Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Do’s and Dont’s of Regulating Third-Party Litigation Funding: Singapore Vs. France

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. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Asian International Arbitration Journal Wolters Kluwer Health

Do’s and Dont’s of Regulating Third-Party Litigation Funding: Singapore Vs. France

Asian International Arbitration Journal , Volume 16 (1): 20 – May 1, 2020
Download PDF
20 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wolters-kluwer-health/do-s-and-dont-s-of-regulating-third-party-litigation-funding-singapore-rGa3aKywkh

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Wolters Kluwer Health
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer Law International BV, The Netherlands
ISSN
1574-3330
Publisher site

Abstract

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.

Journal

Asian International Arbitration Journal – Wolters Kluwer Health

Published: May 1, 2020

There are no references for this article.