Trending Now

John Freund's Posts

3174 Articles

Burford Captial’s Insights on Funding Quality Litigation

Researchers worldwide signal that the cost of a quality litigation team of experts is expected to rise well into the future. When thinking about the future of global enterprise, chief executives are eager to engage vehicles to help their organizations thrive cross-border. Burford Capital claims that franchises that embrace the balance sheet advantages of legal investment will have wider opportunities in commerce than those who choose to ignore the advantages of litigation finance products and services.  According to Burford’s essay on the matter, Chief Financial Officers and their in-house General Councils have fretted while budgeting for multi-year litigation offensives. Burford suggests that those who balk at funding quality litigation will find themselves behind the eight ball over the next decade.  Burford’s researchers have tallied more than 75% of large enterprises holding a range of $20M to $100M in unenforced litigation claims. Burford seeks to expand various lines of business by educating executives of large enterprises about the benefits of LF investment.

Victory Park Capital Bolsters Legal Finance Team with Additions of Chad Clamage and Ahmed Eltamami

Victory Park Capital (“VPC”), a leading global alternative investment firm, today announced the additions of Chad Clamage, Principal, and Ahmed Eltamami, Vice President, to the firm’s investment team. Clamage and Eltamami are primarily responsible for sourcing, analyzing, executing and managing investments within legal finance. They will work closely with Luke Darkow, Principal, and Richard Levy, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Investment Officer & Founder, who leads the legal finance strategy at VPC.

“We are proud to welcome Chad and Ahmed to the firm,” said Levy. “Their breadth of experience in the legal finance industry will be highly valuable as the pace of investment opportunities in this asset class continues to accelerate.”

Clamage brings several years of experience in legal finance to VPC. Most recently, he was a vice president at Burford Capital, where he underwrote and managed litigation finance investments. Prior to that, Clamage was counsel at Mayer Brown LLP, where his practice focused on class action defense, mass tort and appellate litigation. Before Mayer Brown, he clerked for the Honorable Diane S. Sykes of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Clamage received his J.D. from Stanford Law School and his B.A. in economics from Stanford University.

Eltamami was previously an associate on the quantitative team at Burford Capital, where he was responsible for analyzing investments within the underwriting and investment arm and managing the existing portfolio. Prior to that, Eltamami worked in the dispute consulting industry where his work focused on expert witness engagements in a variety of complex litigation. Eltamami received his B.A. in Economics-Accounting and completed the Financial Economics Sequence from the Robert Day School of Economics and Finance at Claremont McKenna College.

VPC takes a private credit-oriented investment approach to the legal asset class and targets investments in legal specialty finance, law firm funding and litigation finance.

About Victory Park Capital

Victory Park Capital is a global alternative investment firm that provides capital to emerging and established businesses in the U.S. and abroad. The firm’s differentiated offerings leverage an extensive network of industry relationships, disciplined deal origination, creative financing capabilities, broad credit structuring and special situations expertise. The firm was founded in 2007 and is headquartered in Chicago with additional resources in New York, Los Angeles, Austin, Miami and London. VPC is privately held and a Registered Investment Advisor with the SEC. For more information, please visit www.victoryparkcapital.com.

New Book Titled “Third Party Funding of Dispute Resolution” Explores LitFin in India

“Third Party Funding of Dispute Resolution” is a lucid look into India’s maturing litigation investment marketplace. The authors suggest that for litigation finance to thrive across India, a holistic approach should be considered and appreciated.  An exclusive extract from “Third Party Funding of Dispute Resolution” paints a picture of a worldwide network of funders who invest in meritorious legal claims that comprise legacy portfolio interests. The book’s authors, Ms. Kritika Krishnamurthy and Mr. Anuroop Omkar, explain that India’s litigation investment community holds a myriad of possibilities. With a healthy portfolio mix at the heart of successful litigation investment franchises, the authors suggest that the world’s funders maintain a kaleidoscope of business models. In terms of returns, the authors depict scenarios where funders will receive anywhere from 10%-45% of award proceeds. The book’s premise hinges on the importance of objectivity when considering dispute resolution remedies.  Check out the link above to find out more about “Third Party Funding of Dispute Resolution.” 

The 5 Most Popular Episodes of the Litigation Finance Podcast

The Litigation Finance Podcast features guests from across the global commercial and consumer litigation funding landscapes. With over 60 podcasts spanning five years of archives, we thought it would be interesting to take a look at the five top podcasts in terms of viewer traffic. It should be noted that the Litigation Finance industry is growing by leaps and bounds, and as new entrants emerge into the space, many come to our site and listen to recent episodes of the LFJ Podcast, hence there is a recency bias in the traffic numbers (the earliest episode on our list comes from March of 2020). That said, below are some key takeaways from our five most popular episodes: #5) Dan Bush, CIO and Director of Innovation, Law Finance Group As CIO and Director of Innovation, Dan Bush wears many hats. He has been with Law Finance for more than a decade, and helped develop one of its most popular products: AR Now. AR Now was created to solve a specific and widespread problem for law firms—clients who won’t, or can’t, pay their bills. Increasingly, clients are approaching law firms demanding steep discounts on legal bills they can’t make good on. Law Finance Group (LFG) offers firms the ability to establish payment plans with clients without impacting the firm’s bottom line. Law firm invoices can be monetized, avoiding sending clients to collections. After all, non-paying clients can impact more than operating budgets. Lines of credit, bonuses, recruitment, even firm salaries may be affected. Perhaps best of all, LFG’s involvement in the creation of payment plans remains clandestine. While this plan was developed due to COVID-related circumstances, Bush sees it outliving the impending return to normalcy. “Everybody was presented with kind of a dire situation, right? With the pandemic, the shutdown, all the economic fallout from that really provided the impetus to get this going. We really see how the product works beyond the COVID pandemic to help law firms help their clients while still bringing money into the firm.” LFG works with firms of all sizes from boutique to leading law firms. It will look at cases in any stage of the litigation process, to see how funding can help. LFG has the equity needed to invest in a wide array of cases and portfolios. It may even offer terms with partial recourse to keep fees down and percentages low. As Bush explains, flexibility is key. “A lot of firms are taking more risks than they would in the past--taking some contingent upside risk, if not a full contingency. They’re coming up with hybrid arrangements, taking some percentages of the hourly fees, which has some contingent upside.” Firms can apply to the AR Now program with a short application that is followed by due diligence and the signing of an NDA. AR Now agreements may cover a single client, small groups, or other arrangements as needed. The bottom line is that firms can take more risks when facilitating payments. It’s a ‘better late than never’ philosophy that works for firms and their clients alike. #4) Elena Rey, Partner, Brown Rudnick In addition to being a Partner at Brown Rudnick, Elena Rey is a member of the Litigation Funding Working Group—which, at the time of this interview, was in the process of creating standardized documentation for funding contracts. Why focus on standardized documentation? Rey explains: “We’ve been seeing a number of trends in the Litigation Finance market in Europe recently. This includes the diversification for funders. So, besides the core of traditional litigation funders, more and more lenders are coming into the space.” Standardizing funding documentation promises many benefits, including shortening the onboarding process and allowing firms to services a wider range of case types. It increases the level of protection for all parties, and speeds the development of secondary markets. Standardized documentation can also be used as part of the negotiation process, as a viable starting point when hammering out details. The current working group has grown into 80 members, including major funders, family offices, insurers, leading law firms and barristers, and private funders. Essentially, professionals from all over the industry are making their voices heard—with the unexpected advantage of encouraging cross-disciplinary discussion on major industry issues. And there is certainly a need for flexibility. As Rey details, all funding is bespoke at its core. Client needs are unique to each case. Commercial funders may be most impacted by standardized documentation, which promises to improve transparency and the quality of terms overall. The first set of documentation from the Working Group is set to be released as early as June of this year. It will focus on insurance, and will serve to demonstrate how impactful this advancement can be on the overall industry.  #3) Christopher DeLise, Chief Executive Officer, Delta Capital Partners  Having been founded in 2011, Delta was an early entrant into the funding industry. Delta sets itself apart by getting term sheets to potential clients with blazing speed after a very short vetting process. Many cases at Delta are vetted and have funding deployed within 48-hours—an extremely fast turnaround in the Commercial Litigation Finance space. The use of standardized documentation also leads to greater clarity and speed—helping clients make more informed decisions about their options. DeLise explains that when it comes to funding, the speed of the process can have a huge impact on origination and client satisfaction. Because Delta has been in the funding game for so long, the company has been at the forefront of the industry’s development since its inception. DeLise explains, “Part of the excitement of this industry, for me personally, is having been an early pioneer and seeing all the changes that have occurred.” In the beginning, much time was spent educating law firms and investors about the benefits of funding—now, that’s less necessary, as funding has grown increasingly popular. Some of the more sweeping changes in the funding industry include an increased number of products available, as well as the trend of personalizing funding terms to better meet client needs. Because more recent graduates and old-school industry pros are becoming more aware of the benefits of working in Litigation Finance, sourcing new talent is easier than it’s ever been. COVID has impacted all aspects of Litigation Finance. As DeLise says, “liquidity is tightening up globally.” This increases the need for funding—particularly commercial funding. This, in turn, leads to commercial entities eschewing traditional lines of credit in favor of non-recourse funding. DeLise expects that trend to continue into the future.

#2) Ben Moss, Asset Manager and Portfolio Advisor, Orchard Global Asset Management

Orchard Global is, as the name implies, a global finance entity with operating centers in the US, UK, and Singapore. Currently, Orchard Global has about 6.5 billion in assets under management. In this interview, Moss explained Orchard Global’s basic investing philosophy and ideal investment size. Expounding on this, Moss detailed Orchard’s commitment to diverse portfolios, and a commitment to making room for non-traditional funding offerings. In Europe, increased demand for litigation funding, particularly in the EU, Germany, and the Netherlands, as well as US markets, has flourished through the rise of collective actions and insolvency matters. As Moss explains, “In Europe, we see an increased awareness, appetite, and adoption of Litigation Finance.” As the legal stage is set for a post-COVID return to normalcy (hopefully), backlogs are slowly being resolved. Class actions in particular were stymied by delays and closures—though some of this was mitigated through remote working and advancements in legal and financial tech. Moss opines that COVID has actually been helpful in terms of advancing Litigation Finance, particularly commercial funding. “In terms of opportunity going forward, we see a high demand for Litigation Finance for two reasons: There will be more claims generally, and also the increased use of Litigation Finance as a tool to fund claims.” Orchard Global sets itself apart from competitors with a small team and clearly defined roles. Team members often take cases from origination through to completion—rather than handing off clients to different departments at different stages of the case. This, in turn, promotes client confidence and improves the experience of investors and clients alike. The industry is buzzing with news of upcoming attempts at standardized documentation, which promises to increase transparency and worker efficiency. Arriving as quickly as Q2, these standardized documents will outline terms for a number of types of funding. This brings about concerns regarding bespoke agreements, and the overall need for flexibility. Ultimately, Moss is expecting great things for the future of Litigation Finance, as it flourishes and develops in exciting new ways.

#1) Cesar Bello, Partner in charge of alternative asset and portfolio management, Corbin Capital Partners

Corbin Capital specializes in commercial multi-strategy and bespoke global portfolio investing. Currently, Corbin has nearly nine billion in assets under management. In this interview, Bello summarizes the appeal of Litigation Finance as an investment, saying, “It’s particularly attractive in times of market volatility, where you expect more fat tails. We think there’s a good change that type of environment will persist in the near term.” The potential for outside returns and the sought-after nature of uncorrelated assets only enhances its appeal. Describing what fund managers look at in terms of vital metrics, he explains that methodology, track record, and valuation are at the forefront. Knowing one’s place in the industry is an essential part of finding your market and sourcing cases. Risk assessment is also important, especially how risk is structured and whether or not it’s seen as completely binary, or more nuanced. On the subject of ESG investing, Bello is clear that tackling environmental, social, and governmental issues through funding is an important factor in increasing access to justice. This can include mass torts, though the Volkswagen emission case was a very public miss. Still, the thoughtful application of funds toward ESG issues is vital for clients—and for investors looking toward lucrative investments that also support the public good. Looking ahead, the industry can expect growth and price compression in the near future. Bello predicts that secondary markets will become increasingly important going forward.

Stonward’s Director Hails Litigation Funding 

Guido Demarco (Director and head of legal assets at Stonward) says that there is a learning curve to understanding the global litigation finance ecosystem. Mr. Demarco was interviewed by the Leaders League about the industry's current climate and what leaders in law should keep in mind for the future. Mr. Demarco suggests that as the global financial population becomes more familiar with litigation finance, people will begin to reap the benefits of third party investment.  Meanwhile, Mr. Demarco warns that the policy decisions being made from Australia to New York State have the ability to shape and mold the future of litigation investment. Demarco says that 2022 will be a pivotal year for the industry, as lawmakers debate meaningful litigation finance regulation.  Demarco also suggests that litigation finance portfolio building is gaining momentum as one of the industry's most valuable product opportunities. In the same vein, Mr. Demarco suggests that those who build close relationships with notable legal professionals stand to benefit from legacy relationships in litigation finance.  Demarco says that one of the major misconceptions about litigation investment is the notion that third party funders help breed ‘frivolous’ claims, rather than facilitate access to justice. Click here to learn more about Demarco’s position on the future of litigation funding.  

Video and Whitepaper: Woodsford’s Practical Guide to Litigation Funding 

Woodsford recently hosted a webinar discussing the ins and outs of practical approaches to litigation finance. Topics covered include the benefits of litigation investment vehicles. The five W’s (who, what, when, where, why) of litigation finance. And, what are the necessary functional framework mechanisms (systems and processes) for a successful litigation finance franchise.  You can watch Woodsford’s video feature by clicking here Additionally, Woodsford has organized a white paper as a companion piece to the webinar. Woodsford suggests that there is ample access to funding for cases that have a meaningful opportunity for investment returns.  Click here to watch the video and read the whitepaper.

Forbes Explores SPAC’s $32.6B Medicare Litigation Enterprise  

A new Medicare/Medicaid technology company is leveraging the fundamentals of litigation investment via SPAC, with billions of dollars on the line. MSP Recovery claims it differs from Omni Bridgeway and Burford Capital, in that the company funds and litigates its own cases. In turn, MSP’s focus is on a 50/50 split of awards received between itself and insurers who have overpaid Medicare/Medicaid expenses. MSP says it is sitting on a $1.5T portfolio, and forecasts $87B in recoverable claims.  Forbes reports that MSP is having trouble actually explaining the value of its corporate enterprise. Based in Florida, MSP Recovery engaged bespoke algorithms to locate claims that insurers billed to the government.  Before going public via SPAC, Forbes reports that MSP booked no revenue. In the Forbes feature, legal scholars suggest that the nature of placing values on litigation finance portfolios is more of assessing the value associated with risk.  Forbes notes that MSP has booked a limited amount of recoveries to date. MSP suggests that this is due to many factors, specifically that many of its cases are still in litigation.

Key Takeaways From LFJ’s Podcast With Erik Bomans, CEO and Executive Board Member of Deminor

On the latest episode of the LFJ Podcast, we spoke with Erik Bomans, CEO and Executive Board Member of Deminor. Mr. Bomans discussed recent developments and trends in litigation funding in continental Europe, including what the total addressable market looks like and how that is expected to grow over time, how country-specific jurisdictions are differentiated, some of the main barriers to investing in litigation funding in Europe, and how the regulatory environment across the continent can actually be a benefit to funders. Below are some key takeaways from the conversation, which can be found in full here. LFJ: How big is the European market for funding? How do you assess the total addressable market?  EB: We have conducted our own research and have estimated the total addressable market in Europe at $1.8B, and that includes the UK. It is a small market, we estimate that it is 16% of the total addressable market of litigation funding.  By comparison, we estimate that the total addressable market in the US is $9B. That is nearly 5x bigger than the entire European market.   When we say the total addressable market, we mean the potential for litigation funding. We get to these numbers by looking at the value of the litigation market, and we apply a percentage which is the penetration rate in that specific market.  LFJ: In terms of a country specific breakdown, I imagine most of the activity happening in Germany and France. Your company Deminor has offices in Belgium, Luxembourg and Milan, so there must be a lot of action in these other jurisdictions as well. Is that the case, is there a lot of activity across Europe?  EB: We are active in most European countries. The top countries without a doubt are the UK and Germany.  We estimate the total addressable market in the UK at $800M. The other $1B is spread out over continental Europe. With Germany definitely taking the biggest part, nearly ⅓. . The Netherlands is the third most active country in Europe.  LFJ: What are some of the barriers to investing in the litigation funding market? Can you share some challenges funders find in this market?  EB: There are pitfalls, Europe is a highly regulated market in general. Litigation funding contracts come with mandatory rules with highly regulated rules such as consumer protection. In Germany and France, legal advice can only be provided by practicing lawyers.  One of the areas in Europe where litigation funding has been scrutinized most in Europe is antitrust cases, where some funders have used the assignment level to structure their litigation funding agreements.   LFJ: How does the EU’s regulatory environment provide opportunities for litigation service providers? I want to ask you specifically about Deminor. How does the regulatory environment provide your business with growth opportunities? EB: Antitrust is the next big area of growth, with the UK and Germany taking the lead. With Italy and Spain becoming active in this area as well. Litigation finance is a risky business, but there are new areas of growth in new emerging areas of litigation funding. Definitely, there are new  opportunities there for litigation funders. But it will be important for litigation funders to pick the right cases.  LFJ: What are your predictions for how the EU litigation funding market develops over the next few years? EB: Litigation funding is strongly growing here in Europe. The business is volatile, and no matter how much you diversify, returns may always be volatile.    

Scotland Introduces Movable Transactions Bill

Scotland continues to advance new and innovative ways for businesses to thrive via alternative financial vehicles. On May 25, 2022 Scotland’s Parliament introduced a new bill titled, “Moveable Transactions (Scotland) Bill.” In essence, the legislation proposes allowing ‘movable’ property to be engaged as finance collateral. Specific to third party funding opportunities, the Movable Transactions Bill also includes intellectual property (such as patents) to be engaged as a vehicle to secure advance funding.  According to the proposed bill, a ‘pledge’ can be engaged just like traditional litigation finance agreements. Specifically, the pledge would be a facility that can be used as collateral to issue a loan. The loan would be repaid at a later date, similar to a litigation investment contract. In this case, the non-recourse functionality of traditional litigation finance would not be applicable. The bill’s use for funding litigation may sound abstract, however, the overall concept is innovative as Scotland’s alternative finance sector grows.  As we recently reported, the Law Society of Scotland has covered third party funding’s usage in group actions such as the ‘Post Office Scandal.’ Hence, the Movable Transactions Bill may hold potential benefits to help the people of Scotland finance their way to justice.

State Governments vs. Funded Energy Litigation 

The International Comparative Legal Guide (ICLG) reports that at London’s International Disputes Week attorneys discussed the complicated intricacies of State-investor energy litigation. State governments are becoming more aggressive in entertaining the prospect of investor-focused energy litigation. However, the pitfalls for states can be problematic. State leaders must juggle conceptual impacts of energy litigation at the expense of state credit ratings which could snowball into a host of other potential unintended consequences.   ICLG notes that the normal cross-governmental structure of many state agencies involves complexities in terms of funded energy litigation. Furthermore, litigation investors may approach a case from a totally different perspective if a state party is involved. For these reasons, lawyers discussing the topic at London’s International Disputes Week are hashing out ideas on how to best shape the future of a state’s role in energy litigation.  Similarly, as Litigation Finance Journal has profiled, States are embracing ideas focused on maximizing litigation finance portfolios via savvy litigation investment agreements.   

Mining Bosses Short on Liquidity Turn to Litigation Finance 

Recent actions taken by international governments are forcing many mining companies into contractual re-negotiations specific to mining rights. With sweeping reforms of this nature, the rights of foreign investors may be violated as they seek to claw back any promised proceeds associated with mining investments. With the average investor-state arbitration lasting 4.28 years, costing upwards of $7.49M, many mining executives are looking to litigation finance vehicles to help prime the pump.  Mining Digital Magazine reports that litigation investors such as Burford Capital are looking to profit off the fragile state of the mining industry.  With oil and gas litigation dominating the news cycle, mining businesses are on track for a decade (or more) of intense litigation. Arbitration finance is becoming increasingly popular for mining claims, as mining operators seek to profit from governments who may not be prepared to dole out funds while seeking to protect a country's environment.  Click here to read more about Mining Digital Magazine’s findings.

2022 Lawdragon Global Litigation Fiance Who’s Who 

With the litigation finance ecosystem growing hand over fist, Lawdragon Global has put together a list of 100 leaders in the space. Lawdragon suggests that the worldwide pool of litigation finance talent includes leaders in law, business and finance.  Lawdragon maintains a list of the 100 top litigation finance professionals. Burford Capital scored nine leaders on the list, while Omni Bridgeway tallied 12. Burford and Omni’s scores topped all other firms in terms of the number of talent recognized by Lawdragon.  Lawdragon says the list has been collated through independent research and peer review, claiming its team spends time meeting with litigation finance professionals around the world to assess emerging talent that may find a spot on the next top 100 list.  Click here to review Lawdragon’s full list, and toggle between country, firm and first/last name.

IL Governor Signs Consumer Legal Funding Law

The following piece was contributed by Eric Schuller, President of the Alliance for Responsible Consumer Legal Funding (ARC). Illinois becomes the latest State to bring proper regulation to the Consumer Legal Funding industry with the signing of SB 1099. The Alliance for Responsible Consumer Legal Funding, a major Trade Association for the companies that offer Consumer Legal Funding, were proud to work with Illinois Senator Jackie Collins and Representative Curtis Tarver in the drafting and passage of this bill.  Additional sponsorship was offered by Senators John Collins, Mike Simmons, Mattie Hunter, and Ann Gillespie along with Representatives Elizabeth Hernandez and Jay Hoffman. The legislation was also supported by the Woodstock Institute, the leading consumer advocate organization in Illinois. SB 1099 brings some of the strongest consumer protections in the country involving Consumer Legal Funding. It prohibits companies from:
    • Paying or offering a commission or referral fee
    • Accept a commission or referral fee
    • Make false or misleading statements in advertising
    • Make any decision in the consumers legal claim
    • Knowingly pay or offer to pay court costs, filing fees or attorney fees
    • Provide legal advice to the consumer regarding the funding or underlying legal claim
    • Attorneys who represent the consumer are prohibited from having a financial interest in the funding company
It also mandates that companies that will offer this product must be registered with the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulations and pass a background check and post a surety bond. Illinois will be the first state that will require companies that offer Consumer Legal Funding to Illinois residents that they must make them aware of Financial Counseling programs. “I would personally like to thank Senator Collins and Representative Tarver for their dedicated efforts in getting this important piece of legislation passed.” stated Eric Schuller, President of Alliance for Responsible Consumer Legal Funding, They were not swayed by the opponents of the legislation and ensured that this product can be offered to the consumers of Illinois in a fair and responsible manner.” Illinois joins Maine, Ohio, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Indiana, Vermont, Tennessee, Nevada and Utah in bringing proper regulation to the industry. Brian Garelli the President of Preferred Capital Funding said: “I would like to thank Governor Pritzker and the Illinois legislature for making SB 1099 law in Illinois. The bill added over a dozen consumer protections.  It also balances the playing field between multibillion dollar insurance companies and injury victims that might not otherwise be able to wait for a fair settlement while their case winds its way through the court system.” The law goes into effect immediately.

What Sberbank’s Liquidation Means for Litigation Finance

Litigation Finance Journal has been covering the Sberbank CZ liquidation. New details are emerging regarding the liquidator’s intent to recover creditor losses. Sberbank CZ’s liquidator is trying to deliver on a single sale of the bank’s assets to one buyer, rather than dicing the assets up into numerous packages. In other words, the liquidator is trying to flip the bank in a quick sale.  Seznam.cz reports that Sberbank CZ’s assigned liquidator is debating if liquidation is the best approach, as opposed to insolvency proceedings. Sberbank CZ was classified as a relatively healthy bank before the war in Ukraine.  Seznam reports that the value of Sberbank CZ is similar to a car hitting a wall … In that the bank’s value was still relatively stable before the accident (‘the wall’ being the war in Ukraine).  Click here to read Sezam.cz’s complete update on the Sberbank CZ liquidation.

Terra Common Litigation Fund Prompts ‘Red Flags’ Warning  

Crypto markets are suffering in the wake of the Terra UST stablecoin’s collapse, which came after losing its $1.00 peg. In the process, over  $60B in value was wiped out, leaving token holders confused over what might have happened to the algorithms meant to safeguard the Terra community from such a devastating loss. A common litigation fund has been organized, but many are worried about certain red flags associated with the fund’s launch.  CryptoSlate reports that the social aspects behind Terra’s demise are ‘catastrophic.’ A compensation fund has been organized as a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO). Donors can donate to the fund, and in doing so, gain voting and other administrative rights to decision making functions.  Those concerned with the lack of regulation of cryptocurrencies claim they see red flags associated with the fund, however not much in the way of specifics have been delivered, and thus far no guidance from regulators or attorneys has been issued.   Click here to read more about Terra’s common litigation fund.

£6M in Back Dues Paid to UK Litigation Funder 

Novitas Loans made a 2021 announcement to freeze new loans servicing customer engagement of legal products and services. The franchise pivoted to new business with a focus on growing its long-term customer base. This, as July 2021 balance sheet line items signaled significant losses over the period.  Novitas noted a decision by leadership to audit its customer rolodex and product lines to link and remit the back payments. Partnering with a variety of legal service companies including probate, finance and medical litigation firms, Novitas booked pre-tax proceeds of £10.3M in 2020. From there things worsened, with 2021 figures suffering a loss of £50.6M pre-tax. Making matters worse, 2021 assets under management declined over 15% to  £183M. The firm says it will stay in operation to support existing customers.

Shakespeare Martineau is the United Kingdom’s New LitFin Solution

The United Kingdom is home to a new litigation investment solution powered by Shakespeare Martineau. Quick funding accessibility via alternative sources pair clients to several products, such as conditional fee agreements, after the event insurance, damage-based policies and third party investment.  According to LF Insider, Shakespeare Martineau says that the organization will be coordinating its product portfolio with various funders to provide a full slate of opportunities. This will include boutique and large-cap funders, along with insurers.  This framework will host a marketplace that is home to a competitive broker environment. Shakespeare Martineau will profit from its “FeeManage” product solution that crafts litigation funding products, accompanied by a charge fee.   FeeManage is designed to perform during active economic events that put pressure on corporate executives. Shakespeare Martineau aims to offer its services during times of need. 

Litigation Financing is an Investment in Democracy

The following is a contributed piece from Rory Donadio, CEO of www.tribecalawsuitloans.com There are many ways to look at what those of us in litigation funding do. Is it a pre-settlement cash advance or a non-recourse loan? Is it truly lending, or is it an investment? But far more important than what we call our work, is what we actually do. According to a September 2021 Bloomberg Law Litigation Finance Survey, 88% of the responding attorneys believe that litigation finance enables better access to justice. Without justice for all, democracy fails. So, I submit that litigation financing is an investment in democracy. Since the inception of this industry, back when it was ripe for opportunity and unregulated like the wild west, I have been excited and driven to help real people in their search for justice. We help level the playing field between large, powerful companies and financially damaged individuals who have been harmed. A pre-settlement loan robs the insurance company of the plaintiff's economic desperation they are so eager to weaponize as they strive to protect their clients from accountability. With the litigation funding we provide, ordinary Americans can do the extraordinary — hold the most powerful entities in our society accountable for their actions. What could be more fundamental to democracy than this? We are investing in democracy. Believe it, and never let it go.

Advice to Others in Litigation Financing

When Tribeca advises newcomers to the industry, I tell them to diversify their portfolios to invest in a wide range of cases. I encourage them to prioritize relationships with everyone — with clients, lawyers, the mailman, the person checking your groceries at your local store, that stranger who looks like they need a friend, and of course, other funders and brokers. Most importantly, I advise them never to lose sight of the genuine good you can do with litigation funding. Never forget that we are helping real people in need — that we are investing in democracy. Let me share a story of one of our clients, who I am now proud to call my friend. Derrick Hamilton’s case is one — of many — that clarified how litigation financing is indeed investing in democracy.

When Democracy Falters

In 2011, Derrick Hamilton was released from prison after serving 21 years for a murder he did not commit. He was fully exonerated in 2015. In this country, we say it is better to let ten guilty men go free rather than convict a single innocent man. Yet our judicial system snatched more than two decades of this man's life. Our legal system failed him. As bad as his wrongful imprisonment was, the way he was treated after his release was almost worse. He was released from prison into poverty with no support structure. And when he sued the state for compensation for the wrongful imprisonment — you know what happened next — the state's attorneys stalled. Despite knowing the state wrongfully locked this man away from his family, his friends, and his life, knowing the state owed him compensation for this vast injustice, the attorneys representing New York and Connecticut still dragged out his compensation negotiations for six years. Think about that for a moment. There were no complex issues to analyze or painstaking research required. Nevertheless, more than two decades of this man's life were stolen — a fact recognized by all sides. They delayed his compensation — for six entire years — because they could. They hoped that his financial straits would force him to accept far less money than he was owed, just to make the pain stop. It nearly worked. Fortunately, we were able to help fund his wrongful incarceration lawsuit. I gained so much more than a business deal from the experience.

All Money is Alike

If you are desperate and cannot scrape the funds together to keep a roof over your family's heads, or provide necessary medical care, then every dollar is precious. But when you have enough money to cover all your needs and wants, then every dollar is just like any other. Forever chasing money simply adds up to bigger stacks of paper. But when we invest in people, we create opportunities to flourish. Unfortunately, sometimes these opportunities are squandered. But through passion, hard work, and faith in God, some people turn their chance to thrive into a way to lift up those around them. When this happens, you know your investment has paid rich dividends.

Investing in People Reaps Enormous Dividends

Supporting cases like Derrick’s crystallized my sense of the work we do. I recognized that, in a small way, I was investing in him and our democracy by helping him continue his fight for justice. I initially helped one man. Then, with the pre-settlement funding we provided, Derrick opened a business of his own, and invested in someone else's restaurant. He netted the money he needed to hire other exonorees to work with him, pursuing justice for others still behind bars. He did this all while continuing to fight for the compensation he deserved. When I look at all Derrick accomplished with the lawsuit loan I provided — just a cash advance on the money he was owed — I am both humbled and in awe. I helped Derrick Hamilton, but he, in turn, helped his family start a business and another company grow. He has employed other men in his very same circumstance, others unjustly imprisoned, and together, they help even more people. Every dollar is a duplicate of another, but a single life that is improved reaches far and wide, bettering the lives of others. Whether someone we help plants a garden, raises a child, or creates opportunities for others our society has left behind, it is a beautiful thing. And each of these lives is singular, unrepeatable, and utterly unique. Calculating the way one life can enhance so many others, strengthening our society and making our democracy work just a little bit better is much messier than standard accounting, and more challenging. The math is harder, but it’s so much more rewarding!

Building a Team and Moving Forward

More advice for others starting out in litigation financing — surround yourself with quality people who share your vision. After 28 years in the industry, I now have an incredible staff that does just that. They are open-minded, caring, and hardworking. They dig into the ways legal funding invests in people and strengthens our democracy. They never shy away from the messy accounting involved. What's different for me today, is that I am not afraid of admitting that I have made a mistake, I can own it, and I can learn from it. When I was one of the litigation financing industry’s pioneers back in the 90s, there were no guardrails or guidelines. In many ways, we were inventing the industry as we worked. Together we helped a lot of people, but I also made plenty of mistakes. I lost deals and made loans I should have walked away from, but these mistakes helped to form the man and the investor I have become today. My faith has allowed me the comfort of knowing there is enough for my storehouse. I don't have to have every deal. I credit self-reflection, passion, work ethic, and my relationship with God as the secrets to my success. In addition, the willingness to make mistakes and to learn from them — to grow — is as essential to success in this field as in any other. Each case is so different from the next; there's plenty of trial and error involved. So when mistakes happen, the truth is better revealed because you see the problem more clearly. The goal should not be to avoid failure but to learn from it and move on. My mantra has become, “Yesterday's denials are today's approvals.” I find my passion for litigation financing redoubled. I feel honored to be in a position to invest in our democracy’s justice system.

Where is the Litigation Financing Industry Headed?

As long as we have positive regulation in the market, the litigation financing industry will continue to grow. We must be proactive with legislation to keep companies honest and keep the industry available to those who need it. I see legal funding as a genuinely noble business, where we use our money to help vulnerable people in distress meet their needs and secure the compensation they deserve. Sadly, some see nothing but an opportunity to victimize these people further and take quick profits with no regard to the damage they inflict. Our industry needs sensible regulations that do the following:
  • Rein in predatory lending practices
  • Allow consumers to get the help they need
  • Protect the litigation funder's investment in the case
Currently, there are bills in Kentucky, North Carolina, New Jersey, Colorado, and New York that we are watching closely. At this time, most appear to be positive legislation that can benefit our industry and our clients. Too often, legislators don't understand our industry, or they paint the good and bad actors with the same brush, so it's vital to be proactive as legislation is written and debated. Litigation financing can serve a diversity of clients and needs. Sometimes, it helps individuals pay their rent while settlement negotiations drag on. Other times, it can provide a litigator with the funds they need to hire an expert witness or get an expensive analysis completed that can make their case. It can also be used for operating capital for commercial entities during litigation to cover their costs. Get creative in the way you look at legal funding, and you'll always find people who will benefit from your support. I am the CEO of Tribeca Lawsuit Loans. We fund a wide diversity of personal injury and mass tort litigation. The cases I am closely watching in 2022 include: Lastly, wrongful imprisonment cases will forever be near and dear to my heart. Accordingly, I’ll be fascinated to see how the class action lawsuit against Hertz — for its disgraceful practice of falsely accusing customers of rental vehicle theft—shakes out. The author of this article is Rory Donadio. Rory can be reached by email: rory.donadio@tribecacapllc.com  

Video: Liberty Mutual on Global Litigation Finance Transparency 

Mike Fallon (President of Major Accounts at Liberty Mutual Global Risk Solutions) spoke with Meg Green at Engage RIMS 2022 in San Francisco about the impact social inflation has on litigation finance. Mr. Fallon suggests that greater transparency is necessary from Liberty Mutual Global’s perspective. Mr. Fallon’s interview with Ms. Green suggests that during jury deliberations, jurors should be aware of fundamental funding arrangements that brought the case to court. Fallon notes that social inflation is a byproduct of COVID-19 supply chain disruptions. Mr. Fallon also describes how litigation finance is a prime utility for many who require investment dollars to bring a case to completion.  Click here to watch the interview.

The Attorney’s Litigation Finance Lexicon Handbook 

As the global litigation finance industry flourishes, new phrases, old phrases and modified legal vernacular are molding new products and services. This, as litigation investors build legacy franchises. As industry innovation continues exponentially, it is key for attorneys to have a model guide or handbook to familiarize themselves with conversational industry terms.  Lake Whillans has collated 54 of the litigation finance terms that make the industry go ‘round. Litigation Finance Journal has organized the terms below, click the hyperlink to be directed to Lake Whillans’ definition for reference. 

Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe on Private Litigation Funding 

Representing bars and law associations of 45 countries and over 1M attorneys, the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) has published insights into third party litigation funding best practices. CCBE’s report is in response to the European Parliament’s draft on responsible frameworks for nurturing the future of third party funding. As an added bonus, Litigation Finance Journal has collated 25 highlights to CCBE’s findings.  According to CCBE, funding agreements should be developed around client interest and avoid complications associated with conflicts of interest.  CCBE states that third party funders should be regulated under European law, but also stresses the importance of ancillary legal service providers falling under similar provisions of regulation. CCBE makes comments on the nature of nonprofit organizations and suggests clearer definitions associated with nonprofit client/attorney relationship protections.  CCBE warns of situations where conflicts of interests are generated between a complicated network of counterparties striving to drive returns against ethical provisions of the law.  Click here to read CCBE’s findings, along with our 25 highlights to the report. 

Insolvency Funding in France 

French insolvency proceedings have unique opportunities, according to Insolvency and Restructuring International. Third party funders can be engaged to help companies navigate insolvency proceedings. Oftentimes, French third party funders help companies in the form of cash advance proceeds, yet they also purchase the legal claims of insolvent companies, in the hopes of earning a hefty ROI on the legal claim.  Insolvency and Restructuring International Vol.16 features Alexandra Szekely and Chloé Delamourd’s research into third party insolvency vehicle engagement in France.  Their research covers instances where an insolvency agreement is reached and then purchased back from the original seller, among other unique third party funding instances under French law. For example, the research suggests that third party insolvency funders have prime opportunities to capture value from the receivables of a firm under bankruptcy proceedings.  Click here to read more on the latest insights spanning French insolvency law. 

Law Society of Scotland on Post Office Scandal Litigation 

The Law Society of Scotland shares a new debrief of the Post Office scandal. The story goes: When the Horizon computer system found over 736 sub-postmasters were allegedly grifting from the United Kingdom’s postal budgets, they were summarily punished. However, Horizon’s back office capabilities were later found to contain bugs and other system defects that allegedly found workers at fault by mistake. Enter litigation funding, a utility that many of the former post office workers found necessary to clear their name.  According to the Law Society of Scotland, February of 2022 saw the initiation of a public debate and investigation on the totality of the Post Office scandal’s effects. The whole affair is being dubbed an extreme case of United Kingdom justice malfeasance. Furthermore, the Law Society explains that about 10% of the 736 criminal records have been overturned. A class of 555 claimants have won restitution, totaling £20,000 each.  Click here to read more about the Law Society of Scotland’s take on the Post Office Scandal.

The Legal 500 Lists the UKs Top Litigation Financiers 

Editor's note--Legal 500 first published the below rankings in 2021. This ranking has resurfaced in 2022, though to our knowledge Legal 500 has yet to update its rankings, nor has it published its methodology.  The inaugural edition of the Legal 500 list of top litigation finance franchises in the United Kingdom has been published. Legal 500 likens litigation investment to tennis, in that winners are decided by those who hit the ball out of bounds less than their rivals. The Legal 500 says top litigation investors look to make four to ten times the cost of investment when choosing claims for funding.  The Legal 500 alludes to innovation in the litigation finance space, and cites portfolio funding as the crux of a successful legacy franchise. With safety in numbers, the best-performing litigation investors are navigating market ebbs and flows through portfolio risk mitigation. Litigation Finance Journal has collated a list of the Legal 500’s leading UK litigation financiers below: 

Rankings Table

First Tier
  • Burford
  • Harbour
  • Therium
Second Tier
  • Augusta
  • LCM
  • Omni Bridgeway
  • Vannin Capital
Third Tier
  • Bench Walk Advisors
  • Balance Legal Capital
  • Woodsford

Video: Mass Tort Finance Innovation 

Max Volsky (co-founder, chief investment officer and general counsel at Lexshares), recently profield how Lexshares approaches funding mass tort claims. According to Mr. Volsky, Lexshares often funds firm portfolios composed of meritorious mass tort claims. Mr. Volsky says that Lexshares’ products and services are designed for individual attorneys and large law firms alike.  In the video interview, Mr. Volsky walks through various scenarios of the Lexshares mass tort review process. Volsky says that the non-recourse nature of litigation finance is an attractive feature for many, as opposed to traditional finance options. Volksy says that if a story is interesting and the case has value, Lexshare is happy to consider these characteristics for mass tort funding review.  Click here to watch the full mass tort interview with Mr. Volsky.

The Arkin Cap Debate 

The Arkin Cap has traditionally been a guide associated with governerning the costs of litigation finance agreements. However, over a series of recent rulings, justices in the United Kingdom allude to their own autonomy, given individual case nuances. This implies that the concept of the Arkin Cap is not guaranteed in any litigation.  Insights outlined by Stewarts Law profile though surrounding the Arkin Cap as a binding rule. With various organizational matters part of litigation finance agreements, modern interpretation of the Arkin Cap has evolved. For example, the Arkin case included a litigation finance agreement that only covered a portion of case costs.  Since the Arkin case, similar scenarios have occurred, where justices have precluded the Arkin Cap under other contractual arrangements. Click here to learn more about the latest Arkin Cap debates.    

Global Electricity Cartel Faces Class Action 

Burford Capital is funding litigation exploration of a potential claim that alleges that some of the world’s largest electricity cable makers conspired to inflate cable prices in a fraud paid for by millions of consumers in the United Kingdom. The higher costs of the alleged cable fraud have been passed onto consumers since April, 2001.  According to reports on the matter, a similar cartel operated between 1999 and 2009, in which $319M in fines were awarded. Given that consumers pay for the high voltage cables as part of their utility bills, the new case aims to recover damages and court costs associated with any modern electricity cartel operating at the expense of United Kingdom consumers.  Click here to learn more about the case.

MoneyWeek on Bankrolling Global Litigation Finance 

Top-30 law firms in the western world hold $2T in pending arbitration claims, while raking in $860B in yearly fees associated with litigation. MoneyWeek takes a deep dive, profiling the best techniques for bankrolling litigation finance globally.  MoneyWeek says that the value of high stakes litigation is increasing exponentially. Different approaches to litigation investment include non-recourse, insolvency and crowdfunding so retail investors can participate.  MoneyWeek describes litigation finance as an asset class that avoids cyclical market events that impact interest rates and bond markets. However, MoneyWeek raises alarm bells that cross-border accounting of unsavory litigation finance houses will be a cause for the industry’s eventual consolidation.  MoneyWeek profiles Burford Capital’s approach to the funding market, given Burford’s top position as a global legal funder.  

Litigation Investment Ethics for the Modern Attorney

With $11B in assets under management in the United States, litigation investors are looking to a global market of attorneys who are engaging modern financial solutions to meet client demands and needs. The ethics behind pure litigation marketplace innovation is something that LexShares says is imperative. A collated collection of whitepapers and scholarly articles concerning global litigation investment ethics are below.  Litigation Funding Ethics acts as an organized primer for the modern attorney. The guide explores large jurisdictions such as New York, Delaware and Texas.  Ten of the 12 chapters from the guide explore top ethical insights impacting United States litigation finance innovation. Click here to read LexShare’s insights on ethical matters impacting the industry. 

Litigation Finance Agreement for new representative claim against Google and DeepMind Technologies

Litigation Capital Management Limited (AIM:LIT), an alternative asset manager specializing in dispute financing solutions internationally, announces that it has entered into a litigation finance agreement for a new representative claim.

The finance agreement is to fund a new representative action in the High Court of Justice of England & Wales brought on behalf of up to 1.6 million individuals against Google and DeepMind Technologies for the unlawful use of patients’ confidential medical records.

The claim is for the misuse of private information and arises out of an arrangement formed in 2015 between Google and DeepMind and the Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust. The tech companies obtained and used a substantial number of confidential and private medical records without patients' knowledge or consent.

This representative claim being brought by Mishcon de Reya, provides access to justice and a means of compensation which would not have been viable on an individual basis due to the cost of the litigation process. Not only does it provide a means of redress to those affected by the misuse of their private and confidential medical records but this is also a significant claim for LCM to support and fund.

Patrick Moloney, CEO of LCM, commented: "LCM has a long and deep experience in funding large scale actions, many of which would not be possible without litigation funding. As pioneers of the industry, we are well-placed to support the claim in this action."

ABOUT LCM

Litigation Capital Management (LCM) is an alternative asset manager specializing in disputes financing solutions internationally, which operates two business models. The first is direct investments made from LCM's permanent balance sheet capital and the second is third party fund management. Under those two business models, LCM currently pursues three investment strategies: Single-case funding, Portfolio funding and Acquisitions of claims. LCM generates its revenue from both its direct investments and also performance fees through asset management.

LCM has an unparalleled track record driven by disciplined project selection and robust risk management.

Currently headquartered in Sydney, with offices in London, Singapore, Brisbane and Melbourne, LCM listed on AIM in December 2018, trading under the ticker LIT.