Skip to main content

News story

November 21, 2017

Litigation funders beware

Litigation is an expensive and risk-laden enterprise. It is not to be embarked upon lightly, especially having regard to the ever-increasing cost of access to justice.

Litigants who are unable to afford funding often turn to third parties who, if they agree, might unwittingly put themselves at risk to meet all or part of the opponents’ costs.

Potential private funders should therefore approach any request for financial assistance in funding litigation with extreme caution, especially if they are offered a share in any “winnings”.

An obvious example of third party funding is where a non-party funder meets the legal costs of a Defendant who loses his case to the Claimant. The Claimant is then unable to recover its costs against the Defendant and looks for other targets.

An obvious target is the funder, who is termed a “non-party”. The Court has wide powers to make non-party costs orders (NPCO) under Section 51 of the Senior Courts Act 1981.

If the non-party is a “pure funder” and has no interest in the outcome of the litigation, then an NPCO is very unlikely to be made. A Court will usually consider that an NPCO is inappropriate where, for example, a disinterested relative has, out of natural affection, funded costs of a claim or a Defence that is reasonably advanced.

The position however changes if the funder has a personal stake in the outcome of the litigation. Examples of such circumstances include:

  • A director funding the costs of his company which is either unable to afford the litigation or is insolvent.
  • Circumstances where a non-party not only funds the proceedings, but substantially controls or stands to benefit from them. He or it will be considered the “real party” to the litigation.

The fact that a non-party acted without any impropriety or upon legal advice does not prevent the making of an NPCO.

Yet further, a funder can be held liable for the opponents’ costs on an indemnity basis if he did not pay sufficient attention to ongoing litigation, thereby allowing it to continue unchecked. Therefore, an absence of oversight and scrutiny of the prospects of success could prove extremely costly.

A prudent lawyer for an opposing party should consider seeking costs against a non-party where an unsuccessful opponent does not look good for the money. He should consider:

  • Putting the non-party on notice of a potential NPCO application as soon as practicable.
  • Whether, if litigating against a company, its financial profile is uncertain.
  • Whether the Directors of a litigant company have a record of being involved with insolvent companies.

It is therefore important to ensure that:

  • If you are asked to provide funds to progress a claim or aid a Defence that you are appraised of all facts and take independent legal advice. Not to do so could lead to a very nasty shock.
  • If you are a litigant and suspect that your opponent has the benefit of third party funding that your lawyers make immediate enquiries with a view to putting the funder on notice of your right to seek an NPCO.

Speak to M. Qaiser Khanzada today for more information on Litigation funders.

Note: This article is not legal advice; it provides information of general interest about current legal issues.

Stay in touch

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay in touch

By completing your details and submitting this form you confirm you are happy for us to send you marketing communications and that you agree to our Website Privacy Policy and Legal Notice and to us using Mailchimp to process your data.


Sending

News/Insight

  • The do’s and don’ts of using AI in your business
    AI can help businesses improve efficiency and make informed decisions, but it also comes with risks. Explore the key do’s and don’ts of using AI responsibly, including data protection, legal considerations and the importance of human oversight.


    Read more
  • Next equal pay appeal: when can market pressures justify different pay
    When can recruitment and retention pressures justify different pay? Karen Cole explores the Next equal pay appeal, explaining why equal pay risks remain and what employers should consider when reviewing pay packages and the evidence supporting their


    Read more
  • Domestic Abuse Protection Orders: where are they available and what other protection can you seek?
    Domestic Abuse Protection Orders can offer tailored protection, but availability is currently limited. Pippa Marshall explains how they work, who can apply and the other protective orders available, including non-molestation and occupation orders.


    Read more
  • Missing beneficiaries and unknown heirs: what should executors do?
    What should an executor do if someone entitled to inherit cannot be found? James McMullan explains how to trace missing beneficiaries, the limits of statutory notices and the options to consider before distributing an estate.


    Read more
  • Pay transparency in recruitment: Is your business ready to disclose salaries?
    Employers may eventually have to provide salary information much earlier in the recruitment process under proposals being considered by the Government.


    Read more

What they say...

  • Bryan E, September 2026
    Absolutely outstanding “This firm is super professional, efficient and friendly at the same time. You could not wish for a better service. I have used them for my Will and a range of other matters over many years. I’ve found all the vario

  • Jan Norris, September 2026
    Excellent Service “Charlotte Barbaroussis has prepared our wills, LPAs and a discretionary trust. She was professional, kind and patient throughout. A very fine person to have looking after us.”

  • Brian Nunan, August 2026
    “I dealt with the group for many years, and no matter which solicitor I used, the results were always the same. Excellent!”

  • Client, July 2026
    Constructive and empathetic “I contacted Pippa Marshall at RIAA Barker Gillette through a recommendation regarding a family law matter. Pippa was always clear, efficient, empathetic and helpful, offering constructive insights on my situation. I

  • Dino, July 2026
    A lucky professional meeting! “We had an excellent professional experience to recommend to all those who need legal help in the UK.”

Read more
Send this to a friend