It cannot be denied that third-party litigation funding is a boon to justice. In many instances, it’s the only way that impecunious plaintiffs can have their day in court. At the same time, legal funding is a business that depends on ROI for investors. That’s why funders have a lot to say about a proposed new regulation in Australia, legislating a standard minimum return to class members in funded class actions. Some have suggested this guaranteed percentage be as high as 70%. Is that reasonable?
Rachel Rothwell: CJC Review’s Recommendations Expected to be ‘Considered, Comprehensive and Workable’
An opinion piece in the latest edition of The Law Society Gazette magazine sees Rachel Rothwell explore the question of whether litigation funders should be worried about the upcoming Civil Justice Council (CJC) review of third-party funding in the UK.
As Rothwell points out in her introduction, the CJC review is unlikely to see the prolonged timelines of similar reviews we have seen abroad, as the CJC has been tasked to deliver its final report by the summer of 2025. She also suggests that the CJC “will not be starting from scratch”, given that one of the working group’s members, Mrs Justice Cockerill, has a pre-existing involvement in an ongoing research project looking at this topic for the European Law Institute (ELI).
Regarding the issue of whether the CJC review will recommend statutory regulation of the litigation funding industry, Rothwell suggests that whilst there is a member of the Financial Conduct Authority on the review’s working group, “the FCA has so far shown no appetite for that onerous task.” Furthermore, Rothwell reveals that the current draft version of the report from ELI “concludes that statutory regulation would not be the right approach.”
Rothwell also explores other issues that the CJC review may consider, from a greater level of self-regulation through industry associations or the potential of imposing a cap on funder’s returns. However, Rothwell concludes that as we currently look at the review “it is particularly encouraging that it is already drawing together a broader consultation group” and that we can expect its recommendations “to be considered, comprehensive and workable.”