Offshore Litigation

Blog

Offshore Litigation

Contributors

Jonathan Addo
Jonathan Addo
  • Jonathan Addo

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Jeremy Child
Jeremy Child
  • Jeremy Child

  • Partner
  • London
Stuart Cullen
Stuart Cullen
  • Stuart Cullen

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Julie Engwirda
Julie Engwirda
  • Julie Engwirda

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Peter Ferrer
Peter Ferrer
  • Peter Ferrer

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Claire Goldstein
Claire Goldstein
  • Claire Goldstein

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Hazel-Ann Hannaway
Hazel-Ann Hannaway
  • Hazel-Ann Hannaway

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Nick Hoffman
Nick Hoffman
  • Nick Hoffman

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Andrew Johnstone
Andrew Johnstone
  • Andrew Johnstone

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Paula Kay
Paula Kay
  • Paula Kay

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Phillip Kite
Phillip Kite
  • Phillip Kite

  • Partner
  • London
Vicky Lord
Vicky Lord
  • Vicky Lord

  • Partner
  • Shanghai
Paul Madden
Paul Madden
  • Paul Madden

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Henry Mander
Henry Mander
  • Henry Mander

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Ian Mann
Ian Mann
  • Ian Mann

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
William Peake
William Peake
  • William Peake

  • Partner
  • London
Lorinda Peasland
Lorinda Peasland
  • Lorinda Peasland

  • Consultant
  • Hong Kong
Chai Ridgers
Chai Ridgers
  • Chai Ridgers

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
Nicola Roberts
Nicola Roberts
  • Nicola Roberts

  • Partner
  • Hong Kong
  • Singapore
Paul Smith
Paul Smith
  • Paul Smith

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Andrew Thorp
Andrew Thorp
  • Andrew Thorp

  • Partner
  • British Virgin Islands
Jessica Williams
Jessica Williams
  • Jessica Williams

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands
Jayson Wood
Jayson Wood
  • Jayson Wood

  • Partner
  • Cayman Islands

Litigation funding in the Cayman Islands – The new Private Funding of Legal Services Act

The Cayman Islands will imminently welcome the Private Funding of Legal Services Act (the Act) into force, bringing certainty and clarity to the availability and acceptable form of disputes funding arrangements in the jurisdiction.

Prior to the new Act coming into force, conditional fee agreements between attorneys and litigants and funding agreements between third party funders and litigants require the approval of the court (you can read more about that here).

Litigants have been slow to adopt these funding arrangements. This may be because the requirement for court approval added an additional layer of cost and, in circumstances where the developing case law did not set clear parameters for acceptable funding arrangements, there was sufficient uncertainty as to whether approval would be given.

The Act provides a straightforward statutory framework for these arrangements, which should reduce the "transaction costs" and uncertainties of implementation, and make them much more attractive to litigants, funders and attorneys going forward. The key features of the Act are that:

  • It applies to civil proceedings (including proceedings in the Financial Services Division of the Grand Court) and arbitration proceedings, but not to criminal proceedings and certain family law proceedings.
  • It repeals the common law offences of maintenance and champerty.
  • It permits both contingency and conditional fee agreements between litigants and attorneys within prescribed parameters without court approval. Any success fee component payable to the attorney under a conditional fee agreement cannot exceed (1) 100 per cent of the attorney’s normal fees and (2) in respect of money claims, a prescribed percentage (to be provided for in the yet to be published regulations) of the amount awarded. The regulations will also provide a cap on the amount payable to an attorney under a contingent fee agreement. The court can approve a higher cap for both contingent and conditional fee agreements (having regard to the nature and complexity of the proceeding, and the expense or risk involved) of up to 40 per cent of the amount awarded. The agreement must be in writing and provide the client with a 14 day cooling off period.
  • It permits third party funding agreements between litigants and funders within prescribed parameters. The fee payable to the funder may be calculated by reference to either (1) the costs of the proceeding plus an amount calculated by reference to the funder’s anticipated expenditure or (2) a percentage of the amount or the value of the property recovered in the proceedings. Unlike contingency and conditional fee agreements, the Act does not set limits on how much the funder can recover.
Litigation funding in the Cayman Islands – The new Private Funding of Legal Services Act

Leave A Comment