Trending Now
Commercial Deals

Qanlex Refines its Latin America Strategy

By Harry Moran |
January 3, 2025

Qanlex Refines its Latin America Strategy

Qanlex is one of the few litigation funders focused on providing third-party financing in Latin America, with a dedicated presence in the region. The funder leverages a sector-specific strategy for targeting lucrative case types.

Speaking with América Economía, Qanlex’s general counsel for Latin America, Juliana Giorgi, emphasised that in order to gain a foothold in the competitive litigation funding market, the firm has leveraged “the development of technology.” Giorgi goes on to explain that its in-house software “searches for cases in judicial databases that might interest us due to the value of the claim or the nature of the process”, allowing Qanlex to find suitable claims to finance in the different countries it operates in.

Beyond the use of technology to refine its strategies, Qanlex has also chosen to focus on specific sectors that generate valuable disputes in Latin America. Whilst the construction sector has been a particular area of interest, Qanlex has also found opportunities for niche areas within different jurisdictions. As Giorgi explains: “In Ecuador we have several energy cases that include thermoelectric plants; in Costa Rica, cases of tourist real estate development; in Colombia, oil and energy cases.”

Regardless of the sector, Gorgi acknowledges that Qanlex is “open to analyzing and financing any range of cases as long as they include a liquid asset transfer at the end of which the fund can take the remuneration.”

Secure Your Funding Below
Secure Your Funding Sidebar

About the author

Harry Moran

Harry Moran

Commercial

View All
Case Developments Commercial

Woodsford Objects as FCJ Intervenes in Stagecoach Settlement

By John Freund |

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has allowed Fair Civil Justice (FCJ) to intervene in the “Boundary Fares” collective action against Stagecoach South Western Trains—a case backed by Woodsford—squarely over who should receive any undistributed settlement funds. The class representative, Justin Gutmann, and funder Woodsford opposed the move, arguing FCJ’s stance risks cutting across the court-approved settlement framework and the interests of the class.

An article in CDR reports that FCJ now has permission to submit recommendations on distribution of unclaimed sums, a question that has taken on outsized importance amid slower-than-expected claims uptake. FCJ’s position emphasizes directing residual money away from claimant-side costs and toward consumer-benefiting destinations, including the Access to Justice Foundation or similar channels. The CAT’s permission gives the tribunal a counterpoint to submissions from the class representative, funder, ATE insurers and others, as it calibrates how to treat non-ringfenced amounts after the claims window closes.

Woodsford’s objection underscores the commercial stakes: the tribunal’s approach to residuals could inform how future CAT settlements structure non-ringfenced buckets, adverse costs protection, and any funder fees—particularly in cases where outreach yields limited direct compensation to class members.

Commercial Deals

Lexolent Litigation Fund 1 SP Achieves First Successful Investment Conclusion, Delivering Access to Justice in Landmark DIFC Case

Lexolent Litigation Fund 1 SP, the inaugural fund from litigation funding disruptor Lexolent, and the first litigation fund to be based in the UAE, has achieved its first successful investment in a case litigated before the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts. The matter—Claim No. CFI 081/2023, concerned an unpaid commission claim by Dubai based businessman, Michael Forbes.

Absent Lexolent’s funding, Mr Forbes would have been unable to pursue the case and secure the payment to which he was rightfully entitled. The investment, which was concluded over just 21 months, will generate a very high internal rate of return (IRR) for Lexolent’s Limited Partner (LP) investors, showcasing the fund’s ability to deliver both strong financial performance and tangible social impact.

The result was a resounding success for both parties. Lexolent secured a strong return on its investment, while Mr Forbes obtained a substantial and life-changing judgment in his favour.

“Without Lexolent’s help, I would not have been able to right the wrong that was done to me,” said Mr Forbes. “Lexolent gave me access to justice, and I am delighted to have been introduced to them. I have learned through this experience that not all litigation funders are the same. Nick Rowles-Davies is very much one of the original founders of this industry and is exceptionally easy to work with. His expertise and experience made this transaction straightforward and highly professional.”

Lexolent CEO, Dr Nick Rowles-Davies, commented: “This is a perfect example of litigation funding in action. Without our investment, Mr Forbes would not have been able to secure such a substantial and transformative judgment. It was our pleasure to assist him—and, from our perspective, it was also a very strong investment, particularly given the high IRR that will be achieved for our LPs over a short 21-month period.”

This first win for Lexolent Litigation Fund 1 SP marks a significant milestone for the company as it continues to reshape the litigation finance landscape both in the Middle East and globally. The case underscores the vital role litigation funding plays in levelling the playing field between claimants and well-resourced defendants, ensuring that justice is not a privilege but a right accessible to all.

Syed Mujtaba Hussain, founding partner of UAE based boutique law firm Emirates Legal, acted for Mr Forbes and instructed David Parratt KC and William Frain-Bell KC.

Mr Hussain commented: “This was the first time I have used litigation funding but I will certainly do so again. Lexolent were easy to work with and allowed the lawyers to do their job without concern over fees being met. Litigation funding is a valuable tool and it assisted in producing a great result for Mr Forbes. We are all delighted with the outcome.”

About Lexolent:

Lexolent is a globally coordinated network for legal finance professionals and the first litigation fund to be based in the UAE, offering innovative funding solutions and unmatched expertise in litigation finance. Led by industry pioneer Dr Nick Rowles-Davies, Lexolent connects capital providers with high-value legal claims, delivering results for claimants and investors alike.

Case Developments Commercial

LitFin Accused of Hijacking Kandinsky Art-Theft Suits

By John Freund |

A high-stakes recovery effort for a trove of Russian avant-garde art has devolved into a funder–claimant showdown. The family of the late collector Uthman Khatib alleges that Prague-based LitFin Capital withheld payments and sought to take control of litigation tied to roughly 1,800 works—including pieces by Wassily Kandinsky, Kazimir Malevich, and El Lissitzky—allegedly stolen from German storage in 2019. Dentons partner Heiko Heppner, counsel to the Khatibs, says LitFin crossed ethical lines by conditioning fee payments on the ability to directly steer the suits and even pressing for the Khatibs’ removal from the claim.

An article in Bloomberg Law reports that the dispute has moved to private arbitration in Frankfurt, where the Khatibs accuse LitFin of breaching a funding agreement reportedly sized at €8.5 million. After initially financing recoveries—including a 2024 police raid in France that turned up a large cache—the relationship soured; by late 2024 LitFin had disbursed about €3.7 million and then stopped paying, according to the family. The Khatibs say the funder insisted Dentons take instructions directly from LitFin and would release roughly €2 million in unpaid fees only if it could assert greater control. LitFin CEO Maroš Kravec declined to discuss ongoing proceedings, saying the firm is committed to transparency and will vigorously defend against “unfounded” accusations.

The litigation is in flux following the July death of Uthman Khatib; proceedings against alleged orchestrator Mozes Frisch and the arbitration with LitFin are paused pending estate matters, though a related French case continues. Around 400 works are currently held by French and German courts; the whereabouts of many others remain unknown. The clash lands amid intensifying scrutiny of funder influence, with recent U.S. state measures in Georgia and Louisiana explicitly curbing funder control.

For legal finance, the case spotlights the fault line between capital provision and case control—particularly in cross-border asset recoveries where monetization paths are complex. Expect renewed focus on governance terms, fee-release mechanics, and escalation protocols that minimize brinkmanship without undermining claimant autonomy.