Trending Now
Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Jason Geisker, Head of Claims Funding Australia

By John Freund |
November 11, 2024

Community Spotlight: Jason Geisker, Head of Claims Funding Australia

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.”

About the author

John Freund

John Freund

Commercial

View All
Commercial

FCA Attacks Consumer Group Over Funding in £9.1bn Car Finance Battle

The Financial Conduct Authority has turned on a consumer campaign group in the escalating fight over Britain's £9.1 billion motor-finance redress scheme, questioning how the organization is funded and its ties to the law firm representing it.

As reported by The Guardian, the regulator has urged judges to dismiss a legal challenge brought by Consumer Voice, arguing the group failed to give "a full and frank explanation" of its own interest and that of its solicitors, Courmacs Legal. In court filings, the FCA suggested Consumer Voice had not been honest about its business model or its relationship with Courmacs, and had not disclosed details of its funding arrangements.

Consumer Voice contends the FCA's compensation scheme will low-ball victims of mis-sold car loans, who face an average payout of roughly £829 per agreement — higher than the £695 the regulator floated in its earlier consultation, but still, the group argues, well short of fair value. Lenders including Lloyds Banking Group, Santander, and the finance arms of Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz are on the hook for the £9.1 billion the FCA expects the scheme to cost.

The clash places the funding and structure of claims-side campaign groups squarely in the regulator's sights, echoing a wider debate over transparency in third-party-backed consumer litigation. With millions of drivers due payouts this year, the dispute over who speaks for claimants — and who pays for that advocacy — is likely to intensify.

Commercial

Treasury Rejects Longo’s Warning Over ASIC’s Depleted Litigation War Chest

Australia's Treasury has brushed aside warnings from former corporate regulator chair Joe Longo that the Australian Securities and Investments Commission is running short of the money it needs to fund major enforcement litigation, insisting the watchdog is adequately resourced.

As reported by Capital Brief, Treasury said there were no funding concerns around ASIC, despite Longo's plea in May for an urgent top-up at the close of what he described as the regulator's most successful year in court. Longo had warned a parliamentary committee that ASIC's Enforcement Special Account — the reserve built to absorb the costs of large, complex cases — was on track to fall to its minimum viable level by 30 June 2026.

"Absent replenishment, this will impede ASIC's ability to maintain its current enforcement program," Longo cautioned, adding that without additional funding the regulator might have to scale back or defer cases that would otherwise proceed. The account is designed to let ASIC pursue resource-intensive matters against well-funded corporate defendants without straining its operating budget.

The exchange spotlights a tension increasingly familiar to litigation-finance observers: even a public enforcement agency depends on a dedicated pool of case capital to sustain high-stakes litigation, and the adequacy of that pool shapes which matters get pursued. Treasury's rejection of Longo's alarm leaves unresolved how ASIC will bankroll its most ambitious cases as the special account approaches the floor he flagged.

Commercial

Meru’s Withdrawal Highlights the Case for Litigation Funding in India

The decision by cab aggregator Meru to abandon its long-running competition appeal against Ola and Uber has become an unlikely rallying point for advocates of third-party litigation funding in India, illustrating how the absence of outside capital can force even well-founded claims to be dropped.

As reported by Moneycontrol, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal permitted Meru Travel Solutions to withdraw its appeal challenging a 2018 Competition Commission of India order that had closed its antitrust complaint at the preliminary stage. The tribunal noted that Meru's operations and revenues had deteriorated to the point that continuing the litigation was no longer viable.

The commentary argues that Meru's exit is less a verdict on the merits than a reflection of a financing gap. Had third-party funding been readily available, the analysis contends, a cash-strapped litigant might have pressed on rather than surrender a claim it could no longer afford to pursue.

India permits third-party funding — no statute expressly prohibits it, and agreements are governed largely by the Indian Contract Act and Bar Council conduct rules — but the market remains thinly developed and lightly regulated. As commercial courts gain stronger procedural powers under 2026 reforms and high-value technology, energy, and infrastructure disputes proliferate, general counsel and chief financial officers are increasingly weighing outside capital as a strategic tool. Meru's withdrawal, the piece suggests, is a case study in the cost of leaving that tool underused.