Practical Law

In my prior blogs I examined “implied probability of loss” as a way of analysing the risk and price of transactions in the litigation funding market. Let’s take for example (and with all the usual caveats about being reductive) a funder that determines that a case has, say, a 2/3 chance of winning and generating for both … Continue reading Funder mentalists: how much does a legal megabrain cost? →

In an earlier piece I proposed implied probability of loss as a means of analysing the risk of a single case investment. In this piece I will use the implied probability of loss to look at cases with different risks at different stages, and then to look at some different models for co-funding transactions with … Continue reading Funding Nemo: do funders fund too few cases? →

There are many ways to price litigation funding transactions, and different funders and their investors may employ different methods even for the same investment. In this piece and a preceding part 1, I explain one method of pricing single case investments using a simplified fundamental analysis where “risk” is reduced to a straight percentage chance … Continue reading Funders keepers: is litigation funding too expensive? (Part 2) →

There are many ways to price litigation funding transactions, and different funders and their investors may employ different methods even for the same investment. In this piece and a following part 2, I explain one method of pricing single case investments using a simplified fundamental analysis where “risk” is reduced to a straight percentage chance … Continue reading Funders keepers: is litigation funding too expensive? (Part 1) →

Litigation funding has typically focused on claimant side investment. Defence funding feels less valuable because it does not so obviously unlock an asset. In addition, the cash benefit of having a funder pay defence legal costs will often be dwarfed by the potential cash payout by the defendant on a loss. And finally, a defendant … Continue reading Litigation funding: no longer sitting on defence →