Litigation Finance Canada

As the first commercial funder to put boots on the ground in Canada when we opened our Toronto office in 2016, Omni Bridgeway has worked to develop the jurisprudence in the country on litigation funding and to provide educational resources on how third-party funding fits into the Canadian legal landscape [in light of the history and evolution of maintenance and champerty].

Our Litigation Finance Canada section contains updates on the evolving Canadian case law regarding litigation funding for corporate commercial claims, insolvency matters and class actions, including discussion of eight reported cases which we have participated in or pursued. It features commentary on the significance of the decisions and information about our [litigation funding] continuing education seminar, which has been approved and accredited by both The Law Society of Ontario (for up to 0.5 professionalism and 0.5 substantive hours) and the Barreau du Québec.

Canadian Case Law

Case Summaries

The case law across Canada regarding litigation funding including a summary of the decisions and links to the decisions (and orders where available) can be found under the following headings:

Additional Information

Check back for updates on the evolving case law in Canada regarding third-party funding.

If you are interested in learning more about case law developments in this area, please contact us.

Maintenance and Champerty

Discussions about third-party funding often raise questions about the common law doctrines of maintenance and champerty. This article sets out how third-party funding fits into the Canadian legal landscape, in light of the history and evolution of maintenance and champerty. As set out in the article, the principles of maintenance and champerty do not prohibit third-party funding, which has been accepted by Canadian courts in both single-party and class action cases.

Read article.

Continuing Legal Education Seminar

Our seminar has been approved and accredited by both The Law Society of Ontario (for up to 0.5 professionalism and 0.5 substantive hours) and the Barreau du Québec.

Notre programme a été agréé par le Barreau de l'Ontario (pour un maximum de 0,5 heure de contenu de professionnalisme et 0,5 heure de contenu de droit de fond) et par le Barreau du Québec.

Please contact us to learn more about a customized presentation for your law firm or your clients.


The presentation given at my offices was extremely well received by all who attended. They found it to be a truly educational experience, both with respect to the evolving law regarding third party litigation funding as well as the numerous options available as provided

Scott R. Venton - Partner, Fogler Rubinoff LLP

Naomi and Tania presented with me to a number of our firm's clients to explain litigation funding. They were articulate, engaging and clear. The presentation was incredibly well received.

James Bunting - Partner, Tyr LLP

I found the presentation extremely useful particularly in the illustration of the range of opportunities where litigation funding could be of interest to potential clients. For example, I had not previously given thought to the possibility that financially strong companies may wish, for effective use of their funds, and to reduce legal spend, to share the risk of litigation with an outside funder. The presentation also provides a valuable insight to market trends for lawyers who act both on behalf of Plaintiffs and Defendants.

J’ai trouvé la présentation très utile, en particulier concernant l’éventail de possibilités où un financement d’un litige pourrait être d’intérêt pour nos clients. Je n’avais pas considéré auparavant que des parties ayant les moyens financiers voudraient partager le risque d’un litige avec une tierce-partie afin de réduire leurs dépenses légaux. De plus, la présentation est essentielle pour n’importe quel avocat qui s’intéresse aux développements dans le marché, qu’on agi en demande ou en défense.

Doug Mitchell - Partner, IMK


Disclaimer: The information contained in this blog is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. We recommend that claim holders obtain advice from their lawyers on litigation funding.

View all

Maintenance and Champerty in Canada

Discussions about third-party funding often raise questions about the common law doctrines of maintenance and champerty. This article sets out how third-party funding fits into the Canadian legal landscape, in light of the history and evolution of maintenance and champerty.

Supreme Court of Canada approves Omni Bridgeway’s litigation funding agreement

The Supreme Court of Canada recognized Omni Bridgeway’s litigation funding arrangement as ‘fair and reasonable’ in a landmark decision for the litigation finance industry in Canada. We delve into the details of the Court’s written opinion on our blog.

Omni Bridgeway authors Practical Law Guide on litigation funding in Canada

Drawing from its expert team, its foundational position in the Canadian market, and its 30+ years of global funding experience, Omni Bridgeway has created a comprehensive and user-friendly guide to the legal and practical issues in a rapidly growing industry in Canada.

Supreme Court of Canada unanimously approves Bentham's litigation funding agreement in landmark insolvency matter

On Thursday, the SCC unanimously allowed an appeal from the bench in a precedent-setting matter on litigation funding in the insolvency context.

Supreme Court of Canada to consider litigation funding for the first time

The Supreme Court of Canada agrees to hear an appeal in a case funded by Bentham IMF involving a lawsuit against Callidus Capital Corporation, in a matter that will shape Canadian law on litigation funding.

Litigation funding in arbitration: three recent developments

Each month, we aim to update the legal community on issues related to litigation funding in Canada, and also on broader news in the industry.

High-interest litigation “loans” vs. non-recourse litigation funding

Last month’s Ontario Superior Court costs decision in a personal injury-type case, Davies v. Clarington (Municipality), caught our attention. It puts into sharp relief the differences between companies who offer loans for personal injury litigation and funders like Bentham who provide funding for corporate-commercial claims and class actions.

Ontario court approves funding agreement in which funder pays legal fees as class action progresses

The Ontario Superior Court recently approved a funding agreement whereby the funder will pay for class counsel’s legal fees as the case progresses, in exchange for a return at the conclusion of the case. This arrangement enables the matter to proceed where the client is not able to pay legal fees, and the law firm is not able to carry its fees throughout the case.

B.C. legislative amendments confirm important role of third-party funding in international arbitrations

In May 2018, British Columbia modernized its International Commercial Arbitration Act by largely adopting the 2006 amendments to the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration.

A Second Trilogy of Canadian Litigation Funding Case Law

Bentham’s litigation funding agreements have been the subject of three recent class action decisions. Learn more:

CCAA Court Approves Bentham's Litigation Funding Agreement / La Cour LACC Approuve le Financement du Litige de Bentham

The Quebec Superior Court has approved the litigation funding agreement in Bentham's first insolvency case in Canada.

Litigation Funding in Quebec / Financement de litiges au Québec

Exciting developments for litigation funding in Quebec.

Advancing a Claim when a company is in CCAA

Two recent Ontario decisions address when and how a Monitor can advance an oppression claim under the Companies Creditors’ Arrangement Act (CCAA).

Creating New Law: A Trilogy of Litigation Funding Cases

In recent weeks, the Federal Court of Canada and the Ontario Superior Court have given valuable guidance on litigation funding arrangements in Canada

Third Party Litigation Funding: Saskatchewan Makes Six

Following the recent decision of the Queen’s Bench for Saskatchewan in Schneider v Royal Crown Gold Reserve Inc, six provinces have now set out the guiding principles for approving third-party litigation funding agreements. Although most decisions are in the class action context, they are instructive for general commercial litigation, the core of Bentham IMF’s business in Canada.

Maintenance and Champerty: Dead but not buried?

In our conversations introducing commercial litigation funding to the Canadian legal market, we are frequently asked about maintenance and champerty. Under current Canadian jurisprudence, third-party funding does not offend the doctrines of maintenance and champerty.

Third-Party Funding Paves Way for Crystallex’s $1.4B Award Against Venezuela

On April 4, 2016, Canadian mining company Crystallex International Corp. won a $1.38B arbitration award for Venezuela’s unlawful expropriation of its Las Cristinas gold mine. Crystallex’s claim was advanced with the support of a third-party litigation funder.