Funding is a new market. Like most new markets, it has massive potential to change as the market develops.
In the light of this, what is likely to happen in the next five years? Continue reading
REUTERS | Jeff Haynes
REUTERS | Jeff Haynes
“What trends are you seeing in the market?” is probably the most common question lawyers ask us after discussion of their individual case. Many who approach funders are curious about the funding market more generally: Who is growing? Who is doing well? And, naturally: when is pricing going to become more competitive?! I have now answered the question enough times that I feel prepared (if not qualified) to give a stock answer. Continue reading
REUTERS |
July 16, 2019
Using NDAs appropriately
Googling NDAs makes for interesting reading. Almost half of the top entries about non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) are negative stories. Common themes include mistreatment at work, sexual harassment and cover-ups. Continue reading
REUTERS | Gleb Garanich
July 11, 2019
CPR 36.17(4): what is sauce for the claimant goose is not sauce for the defendant gander
Paying defendants constantly carp at the cost of litigation and at how much they are expected to pay when they lose. After all, if that were not the case and they paid up without a murmur, there would be no such thing as detailed assessment. Whilst the focus of their disquiet is usually directed at hourly expense rates and at lawyers taking too long to do the work, more recently the operation of Part 36 in its latest incarnation is becoming the focus for their indignation. Continue reading
REUTERS | Rebecca Naden
July 11, 2019
Knight and another v Knight and others: Part 36 offer imposing costs conditions invalid
A Part 36 offer (pre-issue) which imposes a condition as to costs is not a valid offer, HHJ Matthews (sitting as a High Court judge) held in Knight and another v Knight and others. Continue reading
REUTERS | Kim Hong-Ji
As is widely recognised, and often repeated, legal professional privilege serves an important public interest. It allows parties to take professional legal advice, and to prepare for and conduct litigation, without the fear that what they say as part of that process will come back to haunt them later. Continue reading
REUTERS | Yves Herman
In Saint Benedict Land Trust Ltd v London Borough of Camden and another, Marcus Smith J allowed the applicant (Saint Benedict) to vary or revoke an order striking out the applicant’s appeal for failure to file an appeal bundle, on condition that the applicant file a complete appeal bundle within seven days or make a proper request for an extension of time. Continue reading
REUTERS | Henning Gloystein
Administrators and liquidators have always had to take a creative approach to funding insolvency claims. Often lacking the funds to pay legal fees, they have been amongst those to benefit the most from the ability to combine conditional fee agreements (CFAs), litigation funding and after-the-event (ATE) insurance to create a scenario in which an officeholder can pursue litigation with no liability for their own solicitor’s fees, nor that of their opponents, if a claim is unsuccessful. Continue reading
REUTERS | David Mdzinarishvili
June 27, 2019
Children, litigation friends and costs
In Barker v Confiànce and others, the Chancery Division of the High Court considered the issue of costs orders against parties who are minors or their litigation friends. It held that there were no special principles preventing a costs order being made and that the court must consider all of the circumstances of the case. Continue reading
REUTERS | Kevin Lamarque
June 21, 2019
How helpful is witness evidence anyway? The impact (or not) of evidence from a third party in loss of chance cases
A solicitor makes a negligent error in a negotiation between a client and third party. The error leads the client to agree something different to the agreement the client had envisaged. What difference does the error make to the outcome and how should this translate into damages? Does the analysis change where the third party gives evidence and is adamant that the error made no difference to the outcome? These questions arose in Moda International Brands Ltd v Gateley LLP (1) & Gateley Plc (2). Against the background of the Commercial Court’s consultation on witness statements, this case offers an illustration of witnesses’ diminished role. Continue reading