Burford Capital recently joined forces with InterLaw Diversity Forum for a study on ways to improve diversity in large firms. To that end, a panel of experts gathered to discuss the issue. Included were: Burford’s Elizabeth Fisher, Rothschild’s Sarah Blomfield, Patti Kachidza at M&G Prudential, and David Jackson from Barclays.
NEW YORK, NY, July 27, 2020 – Bryant Park Capital (“BPC”), a leading middle market investment bank, announced today that Multi Funding, Inc (“Multi Funding” or the “Company”) recently closed on a $30 million senior debt transaction with a leading international bank. This capital injection will allow the company to accelerate top line revenue, expand its physical footprint, and operate as a significant player in the pre-settlement space.
Most lawyers know the feeling of a meritorious case moving along well, until it slows, and the funding to keep it going starts to run short. What is the next step when a client lacks the financial capability to continue? Is dropping the case to save funds a viable alternative, even if it means forgoing a potential award?
In recent years, Litigation Finance has taken the world by storm. In many cases, third-party funding has helped ordinary citizens seek justice against much larger entities—even governments. Now there’s talk of Bangladesh adopting the practice. What could that mean for the country itself, and the wider region?
The financial stressors caused by the global pandemic have touched nearly every industry. Legal firms are finding it difficult to cope with remote working conditions, court stoppages, and declines in billable hours—all while trying to address a huge influx in proposed litigation. One expert is confident that Litigation Funding is the ideal way to address shortfalls and keep budgets in balance.
The legal field has not escaped the financial uncertainty plaguing the rest of the world. Even before COVID-19 changed nearly everything, firms were already lamenting the ‘death of the billable hour.’ Some might say that billable hours, while low risk to firms, are not a good model for clients—especially those of average or modest means.
Some continue to debate the need for Litigation Finance. Yet every day we see more examples of the practice working as it should, increasing access to justice for those who might not otherwise have it. One such case involves Nanoco, a business associated with Manchester University. The small business recently filed a patent infringement case against tech giant Samsung.
Across the board, Litigation Finance has become a powerhouse industry—one that has shown remarkable growth since its inception just over a decade ago. Since 2017, the industry has seen at least a 10% annualized increase in requests for funding. This year, a 30% increase accompanies a greater acceptance of the practice in the legal world.
When we think of Litigation Finance, our impulse might be to envision well-capitalized funders assisting large companies. The founder and CEO of Legalist, Eva Shang, sees the business differently. Her model is one of David v. Goliaths—helping the little guys that other funders may overlook.
The most successful Litigation Finance firms are those that act as partners, not merely funders. Funders can join a team at any point in the case and still make a positive impact. John Garda has recently made the move from full-time litigator to assessing funding opportunities for Longford Capital.
Trucking companies, insurers, and employees have been having a rough couple of years. Tax law changes have cheated drivers out of their per diem, making their taxes skyrocket. Insurance rates climb ever higher as large payouts cripple insurers. Some have placed the blame on Litigation Finance, claiming that enabling plaintiffs has had a negative impact on insurers. But is that fair?
An Australian case involving contamination from firefighting foam has settled with what the judge called a “fair and reasonable” amount. The class action over PFAS contamination in three Australian towns has been underway for years, involved multiple law firms and over 500 claimants.
Scotland, like much of the world, is bracing for a spike in litigation related to the Coronavirus. Business closures, insurance disputes, non-payment of rent, and other common types of litigation are expected to rise at least three-fold. Once courts are up and running again, the backlog of cases and filings is expected to take 1-3 years to completely clear.
Litigation is more popular than it’s ever been. With a predicted spike in litigation just around the corner, plenty of investors are wondering whether or not they should get involved. This rapidly growing industry has gone from just six dedicated lit fin firms in 2008, to over 40 commercial litigation funding entities as of last year. Together, they manage assets of nearly $10 billion.
Last year, former law firm managing partner John Garda was recruited by Longford Capital to head up their new Dallas office. This includes underwriting in addition to investment sourcing and monitoring. With more than 25 years of litigation experience, his expertise includes complex commercial and securities litigation, investment banking disputes, real estate, and construction disputes, healthcare contracts, and more.
Bankruptcy cases are expected to increase in the coming months, as companies struggle to recover from pandemic-related losses. It’s been reported that firms across the world are looking desperately to hire more bankruptcy lawyers to help handle the expected flood in new cases.
Despite improved awareness, the issue of gender inequity in law has not been satisfactorily addressed. It’s difficult to say precisely where the problem lies. What we do know is that General Counsel can be doing more to close the gender gap.
Champerty is a word we hear often in connection with Litigation Finance. Despite the term being coined in the middle ages, champerty remains a reasonable issue to take precautionary measures against. The original purpose of champerty laws was to keep litigation from becoming a commercialized business.
Litigation Finance is poised to experience a boom in demand as the world tries to recover from COVID-19. Rampant financial uncertainty creates a need for the funding that insures access to justice for those of few means. Funders are well-capitalized, and preparing to sift through cases to find those with the best chances of success. This is all very similar to what the legal world experienced during the 2008 financial crisis.
Government-owned entity Southern Response is engaged in a last-ditch effort to avoid an opt-out class action over allegations regarding earthquake insurance settlement claims. Policyholders have asserted that Southern Response withheld information allowing them to underpay when settling claims related to the Canterbury earthquake.
The largest divorce settlement in Britain’s history is not over yet. Temur Akhmedov recently lost his effort to keep his money secret from his step-mother—who is still attempting to gain the award settlement from her divorce. Tatiana Akhmedova is utilizing litigation funding from Burford Capital as she pursues her claim.
Lauren Bernstein joined Curiam Capital LLC in March 2019. Her experience spans more than a decade. In this interview, she discusses starting her own business in 2014, why she chose to work in Litigation Finance, and how COVID impacts several parts of her life.
On June 11th, Litigation Finance Journal held a special digital conference on Covid’s impact on the Consumer Legal Funding industry. The panel discussion was moderated by Dan Avnir, Managing Director at Bryant Park Capital. Panelists included Eric Schuller, President of the Alliance for Responsible Consumer Legal Funding (ARC), Kevin Confoy, Chief Risk Officer of GloFin, Paul Galsterer, Founding Partner of The Injury Firm, Lawrence Yablon, Partner at Robinson Yablon PC, and Anthony Sebok, Professor of Law and Co-Director of the Jacob Burns Center for Ethics in the Practice of Law at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law.
How big is the addressable market for Litigation Finance? An exact number would be difficult to come up with. What we do know is that the $85 billion number asserted by Omni Bridgeway and others is the subject of much debate. It represents an estimate of the fees that were paid to plaintiff’s lawyers, but is not really indicative of the state of the entire market.
The current trends of litigation related to intellectual property in Pharma indicate an increase in both cost and risk. Does that mean Pharma cases are a bad investment? One might think so, given how complex patents can be, or the increased risk inherent to Pharma regulations. Even successful cases might later be overturned.
