, expressed, "With the successful completion of this transaction, Pegasus will expand its business in the personal injury market while upholding its industry-leading service standards."

GreensLedge Capital Markets LLC played the role of Placement Agent for Pegasus. GreensLedge Senior Managing Director, Douglas Lipton, added, "We are delighted to continue expanding Pegasus' investor base through their second securitization issuance and assisting them in creatively developing their platform."

Headquartered in Deerfield Beach, Florida, Pegasus was founded in 2008 as a pre-settlement litigation finance company. Since its inception, the company's management team has successfully sourced, underwritten, and serviced over half a billion dollars through more than 30,000 advances. While Pegasus has traditionally focused on the New York market, it has established a strong presence in the Southeast and Texas markets as well.

Pegasus is a proud member of the American Legal Finance Association (ALFA), a national organization comprising companies that provide non-recourse funds to personal injury victims. ALFA's primary objective is to establish industry standards for transparency in legal funding transactions, ensuring upfront and clear disclosure to consumers.

Litigation Lending Appoints Emma Colantonio as Chief Investment Officer

In a post on LinkedIn, Australian funder Litigation Lending Services (LLS) announced the promotion of Emma Colantonio to the position of Chief Investment Officer. In the announcement, LLS said that Emma’s dedication and strategic insight have been instrumental to the success of the business.

Colantonio joined LLS in 2021 as an investment manager and served in that role for two years before being promoted to senior investment manager in May 2023. Prior to joining LLS in 2021, Colantonio had also spent five years at MinterEllison as a senior associate, as well as having served as a senior legal counsel at Commonwealth Bank. 

In her own post on LinkedIn, Colantonio provided the following comment: “Excited to step into the role as Chief Investment Officer at Litigation Lending Services Limited! A big thank you to the leadership team for their trust and support. Looking forward to driving our mission forward and exploring new opportunities in litigation funding.”As LFJ reported in August of this year, Colantonio was recently appointed to the board of The Association of Litigation Funders of Australia (AALF) as a non executive director, replacing LLS’ own Stephen Conrad in that position.

IQuote Acquires Over 1,000 Cryptocurrency Claims

The enthusiasm for cryptocurrency over recent years has seen retail investors look to these digital assets as a route to impressive financial returns. However, this relatively nascent and unregulated asset class has also resulted in a significant amount of malpractice and criminal activity, leading to a surge in related legal cases that some funders are engaging with.

An article in TheBusinessDesk covers the news that IQuote, a Manchester-based litigation funder, has acquired over 1,000 claims related to cryptocurrency fraud. The cases that IQuote is funding are being brought by individuals who have been the victims of crypto scams or had their digital assets stolen. IQuote’s acquisition of these claims was achieved both through marketing efforts and organic traffic, with the individual value of the cases ranging from £10,000 to £10 million.

Craig Cornick, founder and chief executive, stated: “At IQuote, we are continually evolving our funding strategies to stay aligned with the dynamic and rapidly changing litigation landscape and are committed to helping victims receive justice. Our goal is to ensure that our financial solutions not only meet the current demands of the legal industry but also anticipate future trends, providing innovative and sustainable funding options for our clients.”

New Burford Capital Research Reveals How Businesses are Preparing for Likely Rise in Global Energy Transition Disputes

By Harry Moran |

Burford Capital, the leading global finance and asset management firm focused on law, today releases new research entitled “Energy transition disputes: GCs and senior lawyers on the business impacts of legal challenges to come,” which demonstrates how businesses are preparing for a likely rise in legal disputes related to the global energy transition. This transition―or the shift to renewable sources of energy―is likely to cause an increase in expensive commercial disputes.

Businesses are investing significant sums in this transition, and corporate commitments highlight the scale of economic engagement as they invest in the new technologies, infrastructure and other resources that will be needed. But multifaceted legal and commercial pressures present businesses with a myriad of potential challenges including contractual disagreements, regulatory compliance issues and the need for intellectual property enforcement or litigation. Burford’s research report aims to offer a unique perspective on how corporations foresee the expected rise in litigation and arbitration related to this energy transition, examining the areas of business impact related to this evolving landscape.

Burford commissioned this independent research by capturing insights from 300 GCs and heads of litigation across key industries impacted by the energy transition and spanning North America, Europe, Asia and Australia.

Key findings from the study include:

Disputes relating to the energy transition are rising

·       76% of GCs report they are already encountering disputes related to the energy transition and nearly half (47%) expect a further rise in the volume of such disputes in the next decade, driven by evolving laws, new technologies and infrastructure requirements.

Disputes relating to the energy transition are expected to be costly

·       Almost two in three GCs (63%) expect legal fees and expenses to exceed $4 million per energy transition case; a notable minority (29%) expect per case costs to exceed $10 million.

·       Over half (52%) view high costs as a significant factor in deciding not to pursue disputes.

·       Half (50%) of GCs agree that the energy transition will create the need for additional capital sources for the business.

Expected disputes span all types of business conflict

·       GCs are most likely to predict (77%) that the energy transition will result in more contractual disputes and commercial arbitration.

·       Joint ventures are expected to be particularly prone to disputes over profit allocation (76%) and intellectual property rights (65%).

·       Over half of GCs (57%) also expect their businesses to face arbitrations to resolve investor-state conflicts relating to the transition.

New tools are needed to manage the rising dispute costs

·       Legal finance is increasingly used to mitigate the financial burden of these disputes; three in four (75%) GCs have used or would consider using legal finance to offset the cost of disputes relating to this transition.

·       In particular, GCs value monetization―or advancing some of the expected entitlement of a pending claim, judgment or award― to generate liquidity from claims tied up in litigation and arbitration. With legal finance, companies can also offset the cost of pursuing affirmative litigation to generate liquidity, shifting legal departments from cost centers to value drivers.

Christopher Bogart, CEO of Burford Capital, said: “Businesses face significant challenges related to the global energy transition due to cross-border projects, differing legal frameworks and rapidly evolving policies. Additionally, long-term energy contracts may not keep pace with energy markets and technologies, resulting in conflicts among stakeholders. Burford’s latest research demonstrates the value of corporate finance for law, as legal finance helps companies manage the high costs of energy transition disputes and allows them to pursue meritorious claims without depleting resources.”

Burford’s research is based on a 2024 survey conducted by GLG and is supplemented by interviews with ten global energy transition experts conducted by Ari Kaplan Advisors.

The research report can be downloaded on Burford’s website.

Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Jason Geisker, Head of Claims Funding Australia

By John Freund |

Jason Geisker is the Head of Claims Funding Australia (CFA), the litigation funding arm and wholly owned subsidiary of Maurice Blackburn Lawyers in Australia. He also serves as a Principal Lawyer at Maurice Blackburn’s Sydney office. With over 30 years of experience in commercial litigation and class actions, Jason has been recognized by his peers in the Doyles’ Guide rankings in Australia as a leading lawyer in commercial litigation/dispute resolution and class actions.

Jason holds a Master of Laws from the University of New South Wales. Since his admission to practice in 1996, he has been involved in several high-profile cases, including shareholder, investor, and consumer class actions. Notably, Jason led the Australian class actions against Volkswagen, Audi, and Skoda following the global ‘dieselgate’ scandal, resulting in settlements exceeding $170 million for over 100,000 Australian motorists.

In more recent years, as Head of CFA, Jason has collaborated with law firms across Australia and New Zealand to fund numerous commercial, insolvency, and class action claims. This includes a +NZD$300 million class action on behalf of approximately 3,000 people affected by the Southern Response insurance scandal following the Christchurch earthquakes in 2011. Under his leadership, CFA has achieved a 94% success rate in its funded cases. Jason is also the co-author of the Australian and New Zealand chapters of ‘The Third Party Funding Law Review’, an annual guide to the law and practice of third party funding, which is currently in its 8th edition.

Company Name and Description: Claims Funding Australia (CFA) is a litigation funding specialist with operations and offices throughout Australia. CFA funds a broad range of litigation in Australia and overseas. Backed by Maurice Blackburn, Australia’s leading class action law firm, CFA is part of the Claims Funding Group, providing third-party litigation funding services across Europe, Asia, North America, Australia, and New Zealand. Founded over a decade ago, CFA has been successful in 94% of its funded cases, recovering almost half a billion dollars for its clients. CFA leverages the expertise, resources, and reputation of Maurice Blackburn Lawyers, whose advisory team includes some of the most experienced class action, insolvency, and commercial litigators in Australia. With the solid financial backing of Maurice Blackburn, CFA brings extensive knowledge and experience in litigation and dispute resolution, offering dependable litigation finance. CFA works with a diverse range of clients, including liquidators, trustees, individuals, businesses, and government agencies, sharing Maurice Blackburn’s commitment to providing greater access to justice and leveling the litigation playing field against well-resourced defendants.

Company Website: www.claimsfunding.com.au

Year Founded: 2014

Headquarters: Melbourne, Australia, (with offices in Sydney, Adelaide, Brisbane and Perth)

Area of Focus: Civil, commercial, and insolvency litigation funding across Australia, and class action and commercial litigation funding in New Zealand and Canada.

Member Quote: “Define your goal, assess the cost, commit to the journey, and relish the rewards with peace of mind and no regrets.

LitFin Highlights Momentum for Booking.com Class Actions

By Harry Moran |

Class actions focusing on anti-competitive behaviour by big businesses continue to provide ample opportunities for litigation funders to support claimants in their pursuit of justice, with European jurisdictions benefitting from a strong regulatory and oversight structure that seeks to clamp down on corporations abusing their dominant market positions.

In a LinkedIn post from LitFIn, the Prague-based litigation funder provides an update on the ongoing class actions brought against online travel agency Booking.com over its alleged anti-competitive practices. The allegations relate to the company’s use of pricing parity clauses, which have harmed hotels by preventing them from offering lower prices on their own websites or other online travel platforms. 

The travel company is now facing lawsuits across a number of jurisdictions in the European Union, with ongoing investigations in Italy, Sweden and France, following in the footsteps of regulators in Spain and Czech Republic who have already issued fines. One class action, brought by German hotels seeking compensation, has already begun proceedings in the Rechtbank Amsterdam.

Juraj Siska, partner at LitFin, provided the following statement: “The recent decision by Spain’s Competition Authority to fine Booking.com €413.2 million is a significant step forward in the fight against anti-competitive practices. Booking.com’s actions have affected market players across the EU, not only in Spain. Now is the time to end these practices and ensure compensation for damages already incurred.”

Concluding the post, LitFin emphasised their active involvement to support claimants seeking compensation in the Booking.com class actions, and encouraged any potentially affected parties to contact them.

Maturation of the Litigation Funding Industry Brings New Opportunities and Challenges

By Harry Moran |

As we enter the final months of 2024, it is only natural for industry commentators and analysts to lay out their observations on the state of litigation finance, seeking to understand how third-party funding has evolved this year.

A column in Bloomberg Law, written by former lawyer turned writer David Lat, examines the current state of the litigation funding industry and examines the changing face of the market, from its growing successes to the evolution of issues it faces. The column draws upon Lat’s time at the LitFinCon event hosted in September of this year, featuring insights from industry leaders who spoke at the conference.

One of Lat’s primary observations is the transformation of litigation funding from a fringe activity in the legal sector, to a mainstream stable that has transformed the way claimants and law firms pursue disputes. Lat highlights this change in attitudes within law firms, quoting Casey Grabenstein of Saul Ewing, who noted that his firm was somewhat reluctant to embrace litigation funding”, whilst Mayer Brown’s Michael Lackey emphasized that third-party funding “was just anathema”, a decade ago. Nowadays, these attitudes have largely been reversed, with Lackey himself noting that in today’s legal landscape “virtually every large law firm that does litigation probably has a funded case somewhere.”

Speaking to one of the prominent topics discussed at LitFinCon, Lat explains that with the startling growth experienced by the litigation finance market, the issue of the ‘commoditization’ of funding continues to be raised. Across the speakers at the event, Lat highlights that the general view of funders and other parties is that the industry has moved towards maturation rather than commoditization, with a lack of standardization across funding arrangements being absent across the industry. Looking to the future of third-party funding, Lat says that industry leaders continue to take a cautiously optimistic view, and quotes Mani Walia of Siltstone Capital who said, “ours is a young industry, and we need to make sure that there are no bad apples.”

In the spirit of this cautious attitude towards ‘bad apples’ and the potential for issues to arise, Lat also addresses the ways in which opposition to and criticism of the funding industry has changed with its maturation. Lat describes this transformation as being a move away from issues of legality to issues of disclosure, highlighting the ongoing debates among lawmakers and the judiciary as to what level of mandatory disclosure should be required for funding arrangements.

Department of Justice Files Statement of Interest on $16 Billion YPF Award

By Harry Moran |

The ongoing saga of the $16.1 billion award in the case brought by investors of the YPF oil and gas company, and funded by Burford Capital, has remained one of the most high profile instances of litigation funding in history. Whilst the Argentine government continues to appeal the award, the U.S. government has now formally offered its own opinion on one of the legal issues at stake in the dispute.

An article by Reuters covers the latest development in the Argentina YPF case, as the U.S. Department of Justice submitted a statement of interest arguing against the seizure of Argentina’s shares in the oil and gas company, as part of the enforcement of the $16 billion judgment. The letter, sent to U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska in Manhattan, appeared to disagree with Burford Capital’s position that there was a commercial activity exception to the Foreign Sovereign immunities Act, and that the law was not intended to disregard immunity for foreign sovereign property. This argument seemed to reflect the DOJ’s position that carving out such an exception to immunity would create a parallel risk for U.S. property in foreign jurisdictions.

In response to media reporting on this latest development, Burford Capital issued a statement that argued the DOJ’s letter only addressed “a narrow question of law in relation to the enforcement of judgements.” Furthermore, Burford argued that the filing “does not reflect DOJ’s taking any broader position on the overall case of the enforcement campaign.” The press release from Burford Capital can be read in full below:

“Burford Capital Limited, the leading global finance and asset management firm focused on law, has noted inaccurate media reporting and subsequent market reaction to an expected court filing last night by the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") in the Petersen and Eton Park matters. The filing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York restates DOJ's position on a narrow question of law in relation to enforcement of judgments. The filing pertains to one motion filed in the Petersen and Eton Park matters as part of the overall, ongoing effort to enforce the judgment against the Argentine Republic. The filing does not reflect DOJ's taking any broader position on the overall case or the enforcement campaign; indeed, DOJ has previously taken the position that pursuing Argentina in the US courts for its breach of contract in this matter was appropriate, and DOJ has not made any filing at all on the pending appeal (and the time to do so has passed). In its filing, DOJ took the view that Argentina could not be required by a U.S. court to move property presently located in Argentina into the United States so it could there be attached for creditors under New York law, which is an unsettled legal issue. The DOJ view is not binding on the court and further briefing and proceedings will ensue. The Company will provide a further update on the Petersen and Eton Park matters during today's earnings call.”