In this post, Simon Burnett, Partner at Balance Legal Capital, gives a brief overview of five key features that Balance looks for when considering a case for funding. Covering these will ensure that your request for funding is considered as efficiently as possible.
Litigators are in the business of persuading others to agree with their point of view. It is therefore surprising that many litigators who plainly believe in the prospects of a case (often shown by accepting conditional fee or damages-based agreements) fail to present their client’s application for litigation funding in an effective and persuasive manner.
In our experience, the best applications for litigation funding contain five key features.
A case summary prepared by the solicitor charged with conduct of the case is a great way to get litigation funding applications started. It serves two key purposes:
In our experience, it is important that case summaries are prepared by the solicitors who, in our view, are uniquely positioned to understand the full range of legal (and non-legal) aspects of the dispute. Case summary notes prepared by counsel teams can focus too closely on the legal arguments at the expense of equally important elements such as case budget and recovery/enforcement strategy. Case summary notes prepared by non-lawyer intermediaries, such as brokers, often fail to articulate a clear case strategy and can lack sufficient analysis of technical legal and quantum issues to get litigation funding.
The engagement letter or retainers between the client, its solicitors and barristers are regularly missing from the packs we receive for funding applications. These are important documents for funders. The terms of the retainer agreements set out the scope of work that the legal team has agreed to undertake for the client, and helps us assess the case budget and funding request. We consider whether any CFAs or DBAs in place cover the full likely scope of work, including interlocutory applications and any appeal or enforcement proceedings, to check that the legal team will see the case through to recovery. The terms of the retainer agreements can also indicate the legal team’s assessment of the case merits, as reflected by the level of fees that are deferred to a successful outcome. Whilst not an absolute requirement in order to get litigation funding, we like to see the solicitor team share some of the risk with us and the client. In our experience, CFAs which make 25-50% of solicitors’ fees contingent upon success in the case provide good alignment of incentives and promote a co-operative working relationship between the client, its solicitor team and the litigation funder.
We require a detailed case budget to understand what our money will be used for if the claimant does get litigation funding, and to satisfy ourselves that the funding requested is sufficient to support the case all the way through to recovery via settlement or adjudication.
The best case budgets:
A significant part of our due diligence process involves identifying settlement drivers and forming a view as to whether or not a case is likely to resolve prior to a hearing, which is sometimes a factor in determining whether the claimant can get litigation funding. Pre-trial settlements benefit both funders and clients because they preserve control over the outcome, expedite recovery and eliminate the risk of an adverse costs order. In our experience, the best solicitors think about the settlement levers and strategy in the early stages of the case. They have formed preliminary views as to their opponent’s attitude to case settlement, the best opportunities for settlement and the most effective means of achieving it.
Effective litigation funding applications include an analysis of quantum and the likely recovery in the case, supported by an explanation of how this has been calculated. We like to see copies of relevant expert reports (regardless of how preliminary) as we can test these ourselves. We will consider where quantum has been exaggerated or lacks reasonable support. The best legal teams will address these points head on.
Finally, winning on the case but failing at the enforcement and recovery stage are cold comfort for clients and funders. Effective case funding applications identify key concerns regarding the credit risk of the defendant and any likely enforcement difficulties, and demonstrate a clear route to recovery.