Category: statutory interpretation

‘Litigation funders will have to redraft the terms of their agreements following a widely awaited ruling by the Supreme Court this morning. In PACCAR Inc & Ors v Competition Appeal Tribunal & Ors, four out of five justices ruled that such agreements fall within the statutory definition of damages-based agreements (DBAs). As they had been entered in to without satisfying conditions for DBAs, they were therefore unenforceable.’

Full Story

Law Society's Gazette, 26th July 2023

Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk

‘Agreements with third-party litigation funders are damages-based agreements (DBAs), the Supreme Court said today in a ruling likely to invalidate almost all existing arrangements.’

Full Story

Legal Futures, 26th July 2023

Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk

‘This appeal concerns a matter of statutory interpretation in the context of litigation funding. Litigation funding involves the agreement of a third party (with no prior connection to the litigation) to finance all or part of the legal costs of certain litigation, in return for a percentage of any damages recovered should the funded litigant be successful. In particular, this appeal concerns whether each of the agreements to provide this funding, known as litigation funding agreements (“LFAs”), constitute a “damages-based agreement” (“DBA”), a term given a specific definition by statute. In order to be lawful and enforceable a DBA has to satisfy certain conditions. The LFAs have been entered into without satisfying those conditions, so the question whether they constitute DBAs is critical for their enforceability.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 26th July 2023

Source: ukscblog.com