INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION 1/3LY
We would encourage all claimants in arbitration to be transparent and upfront about our funding at a very early stage. If we are involved in a case pre-arbitrator selection, we would ensure that the funded party bears that in mind in their arbitrator selection for the panel. KEITH How about the debate around security for costs orders in the arbitration world. Do you have any comments? ROSEMARY There have been a number of high profile arbitration decisions which have set tongues wagging, and which have generated academic debate. We have an After The Event (ATE) insurance portfolio policy which we can automatically provide as part of our terms in litigation or arbitration to cover a potential adverse costs risk. If we think there is a risk from adverse costs in arbitration, as part of our funding terms we will insist on the funded party having ATE insurance in place, which we can provide at a fully deferred premium rate. The debate in the arbitration world at the moment is whether, if it is disclosed that a funder is funding a case, there should automatically be a security for costs order made. We don’t think that is right. We don’t see the basis for that argument.
However, as part of our ATE policy, we can provide a security for costs indemnity for claimants to cover any security for costs application that is made against them and, as such, it is not something to be particularly worried about. If anything, the fact that a funder is sitting there with an ATE policy should militate against a security for costs application being granted. People want it to be a big issue for us but it simply isn’t. Is it something that we have seen personally? No. Is it something that we are concerned about on a day to day case funding basis? No. But it is something that we need to have at the back of our mind because respondents (and I don’t blame them for this) will use it as an arbitration tactic. KEITH Do you usually get approached to fund cases pre-litigation and pre-arbitration, or further down the line? ROSEMARY We are most commonly approached at the start of a dispute when the lawyers have done an initial review of the claim, decided liability is good and the claimant wants to press go but is thinking about costs. However, we also fund claims that are more developed, any time up to trial or, indeed, through enforcement. The benefit for us in funding at a later stage in the dispute is that the case is more developed making it easier for us to make a genuine assessment as to merits and prospects of success and, commercially, we have to invest less, for shorter time period of time.
AS PART OF OUR ATE POLICY, WE CAN PROVIDE A SECURITY FOR COSTS INDEMNITY FOR CLAIMANTS TO COVER ANY SECURITY FOR COSTS APPLICATION THAT IS MADE AGAINST THEM.
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker