Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

The Shadows of Litigation Finance

View through CrossRef
Litigation finance is quickly becoming a centerpiece of our legal system. Once a dispute arises, litigants may seek money from third-party financiers to pay their legal bills or monetize their claims, and in turn those financiers receive a portion of any case proceeds. Yet policymakers are struggling with how to best evaluate and regulate litigation finance. There are two problems. The first is an awareness problem. Some commentators consider litigation finance “likely the most important development in civil justice of our time,” but others have hardly heard of it. As a result, policymakers don’t quite understand what litigation finance is, how it works, and what’s actually new about it. The second problem is analytical. There is no scholarly framework policymakers can rely upon to evaluate whether litigation finance is actually good for the legal system and society. Moreover, the existing scholarship has overlooked important welfare effects, risking inefficient and sub-optimal regulatory decision-making.<br><br>This Article addresses both problems. First, it articulates what exactly litigation finance is, who uses it, why they use it and — most importantly — details what is (and isn’t) new about this form of financing. Second, it provides a novel framework for analyzing the welfare implications of litigation finance. The existing scholarship has thus far focused narrowly on the effects of litigation finance on behavior after a claim accrues and a litigant seeks funding. This Article’s framework provides new insights by explaining how litigation finance also significantly affects parties’ behavior before a legal dispute ever arises. Once these “pre-claim” effects of litigation finance are understood alongside the “post-claim” effects that scholars have previously identified, it becomes clear that policymakers should encourage rather than obstruct litigation finance.<br>
Title: The Shadows of Litigation Finance
Description:
Litigation finance is quickly becoming a centerpiece of our legal system.
Once a dispute arises, litigants may seek money from third-party financiers to pay their legal bills or monetize their claims, and in turn those financiers receive a portion of any case proceeds.
Yet policymakers are struggling with how to best evaluate and regulate litigation finance.
There are two problems.
The first is an awareness problem.
Some commentators consider litigation finance “likely the most important development in civil justice of our time,” but others have hardly heard of it.
As a result, policymakers don’t quite understand what litigation finance is, how it works, and what’s actually new about it.
The second problem is analytical.
There is no scholarly framework policymakers can rely upon to evaluate whether litigation finance is actually good for the legal system and society.
Moreover, the existing scholarship has overlooked important welfare effects, risking inefficient and sub-optimal regulatory decision-making.
<br><br>This Article addresses both problems.
First, it articulates what exactly litigation finance is, who uses it, why they use it and — most importantly — details what is (and isn’t) new about this form of financing.
Second, it provides a novel framework for analyzing the welfare implications of litigation finance.
The existing scholarship has thus far focused narrowly on the effects of litigation finance on behavior after a claim accrues and a litigant seeks funding.
This Article’s framework provides new insights by explaining how litigation finance also significantly affects parties’ behavior before a legal dispute ever arises.
Once these “pre-claim” effects of litigation finance are understood alongside the “post-claim” effects that scholars have previously identified, it becomes clear that policymakers should encourage rather than obstruct litigation finance.
<br>.

Related Results

Patent Litigation and the Internet
Patent Litigation and the Internet
Patent infringement litigation has not only increased dramatically in frequency over the past few decades, but also has also seen striking growth in both stakes and cost. Although ...
Measuring the Value of Litigation Finance
Measuring the Value of Litigation Finance
<p><span>Litigation finance has become a focal point of contemporary debates about civil justice yet those debates remain largely theoretical and rest on untested empir...
A Study on China’s Civil Electronic Litigation System
A Study on China’s Civil Electronic Litigation System
China’s civil electronic litigation system has developed against the backdrop of judicial informatization and the construction of Smart Courts, and has gradually taken institutiona...
The Civil Justice Business
The Civil Justice Business
<div> Our civil justice system rests on foundational commitments: to make rights real for those the law protects, whatever their station; to hold wrongdoers accountable, wha...
Biodiversity Litigation
Biodiversity Litigation
Abstract Biodiversity is declining at an unprecedented speed and urgent action is needed at all levels. Noting the growing influence of climate change litigation as ...
How Patent Strategy Affects the Timing and Method of Patent Litigation Resolution
How Patent Strategy Affects the Timing and Method of Patent Litigation Resolution
Abstract Patent litigation consists of non-market actions that firms undertake to access intellectual property rights defined by prior legislation and enforced by...
Joinder of Parties and Group Litigation
Joinder of Parties and Group Litigation
This chapter in the forthcoming book, COMPARATIVE CIVIL PROCEDURE (Remco Van Rhee and Margaret Y.K. Woo, eds., Elgar Press 2024), addresses the joinder of parties and group litigat...

Back to Top