We would summarize our added value as follows:
- The client’s financial resources are preserved for its core business, which business rarely includes funding litigation.
Third party funding has traditionally offered a financially-weakened but meritorious claimant the means to finance its legal expenses in obtaining legal redress against the wrong-doer. More recently, third party funding has been gaining momentum as an alternative means for claimants – whether insolvent, financially-weakened or perfectly financially sound – to finance their litigation without having to draw on their financial resources (treasury, shareholder advances, third-party debt) and, in so doing, simplify their periodic budgeting and internal reporting procedures.
- The client remains in full control of its case. The Fund does not run the litigation, nor does it intervene in the client’s privileged relationships with its legal advisers. In return, the client undertakes to keep the Fund closely informed of developments in the case, and authorizes its legal advisers to communicate with the Adviser to the fullest extent permitted by applicable regulations. The principle of full transparency applies throughout the client-Fund relationship.
- The client may draw on the Adviser’s experience as an expert in international legal proceedings and award/judgment enforcement.
- The Fund’s agreement is not required for the client to enter into or conclude settlement discussions. The Funding Agreement will have identified the basis of the Fund’s remuneration in case of settlement.
- The potential client may appreciate the view of the Fund as an objective assessment of the case, its strengths and weaknesses as well as its financial outlook. The Fund is an experienced professional.
Considering the Fund’s and the Adviser’s experience in international litigation as well as in enforcement all over the world and the fact that its equity capital is at stake, its assessment of the case will necessarily be realistic.