Oliver v Sheffield City Council [2017] EWCA Civ. 225 – Tanfield Chambers

‘A local authority was required to give credit to leaseholders for funds received from third-parties when recovering a contribution to the cost of major works.’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 1st June 2017

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

In re RBS rights issue litigation (No 2) – WLR Daily

Posted June 7th, 2017 in civil procedure rules, costs, insurance, law reports, third parties by sally

In re RBS rights issue litigation (No 2) [2017] EWHC 1217 (Ch)

‘Subsequent to the defendant bank and its directors having learnt of the identity of the third party funders of the claimants following a successful application made under CPR r 25.14, the defendants sought security for costs pursuant to CPR r 25.14(2)(b) against those funders. That application was prompted by settlements with some of the original claimants, as a result of which the remaining claimants’ exposure to adverse costs increased, and by the defendants learning that the claimants did not have adequate after-the-event (“ATE”) insurance cover in place. The first respondent, a commercial funder and British Virgin Islands entity, opposed the application on the grounds that: (a) its financial position was such that it would be well able to meet any award for costs and in any event the defendants had not demonstrated that the claimants would fail to meet a costs award against them; and (b) the application was made extremely late and therefore caused it and the claimants real prejudice. The second respondent, an Isle of Man entity that was not in the business of litigation funding and provided funding close to the eve of trial, opposed the application on the grounds that: (a) it was unlikely that a section 51 order would be made against it in due course; and (b) no security was justified or necessary on the evidence and the timing was oppressive. Both respondents also argued that: (c) the quantum of security sought was excessive.’

WLR Daily, 23rd May 2017

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

“Don’t call them McKenzie friends” – Court of Appeal looks to counter growth of unqualified advisers in crime cases – Legal Futures

‘The term “McKenzie friend” is not appropriate in the criminal division of the Court of Appeal, the vice-president of the court has said in a ruling detailing the problems that the increasing number of “unqualified third parties” is causing.’

Full story

Legal Futures, 26th May 2017

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

Unregistered barrister allowed to serve claim for LiP – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted May 24th, 2017 in barristers, documents, judges, litigants in person, news, service, third parties by sally

‘A litigant in person has been allowed to serve their claim through an unregistered barrister, despite protestations it was unlawful.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 22nd May 2017

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

The Role in of Section.10a (s.10a)in Confiscation Order Enforcements – A Useful Tool for Local Authorities to get it Right First Time – Drystone Chambers

Posted May 16th, 2017 in confiscation, enforcement, local government, news, third parties by sally

‘On the 1st June 2015, the Serous Crime Act 2015 enacted section 10a of POCA 2002. The section is designed to allow Crown Courts to make a determination on third party rights at the confiscation hearing rather than leaving the decision to the enforcement hearing in the Magistrates Court or in another forum such as in the family courts.’

Full story (PDF)

Drystone Chambers, 15th May 2017

Source: www.drystone.com

Third Party Litigation Funding Continues to Grow – Litigation Futures

Posted May 4th, 2017 in legal services, news, third parties by sally

‘With court fees rising and litigation becoming increasingly expensive, third party litigation funding continues to grow. There are various reasons clients may want to consider litigation funding, such as the need for a cash injection to enable them to get their case off the ground or the desire to take the litigation risk off their balance sheet and avoid having funds tied up in lengthy legal battles. Litigation funding can also be a useful tool for solicitors as it can provide payment of their fees where a client does not have the funds to continue with the litigation.

Full story

Litigation Futures, 3rd May 2017

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Somebody else’s money – Nearly Legal

‘Ms Oliver was the long leaseholder in a block of flats on the Lansdowne Estate, which was owned by the Council. The Council carried out city wide major works, which included works on the Lansdown Estate. Some of the works were eligible for a contribution from a commercial energy company as part of the Community Energy Savings Programme (“CESP”). In total 15 of the 25 blocks on the Lansdowne Estate were eligible to receive CESP funding. The contribution to Ms Oliver’s block was £43,570.44. The Council decided not to pass the CESP directly to the leaseholders as a set off against their service charge contributions. Rather, the Council decided to attribute the money to the funding of works to its city-wide housing stock. The effect of this was that every leaseholder’s service charge was reduced irrespective of whether their block had been entitled to CESP funding.’

Full story

Nearly Legal, 10th April 2017

Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk

Whose Rights are they anyway? Supreme Court gives judgment in FCA v Macris – Blackstone Chambers

‘Criticism can hurt. Public criticism by a regulator taking enforcement action can hurt more. The law has long sought to ensure that those potentially subject to criticism have an opportunity to answer what is said against them.’

Full story

Blackstone Chambers, 5th April 2017

Source: www.blackstonechambers.com

Class certification hearings – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted March 6th, 2017 in class actions, competition, damages, news, third parties, tribunals by sally

‘After a wait of more than a year from the introduction of class actions in the UK, there were two class certification hearings before the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) in just over a month. Although in each case the CAT has yet to hand down its certification decision, the hearings have given some clear signals about how the CAT sees the regime.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 6th March 2017

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

HRA Claims and Concurrent Care Proceedings: Third Party Costs Orders, Statutory Charge Guidance and an Invitation to the Lord Chancellor – Family Law Week

‘Ben Mansfield, barrister of The 36 Group, examines the judgment of Mr Justice Keehan in H (A Minor) v Northamptonshire County Council and the Legal Aid Agency [2017] EWHC 282 (Fam).’

Full story

Family Law Week, 23rd February 2017

Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk

Rise of third party funding: a growing international consensus – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted February 22nd, 2017 in arbitration, costs, foreign jurisdictions, international law, news, third parties by sally

‘Whatever your opinion on the ethical implications of third party funding in international arbitration, the past six months have seen two firm nods in its favour. These have signaled that, as a method of financing arbitration, it is here to stay.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 25th January 2017

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Excalibur and third party funders – guidance from the Court of Appeal – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted December 1st, 2016 in appeals, costs, news, third parties by sally

‘The Court of Appeal has this morning handed down its judgment in the case of Excalibur Ventures LLC v Texas Keystone Inc and others, a decision that is of great importance to third party funders and their potential liability for adverse costs.’

Full story

Hardwicke Chambers, 18th November 2016

Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk

Third party funders as liable for indemnity costs as any other fees, appeal court rules – OUT-LAW.com

Posted November 29th, 2016 in appeals, costs, indemnities, news, third parties by sally

‘Commercial third party funders are liable for the costs consequences of a litigant’s misconduct, regardless of whether they themselves were guilty of any “discreditable conduct or conduct which could be criticised”, the Court of Appeal has ruled.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 28th November 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Arbitrator justified in making losing party pay £2m cost of third-party funding, High Court rules – Litigation Futures

Posted October 6th, 2016 in arbitration, costs, international courts, news, third parties by tracey

‘A defendant whose conduct forced the claimant to seek third-party funding to take its case to arbitration has to pay the £2m owed to the funder following the claim’s success, the High Court has ruled.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 3rd October 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Local authorities’ statutory powers to override third party land rights will apply to a wider range of public schemes, says expert – OUT-LAW.com

‘Local authorities and regeneration bodies can expect greater scrutiny to be placed on their decisions to override third party rights in land on public interest grounds under new UK planning laws that came into effect in the summer.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 21st September 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

High Court allows recovery of costs of arranging third-party funding – Litigation Futures

Posted September 19th, 2016 in arbitration, costs, news, third parties by tracey

‘The High Court has today upheld the decision of an arbitrator to allow the recovery of the costs of securing third party funding as costs, in what is being hailed as a landmark decision.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 19th September 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com

Third-party JR funders must be allowed anonymity – Law Society’s Gazette

Posted August 26th, 2016 in anonymity, judicial review, news, third parties by sally

‘Third-party funders in judicial review proceedings should be identified to defendants only in exceptional circumstances, the Law Society has said in response to government plans to require anyone contributing more than £3,000 to declare their identities.’

Full story

Law Society’s Gazette, 25th August 2016

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

Third party rights of direct action against insurers due to come into force – OUT-LAW.com

Posted July 29th, 2016 in insolvency, insurance, news, third parties by tracey

‘New rights for third parties to bring direct actions against insurers in the event that an insured party against which they have a claim becomes insolvent will come into force on 1 August 2016.’

Full story

OUT-LAW.com, 28th July 2016

Source: www.out-law.com

Cadbury UK Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Societe Des Produits Nestle SA intervening) – WLR Daily

Cadbury UK Ltd v Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks (Societe Des Produits Nestle SA intervening) [2016] EWHC 1609 (Ch)

‘Where a party intervenes in an appeal from a decision of a hearing officer acting on behalf of the Comptroller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks, ordinary a costs order will not be made in the intervener’s favour. The court will only consider departing from its ordinary position if it is satisfied that (1) the intervener’s position was successful, (2) its submission added value to the hearing, and (3) it had not duplicated the respondent’s submissions (paras 10, 12).’

WLR Daily, 7th July 2016

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Ministry of Justice doubles financial threshold for identifying judicial review backers – Litigation Futures

Posted July 12th, 2016 in consultations, costs, judicial review, legal aid, news, third parties by sally

‘The government has doubled the threshold above which third-party contributors to judicial reviews (JRs) will have to be identified.’

Full story

Litigation Futures, 11th July 2016

Source: www.litigationfutures.com