Third-Party Funding in Commercial Arbitration: Risks and Rewards

Third-party funding in commercial arbitration has become an increasingly prevalent and controversial practice in the legal industry. This article explores the risks and rewards associated with third-party funding, providing insights into its importance, regulatory framework, and case studies. By examining the potential conflicts of interest, lack of control, and adverse cost orders, as well as the access to justice, level playing field, and monetisation opportunities it offers, readers will gain a comprehensive understanding of the complexities surrounding third-party funding in commercial arbitration.


Definition of third-party funding in commercial arbitration: Third-party funding in commercial arbitration refers to the practice of a third party, typically a professional funder, providing financial support to one of the parties involved in an arbitration proceeding. This funding is usually provided in exchange for a share of the potential financial award or settlement that the funded party may receive. It allows parties with limited financial resources to pursue their claims and access justice, as they can obtain the necessary funds to cover the costs associated with the arbitration process, such as legal fees, expert fees, and administrative expenses. Third-party funding can be particularly beneficial for smaller businesses or individuals who may not have the financial means to bear the costs of arbitration on their own.

Importance of third-party funding in the arbitration process: The importance of third-party funding in the arbitration process cannot be overstated. It helps level the playing field between parties with disparate financial resources, ensuring that access to justice is not solely dependent on a party’s ability to pay for the costs of arbitration. By providing financial support, third-party funders enable parties to pursue meritorious claims that they might otherwise be unable to afford. This promotes fairness and equity in the arbitration process, as it allows parties to present their case on an equal footing. Moreover, third-party funding can also contribute to the efficiency of the arbitration process, as it reduces the risk of parties abandoning or settling their claims prematurely due to financial constraints.

Overview of the risks and rewards associated with third-party funding: However, third-party funding in commercial arbitration also comes with certain risks and rewards. On the one hand, the availability of funding can incentivise parties to pursue claims that may lack merit, leading to an increase in frivolous or speculative claims. This can potentially burden the arbitration process and increase costs for all parties involved. Additionally, the involvement of a third-party funder may raise concerns regarding the funder’s influence over the funded party’s decision-making process, potentially compromising the party’s autonomy and independence. On the other hand, third-party funding can provide parties with the financial resources needed to conduct thorough investigations, gather evidence, and engage expert witnesses, thereby strengthening their case. It can also alleviate the financial pressure on parties, allowing them to focus on the merits of their claims rather than worrying about the costs of arbitration. Overall, the risks and rewards associated with third-party funding in commercial arbitration need to be carefully considered and balanced to ensure the integrity and fairness of the arbitration process.

Risks of Third-Party Funding

Potential conflicts of interest between the funder and the funded party: Potential conflicts of interest between the funder and the funded party can arise in third-party funding arrangements. The funder may have its own agenda or financial interests that could potentially influence the decisions and strategies of the funded party. This can compromise the independence and impartiality of the funded party, leading to conflicts that may undermine the integrity of the arbitration process.

Lack of control over the arbitration process for the funded party: One of the risks of third-party funding is the lack of control over the arbitration process for the funded party. The funder may have the power to influence key decisions, such as the selection of arbitrators, the choice of legal representation, or the settlement negotiations. This lack of control can result in the funded party having to make compromises or accept unfavourable outcomes in order to align with the interests of the funder.

Possibility of adverse cost orders if the funded party loses the case: If the funded party loses the case, there is a possibility of adverse cost orders. Adverse cost orders require the losing party to pay the legal costs of the winning party, including the funder’s costs. In third-party funding arrangements, the funded party may be responsible for reimbursing the funder for the costs incurred during the arbitration process. If the funded party is unable to pay these costs, they may face financial difficulties or even bankruptcy as a result of the adverse cost orders.

Rewards of Third-Party Funding

Access to justice for parties who may not have the financial resources to pursue arbitration: Access to justice is a fundamental principle of any legal system, ensuring that individuals and businesses can seek remedies when wronged or in dispute. In the context of arbitration, where the costs associated with legal representation and the arbitration process itself can be significant, third-party funding plays a pivotal role in extending this access to a broader range of parties. Often, parties involved in arbitration may lack the necessary financial resources to pursue their claims effectively. By securing third-party funding, they gain the means to level the playing field with better-funded opponents.

Ability to level the playing field between well-funded and less-funded parties: One of the most significant rewards of third-party funding is its ability to level the playing field between parties of varying financial capacities. In arbitration, as in any legal proceeding, the resources available to each party can significantly impact the outcome. Well-funded parties may be able to engage top-tier legal representation, experts, and resources, giving them a distinct advantage. However, third-party funding can bridge this gap by providing the financial backing needed to secure top legal talent and experts. This ensures that the less-funded party can present their case on equal footing, thereby increasing the chances of a fair and just resolution.

Opportunity for the funded party to monetise their claim without assuming the financial risk: Another compelling reward of third-party funding is the opportunity for the funded party to monetize their claim without assuming the financial risk. In arbitration, pursuing a claim can be an expensive endeavor, often requiring substantial upfront investments in legal fees and other associated costs. For some parties, particularly individuals or smaller businesses, these costs can deter them from pursuing valid claims, even if they have a strong case. Third-party funding allows these parties to transfer the financial risk to the funder. If the arbitration is unsuccessful, the funder absorbs the costs, and the funded party is not left with a substantial financial burden. Conversely, if the arbitration is successful, the funder takes a share of the award or settlement, enabling the funded party to receive compensation for their claim without bearing the full financial risk.

Regulatory Framework for Third-Party Funding

Overview of different jurisdictions’ approach to regulating third-party funding: Regulatory frameworks for third-party funding vary across different jurisdictions. Some countries have embraced third-party funding and have established clear guidelines and regulations to govern its practice. These jurisdictions often view third-party funding as a valuable tool for promoting access to justice and levelling the playing field in litigation. They may require third-party funders to be licensed or registered and impose certain financial and ethical obligations on them. Other countries may have a more restrictive approach, either prohibiting third-party funding altogether or imposing strict limitations on its use. These jurisdictions may have concerns about potential conflicts of interest, the impact on attorney-client privilege, and the potential for abuse or unethical behaviour.

Discussion of ethical considerations and potential conflicts of interest: Ethical considerations and potential conflicts of interest are important aspects of regulating third-party funding. One of the main concerns is the potential for funders to exert undue influence or control over the litigation process. This could compromise the independence and autonomy of the funded party and their legal representation. There is also the risk of conflicts of interest arising between the funder, the funded party, and their lawyers. For example, a funder may have a financial interest in the outcome of the case that could conflict with the best interests of the funded party. Additionally, there may be concerns about the confidentiality of information shared between the funded party and their lawyers, as funders may have access to sensitive legal and strategic information.

Importance of transparency and disclosure in third-party funding arrangements: Transparency and disclosure are crucial in third-party funding arrangements to ensure fairness and protect the interests of all parties involved. It is important for funders to disclose their identity, financial resources, and any potential conflicts of interest to the funded party and their lawyers. This allows the funded party to make an informed decision about entering into a funding arrangement and helps to maintain the integrity of the litigation process. Transparency also helps to address concerns about potential abuse or unethical behaviour by funders. By requiring clear and comprehensive disclosure, jurisdictions can promote transparency and accountability in third-party funding arrangements.

Case Studies: Successes and Challenges

Examples of successful outcomes achieved through third-party funding: Case studies provide examples of successful outcomes achieved through third-party funding in the arbitration process. These success stories showcase how parties were able to secure funding from external sources to pursue their arbitration cases and ultimately achieve favourable results. For instance, a case study might highlight how a party was able to secure funding from a third-party funder to cover the costs of legal fees, expert witnesses, and other expenses associated with the arbitration. The successful outcome could involve a favourable settlement, a monetary award, or a successful defense against a claim. These case studies serve as evidence of the effectiveness and benefits of third-party funding in the arbitration process.

Challenges faced by parties and funders in the arbitration process: Challenges faced by parties and funders in the arbitration process are also important to consider. These challenges can include issues such as the complexity and length of the arbitration process, the uncertainty of outcomes, and the potential for delays and cost overruns. For parties, challenges can arise in terms of gathering evidence, presenting a strong case, and navigating the procedural rules and requirements of arbitration. Funders may face challenges in assessing the viability of a case, managing the financial risks involved, and ensuring that their investment will yield a return. These challenges highlight the need for careful planning, strategic decision-making, and effective communication between parties and funders throughout the arbitration process.

Lessons learned from previous cases and their impact on the industry: Lessons learned from previous cases and their impact on the industry are valuable for both parties and funders. By studying past cases, parties can gain insights into successful strategies and tactics that have been used in similar situations. They can also learn from the mistakes and failures of others, helping them to avoid pitfalls and improve their chances of success. For funders, lessons learned can inform their investment decisions and help them identify promising cases with a higher likelihood of success. Additionally, lessons learned from previous cases can contribute to the development of best practices and industry standards, promoting transparency, fairness, and efficiency in the arbitration process.


In conclusion, third-party funding in commercial arbitration presents both risks and rewards. While there are potential conflicts of interest and lack of control for the funded party, third-party funding also provides access to justice, levels the playing field, and allows parties to monetise their claims. It is crucial to have a regulatory framework in place to address ethical considerations and ensure transparency. By conducting proper due diligence and risk assessment, parties can navigate the challenges and make informed decisions. As the industry continues to evolve, it is important to stay updated on future trends and developments in third-party funding.

*Disclaimer: This website copy is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For legal advice, book an initial consultation with our commercial solicitors HERE.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *