Tag Archives: litigation funders

Litigation funders: security for costs

Insurers more and more often face the prospect of defending legal proceedings, which are commenced by an insolvent plaintiff, but are financed by litigation funders. Litigation funding presents legal and strategic challenges for insurers.The Supreme Court of Queensland has recently made decision in favor of defendants seeking security for costs in proceedings which are financed by litigation funders.
There is a longstanding controversy about existence of a legal principle according to which an application for security for costs should be dismissed, if those who stand to benefit from the insolvent plaintiff’s success offer to be personally liable for the plaintiff’s costs. In contrast to the approach preferred in other jurisdictions, the Court found that no such principle exists. Still, the existence of a litigation funding agreement should be taken into account. The Court considered that presence of a commercial litigation funder that shares in the proceeds but not in the risk of an adverse costs order is a powerful factor in favor of making an order for security for costs.

Read full article at InsuranceLawTomorrow.com

Summarized by Natalia Tsar.

Woodsford Litigation Funding in the US

The opening of the first United States office was announced by Woodsford Litigation Funding in July 2017. The funder follows the steps of other investors in the market such as Bentham IMF, Vannin Capital and Burford Capital. The funder said the expansion was a natural outcome of having already funded a number of US cases.

Woodsford managed to employ a team of experienced litigators to its US advisory panel. Many of them are former members of the federal judiciary. And it is a common case, in the US, for them to take up posts within law firms. For instance, Shira Scheindlin, former US District Court judge for the Southern District of New York, said that she was pleased to join Woodsford as it brings its international expertise to the United States.

Read full article at cdr-news.com

Summarized by Natalia Tsar.

Proposed Northern District of California Rule Could Reveal Identity of Litigation Funders

Major players in the litigation funding industry are resisting a proposed amendment to the local civil rules of the Northern District
of California that would require plaintiffs who litigate in that forum
to disclose whether their suits are backed by third-party investors.
Promulgation of a rule requiring such disclosures could have a
nationwide effect, including opening doors to the possibility of
promulgation of a similar rule within the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, the rules that govern procedures in all federal trial
courts in the country.

See full article at TheRecorder

Summarized by Meghan Hallinan