Abstract
There is an extensive literature on third party litigation funding (‘TPLF’) of class actions and a separate literature on the longer- standing use of TPLF in claims by insolvency administrators such as liquidators and bankruptcy trustees. Despite this, there has been little comparative study of TPLF in the two species of litigation. This article seeks to fill that gap and, in so doing, draw some distinctions impacting the issue of appropriate regulation in the two contexts. These include salient differences between repeat playing Australian Securities and Investments Commission-regulated professional insolvency practitioners governed under corporate and personal insolvency regulatory architecture and less experienced, less regulated representative plaintiffs in class actions. Further, the existence of vulnerable class members as silent ‘parties’ to class action litigation and funding arrangements and the effect of settlement processes affecting non-responsive class members is noted. These are found to raise differences, despite both types of litigation benefitting from substantial court supervision.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.