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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.