header-logo header-logo

A costs conundrum

Can litigation funding negate a security for costs application? Georgina Squire investigates

  • Litigation funding is on the rise and greater scrutiny from the courts has followed.
  • Funders have looked to the support of after-the-event insurance policies, but these have also been put under the microscope.
  • The ‘Arkin Cap’ is now a significant consideration for third party funders when assessing whether and at what level to provide funding for litigation.

We are all seeing a rise in litigation funding, evidenced recently by the explosion in profits of one significant AIM-listed funder, Burford Capital LLC. Burford’s 2017 Annual Report shows income up by 109% to £341m and profit after tax up by 130% to £265m.

However, with this rise in funding, comes greater scrutiny by the courts of the role of funders in litigation and their potential liability to other parties. Recent case law has increased that potential liability. Funders often look to the support of an after-the-event (ATE) insurance policy

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

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll