Trending Now

Key Takeaways from LFJs Special Digital Event: Key Trends and Drivers for Litigation Funding in 2023

On January 25, 2023, Litigation Finance Journal hosted a special digital event: Key Trends and Drivers for Litigation Funding in 2023. The hour-long panel discussion and audience Q&A was live-streamed on LinkedIn, and featured expert speakers including William Farrell, Jr. (WF), Co-Founder, Managing Director and General Counsel of Longford Capital, Laina Hammond (LH), Co-Founder, Managing Director and Senior Investment Officer of Validity Finance, and Louis Young (LY), Co-Founder and CEO of Augusta Ventures. The discussion was moderated by Rebecca Berrebi (RB), Founder and CEO of Avenue 33, LLC.

The discussion spanned a broad spectrum of key issues facing the litigation funding industry in 2023. Below are some key takeaways from the event:

RB: How does your underwriting change, given the varied risks across different legal sectors? Do you have different IRR requirements for different case types or jurisdictions?  

LH: At various points in time in our process, we are going to be assessing the risk of total loss. Antitrust, treaty arbitration, patent cases are riskier. When we’re calculating expected risk of loss, we take into account the various factors that make a case more risky—jurisdiction, collectability, other factors that dictate the IRR range. That is how we tie the risk factor to IRR, so the returns reflect the risk commensurate for any situation.

WF: At Longford, our underwriting process remains the same across all legal sectors.  But risk assessment is unique across opportunities.  We look at 50 different characteristics for risk assessment.  At Longford, and I imagine the same is true at funders like Validity and Augusta, there is a very strong demand for our financing, so we are able to pick only the most meritorious cases, rather than pricing risk for a range of cases.

LY: We have a very controlled process in our underwriting, and it’s conducted in a very stock-standard framework. But that framework is a continual iterative process. Our underwriting changes as we resolve cases through wins and losses, where you learn things that you didn’t know in underwriting. If we had to build a portfolio like we did for our first portfolio, which was 60-70 investments with $200MM invested—if that took us three years to build at the time, it would take us four or five years now, given the fact that we’ve learned so many other things as we’ve invested. Changes in financial modeling have become far more complex and nuanced as to the particular cases, so the outcomes and scenarios that we run now are far more detailed.

RB: The last prolonged recession helped jumpstart the litigation funding industry in the US. If we do have a prolonged recession, what do you see as the prospects for the industry this time around? Can we expect the same growth post-recession? 

LH: I think it’s tricky to accurately predict the impact of recessions on specialty industries like Litigation Finance, especially when the recession arises out of complicated geopolitical factors. That said, it’s entirely likely that a recession provides a boost for demand.  Legal services will always be in demand, and the cost of legal disputes is going to continue to rise. In tough economic conditions, companies might be pushed to consider litigation finance as an alternative to the self-funding that they historically use for their litigation. This could also lead to an infusion of capital into the market, as investors look for ways to diversify into alternative assets that are uncorrelated to the broader market.

LY: I don’t know if the last recession did jump start the industry. I remember one of the first trips I did across the U.S. – this was around 2014 or so. And there were a whole set of law firms who didn’t know about litigation funding, so they were taking on the risk themselves—they were in effect acting as litigation funders. I think what really spurred litigation funding was the entrepreneurial bent of these law firms, who said to themselves ‘ok we’ve been taking this risk on for our clients, and here is a way we can de-risk ourselves.’ It was that mindset, and it happened so quick. In 2014, I introduced myself, and it was like, ‘Nice to meet you, here’s the door.’ Then two years later, it was happening. You just had very savvy, sophisticated people within the law firms who saw litigation funding for what it was, and they’ve become champions of it. And those same law firms are championing litigation funding even more now, and that will spur the industry forward.

RB: What insurance products look most interesting right now, and are there any you’d like to see in the future?

WF: Over the past two years, the insurance industry seems to have identified our industry as a new and attractive source of business for the insurance industry. There are significant synergies and similarities between litigation finance investments and insurance products, and for the moment, insurance markets seem to be most comfortable placing insurance on judgement preservation, and that is because they perceive cases at that stage of the lifecycle to be more easily understood, evaluated, and priced. But other products are popping up every day—insurance wrappers, which can be around an entire fund, or offer judgement preservation or principal protection, or they could be more bespoke and wrapped around particular subsets of investments.

Offering insurance products for individual investors within a fund, uniquely designed for that particular investor’s risk tolerances is on the horizon, and will be made available to investors and funds in our industry. At the end of the day, the costs of these products will be most important in determining whether the Litigation Finance industry will be able to find a way to work with the insurance industry. The cost of these products will be taken directly from the returns that might otherwise be achieved without insurance, and the evaluation of these costs against the risk that is being protected against, is what will determine whether insurance becomes a meaningful part of our business.

RB: What are your thoughts on the 60 Minutes piece, and the resulting publicity for the industry? Is this a net-positive—all publicity is good publicity, or would the industry benefit from being more under-the-radar, as there might be a mainstream outcry over a single bad actor that could malign the entire industry?

WF: The Litigation Finance industry has made great strides over the past 10 years, particularly when it comes to awareness and acceptance of our offerings among all of the effected constituencies. Litigation Finance also levels the economic playing field, to where disputes among companies are resolved on the merits, rather than on the financial wherewithal and strengths/weaknesses of the litigants. So it’s good for the legal system. I think that the more awareness we can achieve, the more acceptance and more use we will see. I am opposed to flying under the radar—I like the idea that the more that people know about our industry, the more they will see that we are doing good, because we are helping people access justice which might not otherwise be there for them.

Commercial

View All
Community Spotlights

Community Spotlight: Carlos Ara Triadu, Partner, CUATRECASAS

By John Freund |

Company Name and Description: CUATRECASAS - a leading multi-disciplinary Spanish law firm, providing comprehensive legal services to clients across various industries. With a strong presence in Spain, Portugal, and Latin America, among others, the firm is recognized for its innovative solutions and commitment to excellence.  

Company Website: https://www.cuatrecasas.com/en/spain/

Year Founded: 1917

Headquarters: Barcelona and Madrid (Spain).

Area of Focus: Litigation Funding and Restructuring

Read More

International Legal Finance Association Welcomes First Global Director of Growth and Membership Engagement

The International Legal Finance Association (ILFA) today announced the recruitment of Rupert Cunningham as Global Director of Growth and Membership Engagement. In this role, Rupert will work to drive ILFA’s membership growth and retention, provide leadership and management to serve ILFA members, and promote global education and awareness of litigation finance.

Prior to joining ILFA, Rupert served as a Special Adviser to UK Justice Secretary and Lord Chancellor Alex Chalk KC. He advised the Lord Chancellor on courts, sentencing, and legal services policy and shepherded legislation to support the legal finance industry in England and Wales. Before his work in government, Rupert worked as a public affairs and policy consultant, helping build coalitions of clients and trade associations to achieve positive political outcomes.

“We are thrilled to announce the addition of Rupert Cunningham,” said Shannon Campagna, ILFA’s interim Executive Director. “Rupert’s experience working with membership and trade associations to build coalitions across industries and in the UK’s Ministry of Justice makes him uniquely suited for leading ILFA’s global growth and engagement.”

“I am delighted to be joining ILFA, the leading global organization advocating for the legal finance sector,” Rupert Cunningham said. “When I was in the Ministry of Justice, I saw firsthand how important third-party funding is for promoting access to justice, so I am glad to be supporting the industry by expanding ILFA’s membership and helping members amplify their voice with industry stakeholders and policymakers worldwide.” 

Rupert’s appointment demonstrates ILFA’s commitment to expanding legal finance industry representation across continents and extending the industry’s reach with legislative, regulatory, and judicial policymakers worldwide.

About the International Legal Finance Association   

The International Legal Finance Association (ILFA) represents the global commercial legal finance community, and its mission is to engage, educate, and influence legislative, regulatory, and judicial landscapes as the voice of the commercial legal finance industry. It is the only global association of commercial legal finance companies and is an independent, non-profit trade association promoting the highest standards of operation and service for the commercial legal finance sector. ILFA has local chapter representation around the world.  

For more information, visit www.ilfa.com and find us on LinkedIn and X @ILFA_Official.

Read More

The Future of Litigation Funding Regulation Under the Trump Administration 

Following this month’s elections in the United States, litigation funding leaders and industry observers have begun to try and predict what the change in government at the federal level may mean for efforts to increase regulation and oversight of the litigation finance industry.

An article in The American Lawyer looks at the issue of increased regulation for litigation funding through the lens of the election, getting the views of industry experts as to what approach the incoming GOP trifecta might take. With one piece of draft legislation focusing on funding disclosure already introduced to the House, courtesy of Rep. Darrell Issa of California, lawyers and funders alike are anxious to see whether the Trump administration will take a more combative approach to third-party funding.

Broadly speaking, the view from industry appears to be split on whether the attitudes of Congress and the White House will be aligned on this issue. Charles Agee, CEO of Westfleet Advisors, said that “regulating the litigation finance industry does not seem to be at the top of the agenda for the Trump administration”. Whilst Dai Wai Chin Feman, managing director at Parabellum Capital, noted that Trump has previously exhibited a trend towards appointing judges with less litigation experience, which may harm the industry as it could “inject more variability in litigation funders' ability to underwrite outcomes.” 

Paul Haskel, partner with Crowell & Moring, agreed that regulating third-party funding may not be a high priority for President Trump, but suggested that the commonly-repeated claim that funding acts as a route for foreign actors to malignly influence US interests could be “an appealing way for this administration to attack it.” Similarly, Mark Behrens of Shook Hardy & Bacon, suggested that over on Capitol Hill, “the new congressional leadership provides a reason for optimism that there will be increased attention paid to the disclosure of commercial third-party litigation financing and the involvement of foreign funders in U.S. litigation.” 

Seeking to gain some insight into any provisional policy position that the new administration might hold, The American Lawyer contacted the Trump transition team for a comment. However, spokesperson Karoline Leavitt did not provide a direct answer to the question, instead emphasizing that Trump had been re-elected “by a resounding margin giving him a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail.”