A Comparative Analysis of Litigation Funding in Insolvency Claims and in Class Actions

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.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
University of New South Wales Law Journal
Published
2024-10-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.53637/tjkk6197
Primary Topic
Corporate Insolvency and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Comparative Analysis of Litigation Funding in Insolvency Claims and in Class Actions

Michael F. Duffy, Sulette Lombard
University of New South Wales Law Journal
Corporate Insolvency and Governance
article

A Comparative Analysis of Litigation Funding in Insolvency Claims and in Class Actions

Michael F. Duffy, Sulette Lombard
article en

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.

University of New South Wales Law JournalVol. 47(3)
Openalex Percentile: Top 69%
Corporate Insolvency and Governance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

A Comparative Analysis of Litigation Funding in Insolvency Claims and in Class Actions — Michael F. Duffy, Sulette Lombard · University of New South Wales Law Journal (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS