新泽西州推进诉讼融资监管立法,提升市场透明度;英国加快推进PACCAR改革,期待监管明晰;英国司法延误推高法律费用保险成本与风险
行业动态和会议信息
美国新泽西州推进诉讼融资监管立法，提升市场透明度
New Jersey Advances Litigation Funding Bill to Enhance Market Transparency
-
美国新泽西州正推进针对第三方诉讼融资的监管立法，拟通过第2159号议会法案（Assembly Bill 2159），加强市场透明度并限制资方影响力。根据法案，民事及行政案件当事人须在融资协议签署或案件立案后30天内向法院披露相关协议，供法官秘密审查。同时，法案禁止资方干预案件决策、和解谈判及诉讼策略，也不得提供法律意见或指定律师。在收益分配方面，资方回报不得超过诉讼收益的25%，资方与律师合计获得的金额原则上不得超过赔偿金额的50%。此外，法案禁止融资协议转让或证券化，并规定违规行为可能构成消费者欺诈，导致协议失效，甚至使资方承担连带诉讼费用和制裁责任。该提案显示美国各州正加速探索诉讼融资监管框架，以平衡资本支持与司法公正之间的关系。
New Jersey is advancing legislation aimed at regulating third-party litigation funding through Assembly Bill 2159, seeking to enhance market transparency and limit the influence of funders in legal proceedings. Under the proposed bill, parties in civil and administrative cases would be required to disclose litigation funding agreements to the court within 30 days of either executing the agreement or filing the case, whichever occurs later, for in-camera judicial review. The legislation would prohibit funders from influencing case decisions, settlement negotiations, or litigation strategy, and would also bar them from providing legal advice or selecting counsel. In terms of financial returns, a funder’s share would be capped at 25% of the litigation proceeds, while the combined amount paid to funders and attorneys generally could not exceed 50% of any recovery. The bill would further prohibit the assignment or securitization of funding agreements and provides that violations may constitute consumer fraud, potentially rendering agreements unenforceable and exposing funders to joint liability for court costs and sanctions. The proposal reflects a broader trend among U.S. states to develop regulatory frameworks for litigation funding in an effort to balance access to capital with the integrity and fairness of the judicial process.
英国加快推进PACCAR改革呼声升温，市场期待监管明晰
Calls Grow for PACCAR Reform as Market Seeks Greater Certainty
-
英国诉讼融资改革人士近日警告，政府迟迟未推动立法推翻2023年PACCAR判决，正对诉讼融资市场造成持续冲击，并削弱英国作为全球争议解决中心的竞争力。该判决将许多诉讼融资协议重新界定为损害赔偿协议，导致其可执行性受到质疑。尽管英国政府已接受民事司法委员会提出的追溯性立法建议，并承诺澄清相关规则，但近三年来仍未出台修正法案。业内人士认为，持续拖延不仅加剧市场不确定性，也可能促使资金和案件流向其他司法辖区。
Reform advocates in the UK have warned that the government’s continued failure to introduce legislation reversing the 2023 PACCAR ruling is having a lasting negative impact on the litigation funding market and undermining the country’s position as a leading global dispute-resolution hub. The decision reclassified many litigation funding agreements as damages-based agreements, casting doubt on their enforceability. Although the UK government accepted the Civil Justice Council’s recommendation for retrospective legislation and pledged to clarify the legal status of funding agreements, no corrective bill has been introduced nearly three years later. Industry experts argue that the prolonged delay is increasing market uncertainty and could drive both capital and funded disputes to competing jurisdictions.
ARAG报告：英国司法延误推高法律费用保险成本与风险
ARAG Report Highlights Rising Costs and Risks from UK Court Delays
-
一份由法律费用保险公司ARAG发布的报告显示，英国民事法院和就业仲裁庭案件积压创下新高，正深刻影响法律费用保险市场的运作。报告指出，目前英国超过1000万个家庭和数百万家企业依赖法律费用保险获得法律服务支持，但持续延长的审理周期正推高保险成本并加剧风险管理压力。数据显示，小额索赔案件平均需40.6周才能开庭，多轨案件平均等待时间达到62周，部分地区甚至接近三年。与此同时，英格兰和威尔士就业仲裁庭积案已增至68,192件，同比增长50%，而案件结案数量则明显下降。案件处理时间延长不仅增加了企业尤其是中小企业的法律支出，也使保险公司面临更大的准备金和赔付不确定性。报告因此呼吁政府加强对早期法律咨询和纠纷预防机制的支持，通过更早介入解决争议，减轻司法系统压力，并改善诉讼融资和法律费用保险市场的整体运行环境。
A new report published by legal expenses insurer ARAG has found that record backlogs in the UK’s civil courts and employment tribunals are significantly reshaping the legal expenses insurance market. The report notes that more than 10 million households and millions of businesses across the UK rely on legal expenses insurance to access legal services, yet prolonged court delays are increasing costs and placing greater pressure on insurers’ risk management practices. Small claims cases now take an average of 40.6 weeks to reach trial, while multi-track cases average 62 weeks, with waiting times in some regions approaching three years. At the same time, employment tribunal backlogs in England and Wales have risen to 68,192 cases, a 50% increase year-on-year, while case disposals have declined. These extended timelines are driving up legal costs for businesses—particularly small and medium-sized enterprises—and creating greater uncertainty around reserves and claims exposure for insurers. The report therefore calls on the government to strengthen support for early legal advice and dispute-prevention mechanisms, arguing that earlier intervention could help reduce pressure on the justice system while improving the overall functioning of both the litigation funding and legal expenses insurance markets.
新加坡法院就第三方融资费用问题提供重要司法指引
Singapore Court Provides Key Guidance on Third-Party Funding Costs
-
新加坡国际商事法庭（SICC）近日维持仲裁庭裁决，拒绝允许一宗SIAC仲裁案中的胜诉方向败诉方追偿约1460万美元的第三方诉讼融资费用。法院认为，尽管新加坡自2017年起已允许第三方融资，但现行法律并未明确赋予仲裁庭将融资成本作为可追偿费用判给胜诉方的权力，因此仲裁庭拒绝赔偿相关费用并不违反公共政策。法院同时指出，促进仲裁当事人获得司法救济属于社会政策目标，而非足以干预仲裁裁决的公共政策原则。该案源于一宗金融科技合资企业纠纷，胜诉方虽获得责任裁决支持，但未能收回融资成本。裁决引发业内广泛关注，法律界人士认为，该判决凸显新加坡第三方融资制度在费用可追偿性方面仍存在不确定性，未来相关问题或需通过立法进一步明确.
The Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC) has upheld an arbitral tribunal’s decision refusing to allow the successful parties in a SIAC arbitration to recover approximately US$14.6 million in third-party litigation funding costs from the losing parties. The court held that, although Singapore legalized third-party funding in 2017, the current legislative framework does not expressly empower arbitral tribunals to award funding costs as recoverable expenses. As a result, the tribunal’s refusal to award such costs did not violate public policy. The court further noted that improving access to justice through arbitration is a matter of social policy rather than a public policy principle that would justify judicial intervention in an arbitral award. The case arose from a dispute involving a fintech joint venture, where the claimants succeeded on liability but were unable to recover their funding costs. The ruling has attracted significant attention within the legal and arbitration communities, with commentators noting that it highlights ongoing uncertainty regarding the recoverability of third-party funding costs in Singapore and suggesting that further legislative clarification may be needed in the future.
Burford布局律所股权领域，引发非律师投资律所正当性的相关讨论
Burford’s Law Firm Equity Push Renews Debate Over Non-Lawyer Ownership
-
Burford Capital计划扩大对英国和美国顶级律师事务所的少数股权投资，在核心诉讼融资业务之外开拓新的增长空间。公司认为，随着部分司法辖区逐步放宽对外部资本持有律所股权的限制，法律服务行业正迎来更多机构资本参与机会。Burford将重点投资已使用其诉讼融资服务的优质律所，依托对其案件组合、业务表现及运营情况的长期了解，更精准地评估投资价值。这一策略标志着诉讼融资机构与律师事务所之间的联系进一步深化，资本参与模式也正从单个案件融资延伸至律所层面的股权投资。同时，该计划也再次引发关于非律师资本持有律所股权及法律服务行业开放程度的广泛讨论。
Burford Capital plans to expand its minority equity investments in leading law firms across the United Kingdom and the United States, creating a new growth avenue beyond its core litigation finance business. The company believes that, as some jurisdictions gradually relax restrictions on external ownership of law firms, the legal services sector is becoming increasingly accessible to institutional capital. Burford intends to focus on high-quality firms that already utilize its litigation finance services, leveraging its long-standing understanding of their case portfolios, business performance, and operations to make more informed investment decisions. The strategy reflects a deeper convergence between litigation funders and law firms, with capital participation evolving from financing individual cases to taking equity positions at the firm level. At the same time, the move has renewed broader discussions about non-lawyer ownership of law firms and the extent to which the legal services industry should be opened to outside investment.
德国迎来新诉讼融资机构MOMENTUM
New Litigation Funder MOMENTUM Established in Germany
-
德国诉讼融资市场迎来新参与者——MOMENTUM Legal Finance正式投入运营。创始人Felix von Zwehl拥有超过15年的争议解决经验和10年的诉讼融资经验，公司专注于高价值商业索赔的执行与追偿。MOMENTUM致力于通过诉讼融资和索赔收购，为受损企业提供资金支持与流动性，并在索赔成功实现后分享回收收益。公司重点关注反垄断、滥用市场支配地位、市场操纵及知识产权侵权等案件。通过结合法律AI工具与资深顾问团队的专业经验，MOMENTUM希望提升索赔评估和法律分析能力，同时坚持以客户为中心，直接与索赔方合作，提高债务追索的维权效果。
A new entrant has joined Germany’s litigation finance market, with MOMENTUM Legal Finance officially commencing operations. Founded by Felix von Zwehl, who brings more than 15 years of dispute resolution experience and a decade of expertise in litigation finance, the firm focuses on the enforcement and recovery of high-value commercial claims. MOMENTUM aims to provide funding and liquidity to harmed businesses through litigation financing and claim acquisitions, participating in recoveries when cases are successfully resolved. The company concentrates on matters involving cartels, abuse of dominant market positions, market manipulation, and intellectual property infringement. By combining legal AI tools with the expertise of a seasoned advisory board, MOMENTUM seeks to enhance claim assessment and legal analysis while maintaining a client-centric approach, working directly with claimants to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of private enforcement.
Rocade收购Law Finance，折射诉讼融资行业日趋成熟
Rocade Acquisition Reflects the Growing Maturity of Litigation Finance
-
Rocade Capital首席执行官Brian Roth近日表示，公司收购诉讼融资机构Law Finance Group并非出于行业困境下的整合需求，而是诉讼融资行业日趋成熟的重要标志。他指出，过去业内不少并购交易更多与企业经营困难、资产处置或业务收缩有关，而此次交易则代表着市场开始主动整合优质资源，“选择赢家”而非“救助失败者。”通过此次收购，Rocade与Law Finance Group组成的平台累计已部署超过23亿美元资金，业务范围也将从原有的大规模侵权和风险代理案件融资，进一步扩展至上诉案件、商业诉讼及单案融资领域。Roth认为，随着机构资本持续涌入诉讼融资市场，行业正从早期发展阶段迈向更加成熟和专业化的发展周期，并购整合将成为扩大规模、提升竞争力的重要手段。这一观点也反映出市场对于诉讼融资行业未来增长模式的思考，即通过整合优质资产和专业能力推动行业进一步发展，而非单纯依赖资本扩张。
Rocade Capital CEO Brian Roth recently stated that the company’s acquisition of litigation funder Law Finance Group is not a distressed-market consolidation, but rather a sign of the increasing maturity of the litigation finance industry. He noted that many previous mergers and acquisitions in the sector were driven by financial difficulties, asset disposals, or business wind-downs, whereas this transaction represents the strategic combination of strong performers—“choosing the winners” rather than rescuing failing businesses. Following the acquisition, the combined platform will have deployed more than $2.3 billion in capital and will expand Rocade’s reach beyond its traditional focus on mass tort and contingency-fee financing into appellate matters, commercial litigation, and single-case funding. Roth believes that, as institutional capital continues to flow into litigation finance, the sector is evolving from an early-stage market into a more mature and professional asset class, where consolidation becomes an important tool for achieving scale and strengthening competitive advantages. His comments also reflect a broader discussion about the future growth model of the industry, emphasizing the integration of high-quality assets and specialized expertise rather than relying solely on capital expansion.
Booking.com面临20亿英镑集体诉讼，诉讼融资再受关注
Booking.com Faces £2 Billion Collective Claim Backed by Litigation Funding
-
英国在线旅游平台Booking.com正面临一项金额超过20亿英镑的集体诉讼，该案由诉讼融资机构Balance Legal Capital提供资金支持，并计划提交至英国竞争上诉法庭（CAT）审理。诉讼代表人Chris Warner拟代表数百万英国消费者提起索赔，指控Booking.com通过与酒店签订的“价格平价条款”（Price Parity Clauses）限制酒店提供更低价格，从而推高住宿和旅游产品价格，导致消费者长期支付更高费用。此类条款近年来一直受到欧洲竞争监管机构的重点关注，也为后续损害赔偿诉讼提供了法律基础。案件再次凸显诉讼融资在英国集体诉讼制度中的关键作用。由于“退出制”集体诉讼涉及庞大的资金投入和复杂的诉讼程序，外部资本往往成为案件推进的重要支撑。与此同时，该案也发生在英国围绕PACCAR判决后诉讼融资规则改革讨论持续升温的背景下，进一步引发市场对集体诉讼融资未来发展的关注。
Booking.com is facing a proposed £2 billion collective action before the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal, funded by Balance Legal Capital. The claim, brought on behalf of millions of UK consumers, alleges that Booking.com’s hotel “price parity” clauses restricted hotels from offering lower prices through other channels, leading consumers to pay inflated rates for accommodation. The case is expected to seek more than £2 billion in damages and adds to growing competition-law scrutiny of such pricing practices across Europe. It also underscores the increasingly important role of litigation funders in enabling large-scale opt-out consumer claims, where the costs and complexity of proceedings would otherwise make collective redress difficult to pursue. The filing comes amid continued debate over the future of litigation funding in the UK following the PACCAR ruling.