News and analysis dedicated to the commercial litigation funding sector including regulatory issues, case developments, funding activities, and more.

The subject of costs is a contentious and evolving topic. A recent ruling by Judge Marcus Smith has turned some heads in the funding community. It involves a third-party cost…

Litigation funders may purchase claims from liquidators, keeping a portion of the recovery. But there are practical questions that need answers here—such as whether funders may use evidence from previous examinations of the insolvent company’s affairs. In the instance of LCM Operations Pty Ltd; 316 Group Pty Ltd, LCM bought claims from a liquidator, who would receive 15% of any proceeds collected.

It’s clear that the COVID pandemic has changed the way we communicate around the globe. Still, international disputes are still happening and need resolution. Third-party litigation funding is becoming an increasingly mainstream practice that addresses new and ongoing issues alike.

Litigation Capital Management, an AIM-traded firm, announced that it is funding a collective action against Govia Thameslink Railway and its parent companies.

Burford Capital recently commissioned a 2021 Legal Asset Report. Compiled by Bauman Research and Consulting, it surveyed 378 senior financial officers of large companies in Australia, the US, and the UK.

Despite existing for more than a decade, Litigation Finance is considered a relatively new asset class. The market for litigation funding is enormous—as global law firm fees reach $860 billion annually. According to a recent study from Ernst & Young, the market is set to expand even more as post-pandemic litigation is expected to sharply rise.

In the UK, the litigation funding market has reached maturity as an asset class, and as a facet of the legal system. A new report from RPC states that litigation funding assets (both deployed and held by funders) topped GBP 2 billion as of 2020. There’s no reason to believe this won’t continue to increase.

Underwriters at Lloyd’s are currently facing a class action in Australia. Omni Bridgeway is funding the action, which is being run jointly by Berrill & Watson and Gordon Legal.

A collective action against Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd and its parent companies is underway. Litigation Capital Management, a UK funding leader, has entered into a litigation funding agreement to pursue the case.

Clarion, the Leeds-based law firm, has recently announced three new promotions. Stephanie Kaye, formerly senior associate, was promoted to legal director.

Around 400 companies are breathing a little easier now that insurer Hiscox has reached a settlement agreement with the Hiscox Action Group. The amount of the settlement will remain confidential, according to both sides—though a recent test case in January 2021 suggests that the total payout from the six largest insurers should be around GBP 1.2 billion.

Are claimant-focused legal firms and litigation funders intentionally creating a rise in class actions? That’s one assertion of CMS’s European Class Actions Report 2021, which claims that even powerhouse corporates should be wary about litigation funding’s impact.

On the latest episode of the LFJ Podcast, Ben Phi, Partner at Australian class action law firm Phi Finney McDonald, discussed his recent response to the Senate Economics Committee in regard to the proposed regulation of class actions. Ben outlined his response to the ‘rising D&O insurance’ and ‘social inflation’ arguments being made by Big Insurance, and the negative consequences that could emerge if large class actions are over-regulated.

The concept of ‘conscious uncoupling’ was widely mocked when actor Gwyneth Paltrow mainstreamed it during her divorce from musician Chris Martin. In short, conscious uncoupling is a five-step process that helps couples separate and divorce in a less acrimonious, more amicable way.

Book building has begun in two class actions against Lloyds and QBE—accusing them of failing to pay on valid business interruption policies during the COVID pandemic. Both claims are being underwritten by Omni Bridgeway, a leading litigation funder.

On June 21st, Local Civil Rule 7.1.1 went into law. Signed by Chief Judge Freda Wolfson, it requires disclosure of third-party funding in New Jersey. Currently pending cases will be given 45 days to submit disclosure that includes names and addresses of third-party funders. If they are legal entities, their place of formation is required as well.

LawFinance recently announced the completion of the sale of its litigation funding arm—JustKapital Litigation—to Legal Equity Partners Pty Ltd.

A decade ago, all eyes were on hedge funds as they were believed to be the most shrewd investors. After a decade of sub-par returns, that reputation has soured somewhat. Still, hedge funds currently maintain over $3.5 trillion in assets under management.  

One would think that if new laws are being created to regulate an industry, prominent members of that industry would be consulted. That doesn’t seem to be the case regarding Australia’s proposed law that would place an arbitrarily determined cap on fees for law firms and litigation funders in class action cases.

When a loved one dies, thinking about money may be the last thing on anyone’s mind. But it may also be an introduction to the complex and time-consuming world of probate.

Nanoco Group recently released an update in their legal action against tech giant Samsung. The suit alleges the willful infringement of Nanoco IP. The patent infringement suit was filed against multiple Samsung entities in February of last year. Nanoco has accepted financial assistance from a third-party litigation funder in order to pursue the case.

Remember the lawyer from Erin Brockovich? He married a former cocktail waitress. They bought multiple luxury houses and two private jets. If that sounds like the sensationalized stuff of reality TV, that’s because it is! The Girardis eventually wound up on The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills. So what happened?

Critics of Litigation Finance appear to be celebrating Australia’s proposed cap of 30% on potential returns for litigation funders. It’s hard to argue that such a move would not have enormous, industry-wide consequences. Some say it’s ‘unfair’ for funders to reap high profits while claimants, who were actually damaged by the factors in their cases, receive a paltry sum. But who is really taking on the most risk?

We already know that litigation is expensive. We also know that even if a claimant can technically afford a lawyer, they can easily be outspent by corporations and other big spenders who may be practiced in avoiding responsibility. That’s why litigation funding was developed—to level the playing field between the Davids and Goliaths of the legal world.

As of yesterday, the Singapore Ministry of Law is extending the third-party legal funding framework in order to cover more types. These include domestic arbitration proceedings, some cases heard at the Singapore International Commercial Court—and related mediation proceedings.

Debate continues as to whether the New Jersey district court’s new disclosure rules impacting litigation funding are a celebration of transparency or a futile exercise in unnecessary regulation. What happened?