header-logo header-logo

Odds on for success?

05 November 2021 / Philip Young
Issue: 7955 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Litigation funding , Profession
printer mail-detail
63036
All bets are off: Philip Young discusses the difficulties of boiling a complex case down to a mathematical percentage
  • Practitioners are often asked by insurers, funders and clients to provide a percentage rating how likely a case is to succeed or fail. Determining this percentage is very difficult, and often results in an arbitrary or misleading figure.
  • Language is just as important as numbers, if not more so, in conveying the key information which is likely to affect the outcome of a case.

Nowadays, in modern commercial litigation, practitioners are frequently asked to predict the outcome of a case, issue or application in the form of a mathematical percentage. General counsel often ask for percentages for their own internal purposes, and the growth of the after the event (ATE) and litigation funding markets has also required lawyers to offer percentages, as many insurers and funders insist on a minimum percentage before agreeing terms. For any competent practitioner, offering a mathematical percentage is often an aspect of preparing any opinion that creates anguish, not least because

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