The financing of legal actions by third parties has grown exponentially since the early 2000s and is now common across many common law and civil law jurisdictions. It is still in its infancy in Qatar, but the Qatar International Centre for Conciliation and Arbitration (the “QICCA”) expressly recognised third party dispute funding in its 2024 rules update (the “QICCA Rules”).

This article seeks to provide a brief introduction to third party funding, and how it can make justice more accessible in a time when arbitration has become an expensive endeavour. While third party dispute funding may allow greater access to arbitration, it requires a careful balancing act between the interests of the claim’s stakeholders, and indeed those of the adverse party, with private equity investment demands.Continue Reading Qatar Third-Party Dispute Funding: An Introduction

The use of management service organizations (MSOs) in the law firm space is a new and expanding trend. While uncertainties whether MSOs comply with legal ethical rules remain, with only one decision from the Texas Commission on Professional Ethics touching on the issue so far, continued use of MSOs in law firm transactions is expected.

The UK Ministry of Justice has announced an intention to remove English third-party litigation funding from the current requirements of the Damages-Based Agreements Regulations 2013 (“DBA Regulations”) and provide for a different regulatory framework. As we have discussed previously here and here, various forms of uncertainty remain for third parties who wish to fund

On Wednesday, November 5, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether President Trump’s tariffs—imposed under the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) —were legal. The Court’s decision will have significant impacts for importers, as well as investors in the IEEPA tariff claims. Many investors have participated in the growing secondary market, in which

Much has been made in the legal press and elsewhere following litigation funder Burford Capital’s announcement of its intention to purchase minority stakes in U.S. law firms. Since, except in a few specific U.S. jurisdictions, legal ethical rules prohibit actual ownership of law firms by non-lawyers, Burford was apparently referring to a structure known as “Management Service Organizations” or MSOs. The MSO structure for law firms entails a law firm essentially splitting into two parts: one part being the legal service providing, client-facing portion and the other part being the MSO, which will take over all other law firm functions: administration, accounting, technology, recruiting, HR, real estate, etc. – anything not directly related to the practice of law. As with any other vendor, the MSO is paid a fee for providing these services.

While MSOs are a relatively new phenomena in the law firm space, they have long been a staple in other industries, most notably in health care. Numerous health care providers, especially physicians’ practices, have taken advantage of outside capital and expertise in order to remove much of the administrative burden of running a practice and allow the doctors and nurses to focus on the practice of medicine. The adoption of MSOs in the health care field has been fairly widespread: other service industries like accounting and architecture have also adopted this model on a smaller scale. Many private equity investors (and litigation funders) are now looking to law firms as the next investment frontier.Continue Reading Let’s Buy a Law Firm! – Management Service Organizations

Crowell has been shortlisted for “Exceptional Legal Services Provider for Litigation Funders (US-based)” by the International Legal Finance Association for its inaugural Legal Finance Awards.

The award recognizes law firms that provide direct and invaluable support to funders in creating deals, portfolio management, and other operational outputs, with a strong reputation in the sector for