Do's and dont's of regulating third-party litigation funding: Singapore vs. France
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.
Take a closer look at this chapter here!
This article has been published in the Asian International Arbitration Journal