header-logo header-logo

Commercial funders versus ‘pure’ funders

20 October 2017
Issue: 7766 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail
nlj_7766_highley

When can security be ordered against non-party funders? Richard Highley & Deirdre Lyons Le Croy report

  • Courts may now be prepared to order security for costs against third parties funding litigation for commercial reasons.

The decision of Hildyard J in The RBS Rights Issue Litigation [2017] EWHC 1217 (Ch), [2017] All ER (D) 173 (May) is a useful benchmark for defendants seeking security for costs on cases where litigation funding is present. The litigation involved applications for security against two different funders. It was a long-running case, involving exceptional levels of costs (£19.3m was sought as security), a very late application and multiple claimants with several (not joint) liability for costs under a group litigation order, making enforcing a costs order highly problematic.

A defendant may apply for a security for costs order against a non-party which contributes to the claimant’s costs in return for a share in the litigation proceeds but the court must be satisfied, in all the circumstances of the case,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll