Category Archives: Regulatory Issues
Analyzing the Impact of the Supreme Court’s Judgement on Offshore Litigation Funding
In the weeks since the Supreme Court issued its decision in the PACCAR case, there has been much discussion about how funders and litigants will adapt their litigation funding agreements (LFAs) to comply with the DBA Regulations. However, most of these conversations have focused on LFAs for cases before English courts, whilst the potential impact…
Judge in 3M Lawsuit Orders Disclosure of Funding Arrangements
As LFJ highlighted in an article yesterday, the issue of disclosure for litigation funding has never been more prominent, and there is no universally agreed upon solution in sight across the US district courts. However, a settlement in one of the largest multi-district lawsuits in the US has provided another fresh example of this divisive…
Analysing the Varying Funding Disclosure Requirements in District Courts
Whilst much has been made of ongoing efforts to increase disclosure requirements for third-party litigation funding in patent lawsuits, it is important to remember that there is little uniformity in these requirements across the US. A new piece of analysis examines some of the most notable jurisdictions across America, providing insight into recent rulings to…
ABA Innovation Leaders Don’t Want Non-Lawyers Owning Law Firms
Many say the future of law is linked to financial structures such as litigation finance, and similar legal investment products that expand access to justice. Yet, ABA innovation unit leaders have firmly stated their position that non-lawyers should be prevented from holding a stake in law firm ownership….
Impact of Supreme Court Judgement on Litigation Funding for Insolvency
The full impact of the UK Supreme Court’s decision on litigation funding agreements (LFAs) may not be felt for some time, with industry commentators ranging in their forecasts from cautiously optimistic to extremely concerned. However, whilst much of the coverage has been directed at what the overall impact will be on the litigation finance industry,…
Supreme Court Judgement Unlikely to Stem Long-Term Appetite for Funding
In a briefing from Clifford Chance analyzing the nature and long-term effects of the Supreme Court’s decision, Claire Freeman and her co-authors examine the background to the case, breakdown the details of the judgement and offer their perspective on the implications for litigation funding. …
Lexolent CEO Says Funding Industry ‘Not Prepared’ for Supreme Court Decision
As LFJ continues to report on industry reactions to the UK Supreme Court’s decision on litigation funding agreements (LFAs) being classified as damages-based agreements (DBAs), we are finding varied perspectives ranging from cautious optimism to severe concern….
Access to Justice is the ‘Biggest Loser’ from Supreme Court Decision
Whilst it has only been a matter of days since the landmark decision from the UK Supreme Court, with a judgement establishing that litigation funding agreements (LFAs) should be classified as damages-based agreements (DBAs), there has already been a huge amount of discussion and debate about the ruling’s significance….
Ireland’s Implementation of the EU Representative Actions Directive Avoids Tackling Litigation Funding
One of the stories that will be important to monitor throughout 2023 is how each country within the European Union will handle the implementation of the EU’s Representative Action Directive, particularly as it relates to the use of third-party funding for collective redress in each jurisdiction. LFJ has reported on both the Dutch and German…
Irish Law Reform Commission Publishes Consultation Paper on Third-Party Litigation Funding
Although the use of litigation funding continues to increase in many jurisdictions, both in terms of the volume of funded disputes and in the value of the legal actions being financed, those countries where its use is still prohibited are often proving slow to move towards a welcoming regulatory environment. Ireland is one such jurisdiction…
