- Error
-
- The template for this display is not available. Please contact a Site administrator.
caylorl@bennettjones.com www.bennett jones.com |
Address
3400 One First Canadian Place
P.O. Box 130 Toronto, Ontario M5X 1A4 Canada |
Telephone
+1 (416) 777 6121
|
Languages
English
|
What does Burford Capital’s deal with British Telecom mean for litigation funding? What does Burford Capital’s deal with British Telecom mean for litigation funding?
This week we gather insight on this question from our ICC FraudNet member in Toronto, Lincoln Caylor, a partner with Bennett Jones, who has written about litigation funding. TalkFraud provides thought leadership on important international legal and financial news related to large-scale fraud, asset recovery and insolvency. |
Last month’s announcement by Burford Capital Limited that it would provide $45 million in litigation financing to an FTSE 20 company, namely British Telecom, signals a significant change in the market. It also provides more evidence of an evolving landscape in the world of litigation finance. Within the same month, Augusta announced that it would fund pre-proceedings costs to allow claimants to determine the merits of an action. Why is this deal with British Telecom so significant? It marks a watershed moment confirming more broadly what many of us have acknowledged for years: that litigation is an asset or liability like just about any other property. Companies are used to dealing with most forms of property and how to use financing to maximize or minimize risk associated with them for the financial wellbeing of the corporation and its stakeholders. Litigation is now a more recognized, analyzed and quantified piece of property than it has ever been in the past. Some say these changes have been slow to happen. Why do you think we’re seeing them now? What’s changed? The legal market and in particular many lawyers are conservative. Assessing litigation and providing some certainty is a difficult business. However, the skills of financial analysis, underwriting and investment banking are now being applied to litigation and the business of law more than ever in the past. To the extent lawyers and law firms are not pursuing alternative ways to deal with litigation beyond the historical model, clients and business men and women are. Why has litigation funding been viewed as less suitable for commercial litigation than for consumer group action or individual claims? Big law wants to act for big business, act in big cases and get paid big fees. This model works until big business starts to balk at the big fee part and or looks for a more creative way to deal with the asset or liability that is litigation. Is this foray into the commercial market a good thing? Why or why not? Good or bad it is here to stay. It will create greater access to litigation, level the playing field in more big claims and more openly be addressed by the courts. As the market becomes more mature it will make litigation finance more accessible, common place and transparent. If this move does indeed signal an evolving marketplace, could it potentially have a negative impact on what has been the traditional market for litigation funding – victims without deep pockets to pursue and stay the course in a legal battle? Anything that expands and deepens the market will create more and different opportunities for law firms and their clients. What impact could the move by August have on the marketplace, and on the future of litigation? Could funding pre-proceedings costs potentially be a cost savings for companies who choose this route, and ultimately be helpful to victims who may secure a quicker settlement? The more front end loaded a case the clearer the merits are for both plaintiffs and defendants. This is a positive development and may get the parties to a determination faster. Lincoln Caylor of Bennett Jones is recognized as a “leading counsel and commentator in the asset recovery field,” by Chambers Canada 2016, and is listed as a Most Highly Regarded Individual in North America by Who’sWhoLegal: Asset Recovery 2015. The sole Toronto member of ICC FraudNet, he is internationally recognized for leading state-of-the-art asset tracing investigations and pursuing asset recovery litigation and enforcement actions in prominent, high-value international financial frauds and other economic crimes. ICC FraudNet is an international network of independent lawyers who are leading civil asset recovery specialists in each country. Recognized by Chambers Global as the world’s leading asset recovery legal network, our membership extends to every continent and the world’s major economies, as well as leading offshore wealth havens that have complex bank secrecy laws and institutions where the proceeds of fraud often are hidden. Founded in 2004 by the Paris-based International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), the world’s business organization, FraudNet operates under the auspices of the ICC’s London-based Commercial Crime Services unit. |