Stay on top of regulatory updates taking place throughout various jurisdictions across the globe.

Pursuant to a case involving bid-rigging from some of the world’s largest banks in 2013, a 2019 dismissal affirmed a longstanding precedent in the United States: Dead people can’t sue….

Five years ago, Essar vs Norscot brought about a landmark decision. The English High Court upheld a ruling requiring that the defendant cover the claimant’s costs associated with legal funding…

Precedent has been set by Kent v. Apple. on the merits of ATE premium privacy. The court ruled that Apple is not privy to ATE policy details, in that it…

Turkey’s economy has been targeted by aggressive international profiteers, according to officials in Ankara. The Capital Market’s Board fined a group of United States banks who signaled clear hawkish intentions…

As the third party funding ecosystem matures, businesses’ organizational systems and processes are sure to evolve. A credit agreement has traditionally served as a loan vehicle to fund litigation. The…

Even with new technology available to funders, solid estimates for the amount of time it might take for a class action to reach completion remain elusive. One way to shorten…

Louisiana truckers pay the highest premiums, according to a new report on trucking litigation finance. The 2021 Highway Fairness Act is hailed by many long-haulers on America’s highways. ‘Justice driving…

Just as Moderna faces a potential COVID-19 patent infringement lawsuit, the Supreme Court and Congress are assessing sweeping changes to United States patent law. All this with a new Patent…

It’s fewer than two decades old, but Litigation Finance has blossomed into an industry worth $17 billion across the globe. Just over half of that money, 52%, is being spent…

Former Communist China has not been known for access to justice. In fact, recent protests in Hong Kong sprung up due to China’s Fugitive Offenders and Mutual Legal Assistance in…

South Africa is experiencing the emergence of litigation funding as a key driver of access to justice. Regulation, however, figures to be the burning issue foreshadowing thorny ethical debates regarding…

Is an award for costs of legal funding an excess of power? Not according to the English High Court. The High Court recently affirmed that tribunals may award costs for…

Access to justice in Germany is awakening a ‘Sleeping Beauty’ (that being litigation finance), according to a new report. Heavy hitters such as Roland, Foris, Allianz and Legial dominated the…

The mainstreaming of Litigation Finance is expected to continue long after COVID. The practice’s use in arbitration has become increasingly common, despite an overall dearth of legislation to regulate it….

A long-awaited report from the Law Reform Commission of Hong Kong was published. On the topic of outcome-related fee structures in arbitration, it recommends that prohibitions on ORFSs be lifted….

Traditionally, English courts are reluctant to interfere with decisions relating to arbitration proceedings. Arbitrators are given broad discretion to manage cases as they see fit. Courts therefore seldom get involved…

A recent Victorian Supreme Court decision represents the first Australian ruling for an application seeking a group costs order. The case, Fox v Westpac Banking Corporation, Crawford v Australia, and…

With the exponential rise in funded claims across Europe, calls for further regulation abound. Similar to what we’re seeing in the US and Australia, many on the continent want to…

Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights states that every citizen has the right to unimpeded access to the courts. Citizens of modest means who cannot afford an…

In any discussion on rising insurance costs, fingers are sure to be pointed at Litigation Finance. LitFin is a $17+ billion industry, with more than half of assets being leveraged…

When surveying funding agreement options, claimants will often come across damages based agreements, or “DBAs,” and litigation funding agreements, or “LFAs.” Both DBA and LFA agreements help clients achieve the…

As the Litigation Finance industry grows, attorneys, insurers, corporates, and even small businesses are seeing the benefits of non-recourse third-party funding. As regulation adapts to these new realities, new opportunities…

Much has been made of the US District Court of New Jersey’s Local Rule 7.1.1, which requires disclosure of any non-recourse legal funding used to support a case. Some have…

The Supreme Court recently rejected the claim filed by Richard Lloyd against Google. Lloyd is the former executive director of Which?, a consumer protection organization. The case involved a data…

An Australian court recently offered guidance regarding when litigation funding agreements will be grandfathered, vs when they’ll be subjected to the Managed Investment Scheme regime. This came in the form…

Law firm ownership has been changing in recent years. Legal professionals in Australia and the UK are leading the world regarding ownership of legal firms. Recent developments in US states like Arizona, combined with a more liberal approach on ownership from the American Bar Association, means that the tide may be turning on this issue. Other US states are considering similar measures, including California, Utah, Florida, Illinois, and Michigan.

With the elimination of ethics Rule 5.4, the state of Arizona loosened regulations prohibiting non-attorney ownership of law firms. Not unexpectedly, this has attracted interest from several prominent litigation funders. Comparable legislation is expected in multiple states in 2022, with Michigan, North Carolina, Illinois, New York, and California already considering it.

As litigation funding grows in popularity and legislation struggles to keep up—much attention is drawn to the outliers who fill funding opponents with fear. Unscrupulous funders get plenty of press coverage, further clouding already contentious issues.

The Australian government’s bid to reform class actions, and by extension third-party litigation funders, is nearing its climax. A parliamentary committee assembled to examine the bill has expressed support. A key argument in favor of increased legislation is that funders ostensibly make profits that are out of proportion to the risk taken and the costs incurred.