A recent decision in the UK demonstrates the importance of working with disputes financiers who have transparent finances, adequate capital and who are willing to provide defendants with an undertaking to meet their costs if required.
The most significant aspect of this case is the court’s expectation that funders will account for the possibility of adverse cost orders in their business model, and that funders will be organized and capitalized in such a way that an order for security for costs is unlikely to be granted in the first place.
Read the full article here