header-logo header-logo

Litigation funding: is the party over?

27 April 2023 / David Greene
Issue: 8022 / Categories: Opinion , Litigation funding , Regulatory
printer mail-detail
120679
Is the absence of regulation enjoyed by litigation funders coming to an end? David Greene examines the ever-closer attention of regulators worldwide

Having had a fairly free regulatory ride, outside of self-regulation, thus far (at least outside Australia), litigation funding is coming under ever closer scrutiny—derived perhaps from its success—and faces challenges in its structure and workings that will cause changes and, perhaps for some less robust funds, demise.

Litigation funding has been riding the crest of the litigation wave for some years. In many cases, it has been a happy marriage between providing access to justice and gaining profit from the proceeds. A well-known example is the Post Office sub-postmasters’ litigation that would not have seen the light of day—at least in the dramatic way it did—but for the funding from litigation finance provider Therium. The Post Office fought every issue, and without funding the claimants simply could not have competed. It is likely the full horror of the facts behind that litigation would not have seen the

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll