Journal articles: 'Litigation funding'

1

Tweed, Paul. "Funding defamation litigation." Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 63, no. 1 (March 3, 2020): 145–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v63i1.379.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Rawson, Edwina. "Funding update." Clinical Risk 16, no. 4 (June 28, 2010): 143–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1258/cr.2010.010041.

Full text

Abstract:

Funding medical litigation is constantly evolving, and the last 12 months have seen many interesting cases and developments, in addition to proposed radical reforms to the structure of funding. Now, more than ever, medical negligence lawyers need to key abreast of developments, not only in their own area but in other areas of litigation as these may give indication of changes that may come our way. It is vital for patient safety that funding is effective, and that medical litigation remains commercially viable for firms.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Gamino, John. "Taxing Nonrecourse Litigation Funding." ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research 12, no. 2 (September 1, 2014): 85–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/jltr-50939.

Full text

Abstract:

ABSTRACT This article examines the implications of the growing phenomenon of nonrecourse litigation funding. The increasing acceptance and use of such funding raises elemental federal income tax issues of characterization and timing for funding providers and for plaintiffs accepting such funding in exchange for agreeing to share the cash proceeds of any settlement or judgment. Emphasizing the commercial (business-to-business) market for litigation funding as it has evolved, this article addresses the lack of guidance as to the implicit tax compliance issues by testing alternative guidance models that may apply by analogy. It concludes by identifying the single model that should apply and offers a pro forma revenue ruling as a starting point for the government's further consideration of the issues and early promulgation of administrative guidance.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

van der Krans, A. "Third party litigation funding." Onderneming en Financiering 26, no. 2 (July 2018): 30–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.5553/oenf/157012472018026002004.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Heaton, J. B. "The Siren Song of Litigation Funding." Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review, no. 9.1 (2020): 139. http://dx.doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.9.1.siren.

Full text

Abstract:

For an investor, litigation funding is too tempting to resist. Litigation funding promises that most elusive of investment returns: those uncorrelated with an investor’s other investment returns. Litigation funding also invests in a world that seems fraught with possible pricing inefficiencies. It seems plausible—even likely—that a team of smart lawyer-underwriters can identify high-value litigation investments to generate superior returns for litigation funding investors. But more than a decade of experience suggests the promise of litigation funding is a siren song. The promise draws investors into the water, but the payoffs may be meager and rare. While litigation funding has always been controversial with defendants and business trade associations, the real problem is that the investment class is a poor one. First, high-stakes civil litigation is far more complex and random than most investors understand. There are an overwhelming number of ways that litigants can lose and far fewer paths to significant victories. Second, few good cases—from an investment perspective—are likely to find their way to funders. Third, litigation funding is probably prone to optimism bias, causing litigation funders to overestimate the probability of victory in their cases. Finally, litigation funding is fungible with little value added by the funder, suggesting that competition will drive down any significant previously-existing profits. While litigation funding serves a valuable social purpose when it finances meritorious cases that otherwise would not be pursued, we can expect investor success in the field to be rare and likely limited to those funders with the most litigation savvy and the best luck. Nevertheless, investors are unlikely to give up on the space despite the large prospect of poor returns.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Capper, David. "Three aspects of litigation funding." Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 70, no. 3 (October 3, 2019): 357–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v70i3.268.

Full text

Abstract:

This comment reviews three decisions of the Supreme Court of Ireland from the last three years which concern different aspects of litigation funding. Persona Digital Telephony Ltd v Minister for Public Enterprise is about the direct provision of financial support for litigation, something which the Supreme Court invalidated as contravening the ancient principles of maintenance and champerty. In SPV Osus v HSBC Institutional Trust Services the Supreme Court unsurprisingly struck down an assignment of a right to litigate as also savouring of maintenance and champerty. Finally in Moorview Development Ltd v First Active plc the Supreme Court considered when a third party supporting litigation in circumstances not covered by Persona Digital might be required to pay the costs of the defendant should the litigation supported be lost. Persona Digital is a decision of mainly Irish significance, but the other decisions have implications for the wider common law in relation to two matters. The first is whether the difference between financing a claim and buying it is more than a matter of form. The second is the appropriate approach of courts wherever situated to making a non-commercial funder of civil litigation liable to pay the costs of an opposing litigant.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Khoza, Mpho Justice. "Formal Regulation of Third Party Litigation Funding Agreements? A South African Perspective." Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal 21 (August 29, 2018): 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2018/v21i0a3426.

Full text

Abstract:

In South Africa third party litigation funding agreement as a tool that provides access to justice is not legislated with regard to non-lawyers. This article is based on research conducted to determine whether regulating this type of agreement would facilitate in fostering the policy that favours access to justice. A brief comparative study showed that English law permits third party litigation funding agreements in the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. However, unlike in South African law, English law also has a body that regulates the conclusion of third party litigation funding agreements. The Association of Litigation Funders introduced a voluntary Code of Conduct for Litigation Funders in 2011 and an updated one in 2016, which regulates the conclusion of third party litigation funding agreements. The Code of Conduct protects the litigant against abuse by the funder and the funder against non-compliance by the litigant. Despite being a "self-regulatory" legislative initiative that governs most of the funding agreements in England, this Code does not bind non-members of the Association. In South Africa there is no such voluntary regulation of third party litigation funding agreements. Consequently, litigants may be prejudiced by the litigation funder in instances where a funder receives a disproportionate percentage of the capital award. The study on which this article draws investigated whether there is a need for an effective legislative response that regulates third party litigation funding agreements in South Africa. It was found that there is a need for formal regulation with regard to third party litigation funding agreements because there are no clear guidelines on the conclusion of the agreements in South Africa.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Xiao, Jean. "Consumer Litigation Funding and Medical Malpractice Litigation: Examining the Effect of Rancman v. Interim Settlement Funding Corporation." Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 14, no. 4 (November 7, 2017): 886–915. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jels.12167.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Solas, Gian Marco. "Alternative Litigation Funding and the Italian Perspective." European Review of Private Law 24, Issue 2 (April 1, 2016): 253–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/erpl2016016.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract: Alternative Litigation Funding (ALF) refers to any practice whereby an entity not party to a dispute provides capital to claimants or defendants or in any way bears whole or part of the dispute costs, in exchange for a share of the expected financial recovery. For a few years, the use of ALF has experienced some success in certain common law jurisdictions but has not yet emerged in most (European Union) civil law countries. Italy is one of those countries in which ALF has not yet emerged, although court costs have steadily increased in recent years, and practitioners’ claims for access to justice have multiplied. Against this background, after a comparative overview, this article aims to shed light on the current status and issues related to ALF in Italy. In doing so, some Italian legislation that might potentially involve this manner of funding will also be analysed, particularly with regard to the recent reforms of (civil and commercial) justice. Résumé: Le financement alternatif du contentieux (FAC) se réfère à toute pratique par laquelle une entité non partie à une dispute fournit des capitaux aux parties, ou encore assume tout ou partie des coûts liés au litige, en échange d’une part des gains attendus. Depuis plusieurs années, le FAC connaît un succès grandissant dans certains pays de common law. En revanche, la plupart des pays de droit civil de l’Union Européenne se sont pas encore ouverts à cette pratique. En Italie par exemple, le FAC n’a pas encore vu le jour bien que, au cours des dernières années, les frais de justice aient augmenté de facon constante et les plaintes des praticiens concernant l’accès à la justice se soient multipliées. L’objectif de cet article sera donc d’établir un état des lieux des questions liées à l’introduction du FAC en Italie. Après un rapide apercu comparatif, nous analyserons la législation italienne pouvant concerner cette forme de financement. Nous intéresserons ainsi en particulier aux récentes réformes de la justice civile et commerciale.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Hamuľáková, Klára. "Funding of Collective Actions." International and Comparative Law Review 16, no. 2 (December 1, 2016): 127–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/iclr-2016-0019.

Full text

Abstract:

Summary The paper deals with the questions of funding of collective actions. Proper funding has significant influence on the right to the access to the court and is a precondition for the efficient course of litigation in general, specifically in connection with a collective redress. Funding of class actions is also closely related with other issues such as costs and lawyer’s fees, reimbursement of legal costs and moreover.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Xu, Mingtao. "How Does Patent Litigation Affect New Venture Funding?" Academy of Management Proceedings 2019, no. 1 (August 1, 2019): 19480. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2019.19480abstract.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Shamir, Julia, and Noam Shamir. "Third-party funding in a sequential litigation process." European Journal of Law and Economics 52, no. 1 (August 2021): 169–202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10657-021-09707-4.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Mulheron, Rachael. "ENGLAND'S UNIQUE APPROACH TO THE SELF-REGULATION OF THIRD PARTY FUNDING: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS." Cambridge Law Journal 73, no. 3 (November 2014): 570–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0008197314001044.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThird Party Funding is governed by a unique and unparalleled legal framework in English law. That framework consists of: the recent 2014 Code of Conduct for Litigation Funders, its supervision by the Association of Litigation Funders, and sporadic judicial oversight of Litigation Funding Agreements – and with some unenacted legislation in the background for good measure. The purpose of this article is to analyse and critique this unique regulatory regime in several key respects. These include: the capital adequacy required of Funders; the key anti-champerty factors either judicially stipulated or contained within the 2014 Code; the efficacy and fairness of the so-called “Arkin cap”; the grounds upon which a Funder may legitimately withdraw funding; and the impact of recent contingency fee reforms. Overall, Third Party Funding represents an evolving and controversial landscape, both legally and politically.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Legg, Michael, and Louisa Travers. "Necessity is the Mother of Invention: The Adoption of Third-Party Litigation Funding and the Closed Class in Australian Class Actions." Common Law World Review 38, no. 3 (September 2009): 245–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1350/clwr.2009.38.3.0189.

Full text

Abstract:

Australian class actions have recently undergone a revolution in relation to the financing of litigation and group definition. Australia has historically banned contingency fees and adopted an opt-out class action. However, the law now allows for third-party litigation funding where non-lawyers may finance class actions in return for a share of the recovery and for the class action to be defined as a closed class that only includes those group members who have entered into a litigation funding agreement. These developments have important ramifications for class action practice. Litigation funding filled the financing gap in Australian class actions and consequently facilitated access to justice. However, the need for a contractual relationship to allow for the quasi-contingency fee to be recovered led to the employment of a closed class. The closed class dissuaded ‘free-riding’ but also undermined the Australian class action objectives of access to justice and efficient resolution of disputes.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Koski, William S., and Henry M. Levin. "Twenty-Five Years after Rodriguez: What Have We Learned?" Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education 102, no. 3 (June 2000): 480–513. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016146810010200301.

Full text

Abstract:

Twenty-five years ago, the landmark Supreme Court decision in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez effectively closed the door on educational finance equity litigation in the federal courts. In that case, the high court ruled that despite the glaring disparity in funding between school districts in the San Antonio metropolitan area, the United States Constitution does not require that funding among school districts be equalized. Rodriguez was hardly the last word in school finance litigation, however, as educational finance reform advocates have turned to state courts and constitutions to bring about reform under theories of equity and adequacy in school funding. Using the twenty-fifth anniversary of Rodriguez as a milestone for reflection, this article examines three central assumptions that undergird the Rodriguez decision and fuel the unabated litigation over educational finance schemes: that dollars make a difference in educational outcomes, that courts and policy makers can develop standards for what is an “adequate” education, and that litigation will lead to equity in educational finance.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Morrison, Alan B., and Randy Haight. "The Tax Treatment of Alternative Litigation Funding: Some Answers, but Mostly Questions." Pittsburgh Tax Review 12, no. 1 (February 24, 2015): 1–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.5195/taxreview.2014.31.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Mead, John. "Trends in surgical litigation claims." Bulletin of the Royal College of Surgeons of England 96, no. 6 (June 2014): 180–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1308/147363514x13990346756328.

Full text

Abstract:

Civil claims against NHS bodies in England arising from the actions or inaction of surgeons have risen by 66% in 5 years owing to the funding system in place prior to 1 April 2013. Orthopaedics accounts for the largest percentage of claims. The basic legal test (Bolam) has been in place since the late 1950s and has been amended only slightly by Bolitho in 1997.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Cheever, Kathryn A. L., and Peter deLeon. "Fair Housing Advocacy Groups: Litigation as a Source of Nonprofit Funding." Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 30, no. 2 (June 2001): 298–320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0899764001302007.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Bogart, Christopher P. "Dispute ResolutionThird-Party Funding: Helping Companies Control Runaway Litigation Costs." Business Law Review 34, Issue 4 (August 1, 2013): 148–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/bula2013029.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Cumming, Douglas, Bruce Haslem, and April Knill. "Entrepreneurial Litigation and Venture Capital Finance." Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 52, no. 5 (October 2017): 2217–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0022109017000758.

Full text

Abstract:

This article empirically examines the interaction between entrepreneurial plaintiff firm litigation and venture capital (VC). The data indicate that, relative to nonplaintiffs, firms that litigate prior to (after) obtaining VC i) receive financing from less (more) reputable venture capitalists (VCs), ii) are subject to greater (similar) oversight by VCs, iii) receive less (more) VC funding, iv) are more likely to exit through an initial public offering than through an acquisition, and v) are less likely to be liquidated when litigation occurs after VC financing. The results are robust to different specifications, methodologies, and endogeneity checks.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Waye, Vicki, and Michael Duffy. "The Fate of Class Action Common Fund Orders." University of Queensland Law Journal 40, no. 2 (June 29, 2021): 215–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.38127/uqlj.v40i2.5435.

Full text

Abstract:

Common Fund Orders’ (CFOs) have had a significant effect on Australian third party-funded class actions by requiring all class members to make a contribution to the third-party litigation funder’s fee in the event of a successful outcome. This altered past practice whereby only class members who had contracted with the litigation funder would be liable for such a contribution. However in a 5:2 decision in BMW Australia Ltd v Brewster in 2019, the High Court cast some doubt on CFOs, determining that neither s 33ZF Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) nor s 183 Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) provided a legal basis for making CFOs at the outset of proceedings so as to secure litigation funding support. In late 2020, the Commonwealth Parliamentary Joint Committee (PJC) on Corporations and Financial Services recommended that legislation be enacted to ‘address uncertainty’ in Brewster in a manner that would enable CFOs to be made at settlement or judgment. The authors canvass normative arguments as to the merits of CFOs and compare the alternative practice of making Funding Equalisation Orders (FEOs). They also consider the related issue of courts setting overall funding commissions. Given the possibility of legislative intervention, they also review arguments as to the potential constitutional validity of CFOs, a matter that was raised, but received very limited treatment from the High Court in BMW.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Marquais, Olivier, and Alain Grec. "Do’s and Dont’s of Regulating Third-Party Litigation Funding: Singapore Vs. France." Asian International Arbitration Journal 16, Issue 1 (May 1, 2020): 49–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/aiaj2020014.

Full text

Abstract:

Opting for international arbitration no longer ensures a quicker and cheaper access to justice. By reason of the exponential increase of the costs incurred in arbitration proceedings, a claim constitutes both a financial asset and a burden. A number of products offered by disputes funding firms allows litigants to externalize these costs. Funding cases puts equity capital at risk on a non-recourse basis. Naturally, this follows a well-structured decision-making process involving a budget plan and a deep dive due diligence conducted by experienced litigation and finance teams. Different approaches to regulating the funding activity have emerged. While France adopted a hands-off approach which led to the development of ethical and professional standards by concerned stakeholders, Singapore successfully legislated and developed an inspiring model, allowing the activity to thrive in the litigants’ best interests, in record time.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Faure, Michael G., Ton Hartlief, and Niels J. Philipsen. "Funding of personal injury litigation and claims culture Evidence from the Netherlands." Utrecht Law Review 2, no. 2 (December 5, 2006): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.18352/ulr.23.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Raghupathi, Viju, Jie Ren, and Wullianallur Raghupathi. "Understanding the nature and dimensions of litigation crowdfunding: A visual analytics approach." PLOS ONE 16, no. 4 (April 27, 2021): e0250522. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250522.

Full text

Abstract:

The escalating cost of civil litigation is leaving many defendants and plaintiffs unable to meet legal expenses such as attorney fees, court charges and others. This significantly impacts their ability to sue or defend themselves effectively. Related to this phenomenon is the ethics discussion around access to justice and crowdfunding. This article explores the dimensions that explain the phenomenon of litigation crowdfunding. Using data from CrowdJustice, a popular Internet fundraising platform used to assist in turning legal cases into publicly funded social cases, we study litigation crowdfunding through the lenses of the number of pledges, goal achievement, target amount, length of description, country, case category, and others. Overall, we see a higher number of cases seeking funding in the categories of human rights, environment, and judicial review. Meanwhile, the platform offers access to funding for other less prominent categories, such as voting rights, personal injury, intellectual property, and data & privacy. At the same time, donors are willing to donate more to cases related to health, politics, and public services. Also noteworthy is that while donors are willing to donate to education, animal welfare, data & privacy, and inquest-related cases, they are not willing to donate large sums to these causes. In terms of lawyer/law firm status, donors are more willing to donate to cases assisted by experienced lawyers. Furthermore, we also note that the higher the number of successful cases an attorney presents, the greater the amount raised. We analyzed valence, arousal, and dominance in case description and found they have a positive relationship with funds raised. Also, when a case description is updated on a crowdsourcing site, it ends up being more successful in funding—at least in the categories of health, immigration, and judicial review. This is not the case, however, for categories such as public service, human rights, and environment. Our research addresses whether litigation crowdfunding, in particular, levels the playing field in terms of opening up financing opportunities for those individuals who cannot afford the costs of litigation. While it may support social justice, ethical concerns with regards to the kinds of campaigns must also be addressed. Most of the ethical concerns center around issues relating to both the fundraisers and donors. Our findings have ethical and social justice implications for crowdfunding platform design.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Mimoso, Maria João, and Joana Lourenço Pinto. "The Third-Party Funding in Arbitration: A Challenge in Times of Crisis." European Journal of Marketing and Economics 4, no. 2 (October 1, 2021): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.26417/742rno12l.

Full text

Abstract:

Arbitration as a way of resolving disputes between companies is essentially linked to the advantages of arbitration, especially with the speed and neutrality of arbitration, as well as the confidentiality, the possibility of choosing arbitrators with precise technical knowledge in the area of litigation, among others. The parties choose arbitration as a means of resolving disputes, relating to interests of an equity nature, bearing in mind that for some legislators the emphasis is on the availability of rights, arising from the contractual relationship that unites them. The payment of costs is a sine qua non condition for the constitution of the arbitral tribunal. The parties must proceed with the payment of taxes and fees, respectively to the arbitration center they have chosen and the arbitrators they have chosen. Considering that the economic situation of the companies may fluctuate, either during the execution of the main contract, or when the dispute arises, the constitution of the arbitral tribunal and during the procedural iter, the possibility of financing the arbitration was outlined. Third-Party Funding is a figure that involves a third-party, unrelated to the litigation, who will defray the expenses due by one of the parties to the arbitration. It will have as a counterpart the participation in the eventual financial result achieved through the success of the arbitration. As a methodology, in addition to analyzing the state of the art, we will indicate real cases and the reasons for the growth of this instrument, without forgetting the ethical issues involved.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Bao, Chiann. "Third Party Funding in Singapore and Hong Kong: The Next Chapter." Journal of International Arbitration 34, Issue 3 (July 1, 2017): 387–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/joia2017020.

Full text

Abstract:

2017 marks an important juncture for the arbitral community in Hong Kong and Singapore as both jurisdictions are legislating to make third party funding available for international arbitration. The road to reform was by no means smooth, as the author describes through a review of the policy and prior case law in this area. The author goes on to describe the new legislation and anticipated legal framework for third party funding for arbitration in both jurisdictions. This article will compare the regulatory framework and substantive protections provided in Singapore and Hong Kong with their common law ancestor in England and Wales, across a number of areas where the availability of third party funding has generated concerns and controversy. Given the pace at which litigation funding is expanding, the author anticipates further development of the concept in Asia.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Tamlander, Matias. "Proposed Regulation of Third-Party Funding in Investor-State Dispute Settlement." Helsinki Law Review 14, no. 1 (February 8, 2021): 74–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.33344/vol14iss1pp74-87.

Full text

Abstract:

Third-party litigation funding is increasingly used to finance legal claims in investor-state dispute settlement, with financiers funding investor claims against sovereign states in exchange for a share of potentially substantial compensation rendered in eventual arbitral awards. A chiefly unregulated phenomenon, third-party funding has been perceived especially controversial in the context of the investment arbitration regime, a system some allege is already ingrained with inequities. Third-party funding raises numerous policy questions, such as conflicts of interests, disclosure, costs of the proceedings, and even the entire permissibility of the practice in investor-state dispute settlement. This review raises various issues and concerns related to third-party funding in investor-state dispute settlement and presents the regulatory efforts and criticism thereof with regards to the reform of rules of both the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

McCarthy, Alan. "Competition Damages Claims in Ireland: The Damages Directive Improves the Irish System Though Obstacles Remain." World Competition 42, Issue 2 (June 1, 2019): 205–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/woco2019014.

Full text

Abstract:

The Damages Directive and the implementing Irish legislation apply to infringements of EU (and Irish) competition law that occurred on or after 27 December 2016. Irish litigation rules were already well developed but the Directive will augment and add to the Irish rules on disclosure, the effect of national decisions on competition law, limitation periods, joint and several liability, quantification of harm, passing-on of overcharges and consensual dispute resolution. However, obstacles remain to bringing competition damages claims in Ireland. In particular, the absence of any class action system and litigation funding coupled with the lack of any real history of such claims will limit the ability to bring such actions in Ireland.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Avraham, Ronen, and Abraham L. Wickelgren. "Third-Party Litigation Funding with Informative Signals: Equilibrium Characterization and the Effects of Admissibility." Journal of Law and Economics 61, no. 4 (November 2018): 637–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/700216.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Sahani, Victoria Shannon. "Global Laboratories of Third-Party Funding Regulation." AJIL Unbound 115 (2021): 34–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/aju.2020.79.

Full text

Abstract:

Third-party funding, also known as “dispute finance,” is a controversial, dynamic, and evolving arrangement whereby an outside entity (“the funder”) finances the legal representation of a party involved in litigation or arbitration, whether domestically or internationally, on a non-recourse basis, meaning that the funder is not entitled to receive any money from the funded party if the case is unsuccessful. It has been documented in more than sixty countries on six continents worldwide—including in many of the jurisdictions highlighted in this symposium that are experimenting with other aspects of international commercial dispute resolution. Indeed, funding greases the wheels of this experimentation. The true prevalence of third-party funding is likely far greater than we know since disclosure is not presently mandated everywhere. This essay argues that the three biggest global regulatory issues with respect to dispute finance are disclosure, definition, and delegation of oversight and that the global laboratories of dispute finance remain firmly within the control of the private sector with the public regulators continuously struggling to understand and address new developments in the industry. An apt analogy would be that the dispute financiers are driving cars and building spaceships with respect to their innovative financing arrangements, while many of the regulators are aiming their sights at the classic “horse-and-buggy” third-party funding arrangements that are rapidly falling out of use.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Underwood, Julie. "Under the Law: Weighing responsibility for providing equitable and adequate education." Phi Delta Kappan 100, no. 8 (April 29, 2019): 74–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0031721719846896.

Full text

Abstract:

Questions of responsibility for school funding often hinge on our definitions of community. Historically, in the United States, the community that is responsible for education is the local one, but over time, states have taken more responsibility, particularly in the area of funding. In this column, Julie Underwood considers how questions of responsibility and control have played out in the courts at the federal and state levels. There is no federal right to education, and so much of the litigation related to questions of funding equity has occurred at the state level, with different results in different states. A recent federal case, Cook v. Raimondo, however, seeks to establish that students have a right to an education that provides them with certain civic skills needed to participate in the democratic process.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Piletta, Massaro. "The new directive on an EU-wide representative action and third-party litigation funding: An opportunity for European consumers?" Revija Kopaonicke skole prirodnog prava 3, no. 1 (2021): 95–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.5937/rkspp2101095p.

Full text

Abstract:

After years of compensatory collective redress being left to a sort of regulatory competition among Member States, Directive 1828/2020 finally introduced an EU wide representative action scheme, aimed at strengthening the position of European consumers vis-à-vis new market dynamics such as globalisation and digitalisation. The new system, which shall run in parallel with national tools, introduces some innovations such as a cross-border action mechanism, the possibility of adopting an opt-out model and a specific regulation of third-party litigation funding in the context of collective redress. This aspect, addressed already in the 2013 Recommendation, is of particular interest, because third party funding represents a particularly powerful complement to collective redress in easing citizens' access to justice. However, the provisions introduced with Directive 1828/2020 leave some issues open. In particular, the Court's role in managing the funding agreement, with special reference to the funder's fee, and the effect of the funding agreement in case an opt-out adhesion mechanism is adopted are of paramount importance and still need to be addressed interpretatively. In this task, the comparative method will be particularly helpful in analysing the solution which Countries more familiar with third party funding, like Australia, Canada or the United States have introduced or discussed.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Day, Martyn. "The Environment: Modernising Justice?" Energy & Environment 11, no. 2 (March 2000): 217–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1260/0958305001500031.

Full text

Abstract:

In this article I review what has happened in environmental litigation in the Britain over the last ten years as a part of determining the extent to which the litigation process has played a part in protecting the environment. I consider a number of the key cases in the 1990s and the decisions made by the Courts. My conclusions are that the Courts have dramatically failed to protect the interests of the individual; that they have put before the individual claimant or applicant enormous hurdles that are almost insuperable; and that combined with the steadily reducing level of funding in these claims the prospect of these types of claim ever succeeding has to be seriously put into question at what damage not only to the environment but also to the British sense of fairness?

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Kalajdzic, Jasminka, Peter Cashman, and Alana Longmoore. "Justice for Profit: A Comparative Analysis of Australian, Canadian and U.S. Third Party Litigation Funding." American Journal of Comparative Law 61, no. 1 (January 1, 2013): 93–148. http://dx.doi.org/10.5131/ajcl.2012.0017.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Springate, L., and R. Gardner. "Re the Valetta Trust: Landmark decision reached on the validity of litigation funding in Jersey." Trusts & Trustees 19, no. 1 (September 3, 2012): 90–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tandt/tts100.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Reisberg, A. "Funding Derivative Actions: A Re-Examination of Costs and Fees as Incentives to Commence Litigation." Journal of Corporate Law Studies 4, no. 2 (October 2004): 345–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2004.11419923.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Baker, Bruce, and Kevin Welner. "School Finance and Courts: Does Reform Matter, and how Can We Tell?" Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education 113, no. 11 (November 2011): 2374–414. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016146811111301105.

Full text

Abstract:

Background/Context School finance litigation has often prompted funding reforms, but what happens as a result is the subject of considerable dispute. Purpose This article explores design problems encountered in studies examining the nature and effects of those reforms. Analysis After describing the development and current status of school finance litigation, the authors explore methodological complexities associated with estimating the effects of state school finance reforms. Then, following a review of the research literature that provides the most direct and empirically rigorous evaluations of the achievement effects of these reforms, the authors critique a growing body of weaker but nonetheless influential literature focused on attacking school finance reform and more generally on discrediting judicial involvement in public schooling and finance litigation. In the article's final section, the authors review school finance reform in the four states analyzed in an influential recent book by Hanushek and Lindseth, taking a second look at what the book's authors concluded were disappointing outcomes. Conclusions Methodological complexities and design problems plague finance impact studies. Although there are high-quality studies covering these issues, the research appearing to have the greatest influence in media coverage and policymaking is often advocacy-oriented and of lesser quality.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Manuel, Oliver Cojo. "Third-Party Litigation Funding: Current State of Affairs and Prospects for Its Further Development in Spain." European Review of Private Law 22, Issue 3 (June 1, 2014): 439–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/erpl2014036.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract: Third-party litigation funding (TPLF) is a promising and fascinating practice that is receiving increasing attention. However, TPLF is still a novel institution, and hence there exists certain controversy as to what it actually stands for. In order to bring some clarity in this regard, a definition of TPLF will be provided. This definition will be used to compare TPLF with other ways of funding litigation disputes, to investigate its origins, and to examine its advantages and disadvantages. Nonetheless, the main purpose of this article is to shed light as to two supplementary issues. On the one hand, this article will show what is the current state of affairs of TPLF. For that purpose, a comparative analysis of several countries will be provided. This will show that TPLF is commonplace in common law countries such as Australia, though virtually non-existent in civil law countries. On the other hand, in order to determine the prospects for TPLF to expand into jurisdictions in which it has not developed so far, Spain will be taken as an example. This analysis will show that the possibilities for TPLF to grow in Spain are rather promising as TPLF may help overcome some of the challenges currently faced by the Spanish civil justice system. In addition, TPLF seems to be legally viable under Spanish law. Resumé: Third-Party Litigation Funding (TPLF) est une pratique prometteuse et fascinante, qui reçoit une attention croissante. Cependant, le TPLF est encore une institution novatrice, à ce titre il existe un certain nombre de controverses concernant ce qu'il représente. Afin d'apporter de la clarté à cet égard, une définition du TPLF sera fournie. Cette définition sera utilisée pour comparer le TPLF avec d'autres moyens de financement de litiges contentieux, pour rechercher ses origines et examiner ses avantages et inconvénients. Néanmoins, le but principal de cet article est de faire la lumière sur deux questions supplémentaires. Dans un premier temps, cet article montrera quelle est la situation actuelle du TPLF. Pour cela, une analyse comparative de plusieurs pays sera établie. Elle démontrera que le TPLF est monnaie courante dans les pays de common law comme l'Australie, et pratiquement inexistante dans les pays de droit civil. Dans un second temps, afin de déterminer les perspectives du TPLF de se développer dans les juridictions où il n'est que peu implanté, l'Espagne sera prise comme exemple. Cette analyse montrera que les possibilités pour le TPLF de se développer en Espagne sont prometteuses puisque le TPLF peut permettre de surmonter certaines difficultés rencontrées actuellement par son système de justice civile. En outre, TPLF semblent légalement viables en vertu du droit espagnol.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Tate, James O. "Court Decisions and IDEA 1997 Compliance Issues that Affect Special Education Programs in Rural Schools." Rural Special Education Quarterly 19, no. 1 (March 2000): 3–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/875687050001900102.

Full text

Abstract:

This article reviews court decisions and compliance issues of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) 1997, that impact rural public school special education programs. IDEA funding, alternative placement options, and qualitative standard requirements. Select elements of the IDEA 1997 Amendments are of particular importance to rural schools. Those elements are funding compliance requirements, changes in the identification and evaluation of eligible students with disabilities, and the qualitative standards required for providing special education and related services. Rural schools do not receive special compliance exemptions under the IDEA. The article presents court decisions in which litigation has produced guidelines for school administrators regarding use of resources, accommodations, modifications, and qualitative standards in rural special education programs.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Rothbart, Michah W. "Does School Finance Reform Reduce the Race Gap in School Funding?" Education Finance and Policy 15, no. 4 (October 2020): 675–707. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/edfp_a_00282.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper offers new evidence on the impacts of school finance reforms (SFRs) precipitated by school finance litigation, exploring the extent to which the impact of SFR differs by district racial composition. Using difference-in-differences and event study models with a series of district and year (or state-by-year) fixed effects, and a sixteen-year panel of over 10,000 school districts, my analyses exploit variation in funding across school districts, and timing of school finance court orders across states, to estimate the effect of SFR on the distribution of district funding by racial composition. Models include relevant control variables available in national data and results are robust to numerous alternative specifications, including estimating impacts on percent changes in resources (in addition to levels), restricting analyses to districts in SFR states, controlling for additional covariates available in only some years and some states, and adding controls for state-specific time trends. In addition, I estimate changes in New York State to assess whether and to what extent results are sensitive to additional controls for revenue-raising capacity and district costs. Results suggest that SFR can work to alleviate racial funding gaps, though impacts are moderate.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Christman, Ben, and Malcolm Combe. "Funding Civil Justice in Scotland: Full Cost Recovery, at What Cost to Justice?" Edinburgh Law Review 24, no. 1 (January 2020): 49–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/elr.2020.0599.

Full text

Abstract:

In Scotland, there has been an increasing trend for the costs associated with the administration of civil justice to be met by the users of the court system. Such a policy can broadly be referred to as “full cost recovery”. A recent Scottish Government consultation on court fees uncritically continued with this overall approach, but various consultees nevertheless took the opportunity to critique full cost recovery in the context of that consultation and more generally. This article takes up that analysis, in a manner that should also be of interest to non-Scottish readers who may be contending with a similar challenge in another jurisdiction, by critiquing full cost recovery in principle and by offering potential routes by which its implementation might be challenged. It begins by explaining what full cost recovery actually is and investigating its origins, before interrogating some of the assumptions or acquiescence that seems to have developed around the issue and discussing the potential for litigation against court fees in Scotland.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Halladay, John. "Annulment Funding Co Ltd v Cowey and another [2010] EWCA 711 First Plus Financial Group v Hewett [2010] EWCA Civ 312." Denning Law Journal 23, no. 1 (November 26, 2012): 227–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.5750/dlj.v23i1.372.

Full text

Abstract:

RECENT PROBLEMS IN UNDUE INFLUENCEAfter the flood of litigation at the end of the 20th Century, it was hoped that the House of Lords decisions in O’Brien and Etridge would put an end to the uncertainties facing those wishing to take security over a family home. But as seen in the recent Court of Appeal decisions in Annulment Funding Co Ltd v Cowey and another [2010] EWCA 711 (“Cowey”) and First Plus Financial Group v Hewett [2010] EWCA Civ 312 (“Hewett”), there still remain some interesting questions and potential problems for the unwary lender.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Davies, Andrew L. B., Giza Lopes, and Alyssa Clark. "Unique New York? Theorizing the Impact of Resources on the Quality of Defense Representation in a Deviant State." Criminal Justice Policy Review 31, no. 6 (December 4, 2019): 962–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0887403419890650.

Full text

Abstract:

Litigation in New York State has resulted in the allocation of substantial new funding to limit indigent defense caseloads and improve representation provided to criminal defendants. Funding injections have rarely been studied in defense, however, so it is not clear what will be the effects of the new resources. Defense critics expect their impact to be transformative, but empirical scholarship is more pessimistic. We sort between these perspectives using exploratory interviews with the individuals most critical to the planned reforms: executive-level chief public defenders. Conceptualizing defense service quality in terms of “public value,” we find points of deviation from both the optimistic and pessimistic accounts. New York is a “deviant case,” we argue, which can be used to break new theoretical and empirical ground around the question of how resources impact defense service quality.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

Fairgrieve, Duncan, and Geraint Howells. "COLLECTIVE REDRESS PROCEDURES–EUROPEAN DEBATES." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 58, no. 2 (April 2009): 379–409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589309001080.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractCollective redress mechanisms for consumer claims seek both to allow legal systems to accommodate mass litigation without being overwhelmed and to enable litigation to be viable where individual claims would not be economic. The article maps a number of recent reforms and reform proposals relating to consumer collective redress at national level and comments on EU developments. It notes that there is insufficient recognition of the differences between schemes geared at managing mass litigation as opposed to those aimed at facilitating otherwise non-viable claims. There are however signs that a European style of collective redress procedure is developing, which emphasize the role of public authorities and consumer organizations as gatekeepers to collective redress. The EU is unlikely to be able to impose collective redress procedures on national civil procedures, but the EU could prompt Member States to reflect on the need for national reforms. There may be limited scope for an EU mechanism to address the problem of individually non-viable consumer claims. This would however have to address certain fundamental issues such as the opt-out mechanism, cy-près distribution and funding if consumer organizations are to be encouraged to bring such actions. At a legal doctrinal level, it is interesting to note the influence of comparative studies on policy development within Member States as well as at the EU level.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Seemasmiti Pattjoshi et al.,, Seemasmiti Pattjoshi et al ,. "Third Party Funding for Litigation in Dispute Resolution Mechanism and its Recent Developments in International Commercial Arbitration." International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering Research and Development 10, no. 3 (2020): 1153–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.24247/ijmperdjun2020100.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Seemasmiti Pattjoshi et al.,, Seemasmiti Pattjoshi et al ,. "Third Party Funding for Litigation in Dispute Resolution Mechanism and its Recent Developments in International Commercial Arbitration." International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering Research and Development 10, no. 3 (2020): 1153–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.24247/imperdjun2020100.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Singh, Amanjot. "Investigating the dynamic relationship between litigation funding, gold, bitcoin and the stock market: The case of Australia." Economic Modelling 97 (April 2021): 45–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2021.01.007.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Fuqua, Erik. "Two Roads Converged in a Legal Wood: The Intersection of Litigation Funding and the False Claims Act." Indiana Health Law Review 19, no. 1 (February 8, 2022): 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.18060/26083.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

Zorlu, N., R. Nash, and R. Srinivasan. "Ten years on from an appraisal of litigation against English Health Trusts in otolaryngology: What have we learnt?" Medico-Legal Journal 87, no. 2 (February 1, 2019): 88–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0025817218812258.

Full text

Abstract:

NHS Resolution provides indemnity cover for legal claims against the NHS, assists the NHS with risk management and aims to share lessons from claims in order to improve safety. The study aimed to investigate the financial costs of litigation against English Health Trusts in otolaryngology over a 10-year period, to see if any lessons have been learned and identify trends that may lead to a potential reduction in costs and improve patient safety. A Freedom of Information request was made to NHS Resolution for information regarding claims made to otolaryngology departments over the last 10 years. There was a total of 612 successful claims in the 10-year period between 2008/2009 and 2017/2018 with costs of nearly £87 million. Overall, the costs of litigation have increased dramatically, and the main areas for these successful claims can be identified, but restrictions in the detail of information released allows too little insight for improvements to be made to avoid them in future. This continues to be a major problem for healthcare funding and practice.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Stadler, Astrid. "Are Class Actions Finally (Re)conquering Europe? Some Remarks on Directive 2020/1828." Juridica International 30 (October 13, 2021): 14–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.12697/ji.2021.30.03.

Full text

Abstract:

The article provides a brief overview of the background of the new European Union directive on representative actions for protection of the collective interest of consumers (Directive 2020/1828). It describes the basic elements of the directive and explains the major changes that have occurred since the European Commission issued its Recommendation document on collective redress in 2013. The author highlights the issues of the scope of application of the directive, of legal standing to bring a representative action, of collective settlements, and of the problem of funding for collective actions. This discussion puts emphasis on the need to extend legal standing to individual members of the group and articulates an appeal to national legislatures, particularly in Germany, to be more open-minded towards commercial litigation funding and the establishment of a public access-to-justice fund designed to guarantee the effectiveness of Directive 2020/1828 and its implementation.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Journal articles on the topic 'Litigation funding'

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles