The case involving Craig Wright was unconventional from the start. Wright is currently in a legal battle with his late partner’s brother over what could be more than $10 billion in Bitcoin and related IP. The case, which was originally filed in February of 2018, is now cleared to go to trial in August.

Litigation is more popular than it’s ever been. With a predicted spike in litigation just around the corner, plenty of investors are wondering whether or not they should get involved. This rapidly growing industry has gone from just six dedicated lit fin firms in 2008, to over 40 commercial litigation funding entities as of last year. Together, they manage assets of nearly $10 billion.

How big is the addressable market for Litigation Finance? An exact number would be difficult to come up with. What we do know is that the $85 billion number asserted by Omni Bridgeway and others is the subject of much debate. It represents an estimate of the fees that were paid to plaintiff’s lawyers, but is not really indicative of the state of the entire market.

Litigation Finance has taught us that that litigation itself is an investment with its own rules. Funding agreements help by allowing firms to anticipate payouts and expenditures in a more concrete way. 

Litigation Finance has become a booming industry in recent years. While that’s provided untold opportunities to firms and justice-seeking plaintiffs alike, not everyone is in agreement with what the rules should be. Perhaps most contentious is the subject of common fund orders. In short, this is the policy of requiring every member of a class action group to pay a percentage of their award to the funder—even if they did not agree to that when signing on.

An Australian parliamentary inquiry plans to reevaluate the country’s system of class action lawsuits. AG Christian Porter approved the inquiry, which is being held by the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Financial Services and Corporations. Slated for March, the inquiry has been pushed back due to COVID-19 concerns.

Litigation Finance is a complex and growing industry for good reason. It’s a boon to potential plaintiffs of limited means, as it increases their access to the pursuit of justice. It’s helpful for legal firms keeping the balance sheets tight while still pursuing a heavy caseload. Litigation funding is also good for the court systems at large, as funders only want to fund meritorious cases—cutting down on frivolous litigation clogging courts.

This week, the Supreme Court of Canada publicly released the reasoning behind its January decision in a case involving third-party litigation funding. The ruling provides clarity for an earlier act known as CCAA—the Companies Creditors Arrangement Act. The unanimous ruling found that a gaming software company may use third-party funding to pursue a $200MM lawsuit against Callidus Capital Corporation.