South Asian Bar Association (SABA) of North America’s Post

We are pleased to share that 25 Carrington Coleman lawyers have been named to the 2025 "500 Leading Litigators in America" list by Lawdragon. The prestigious legal guide honors the attorneys most trusted by corporations and other entities to handle their most important commercial, construction, labor and employment, antitrust, securities, intellectual property, product liability, insurance coverage, bankruptcy and financial litigation, as well as appellate, professional liability and white collar investigation matters. Attorneys selected to the list are: Cathy Lilford Altman, Construction Litigation Christopher Anaya, Commercial Litigation, Construction Katie Anderson, Commercial Litigation Mike Birrer, Labor and Employment Litigation Neil Burger, Commercial Litigation Ken Carroll, Appellate, Antitrust Bruce Collins, White Collar & Investigations, Securities Litigation, Commercial Litigation Lance Currie, Securities Litigation Monica Gaudioso, Commercial Litigation John Gessner, Commercial Litigation Parker Graham, Commercial Litigation Kelli Hinson, Accounting & Other Professional Liability Mark Howland, IP Jason Katz, Commercial Litigation Monica Latin, Business/Financial Litigation, Commercial Litigation Rodney Lawson, Product Liability, Class Action Steve Levine, IP Litigation, esp. Trademark Alex More, Business/Financial Litigation Debran Meyer O'Neil, Accounting & Other Professional Liability, Product Liability Marisa O'Sullivan, Commercial Litigation, Insurance Coverage Litigation LaCrecia Perkins, Commercial Litigation, Real Estate Brent Rubin, Appeals, Financial Services Jennifer Ryback, Commercial Litigation, Employment Brian Shaw, Business/Financial Litigation Mike Sutherland, Bankruptcy Litigation Read more here: https://lnkd.in/gkjCGtBH

This year’s Legal 500 is out, and we’ve been named again as Tier 1 for Family (Essex) 🥇 Congratulations to my colleagues Philip Hoddell, Lisa Collins & Francesca Cozens who received Leading Partner, Next Generation Partner and Leading Associate status respectively! 🎉🎉🎉 Read all about it here: https://lnkd.in/gZG8P9bz #Law #Legal500 #Legal500UK2025 #Legal #BirkettLong

So, class actions are becoming increasingly popular in England and Wales, with this type of litigation ranging from those claims brought together by a few individuals to "opt-out" collective or representative proceedings which may be brought on behalf of potentially millions of individuals. There are four ways to bring a class action in England and Wales: (1) multiple claimants sue the same defendant(s) using the same claim form; (2) group litigation orders; (3) collective proceedings; and (4) representative proceedings. Multiple claimants sue the same defendant(s) using the same claim form: Every claimant in this type of claim will have to take proactive steps to participate (it is, in other words, an "opt-in" claim). Such cases are often conducted under conditional fee agreements ("CFAs") – also known as ‘no win no fee’ cases – or with litigation funding. They often also proceed with after the event ("ATE") insurance which protects the claimant against any liability for the other side’s costs in the event that the claim is not successful.  Group litigation orders: Claimants may opt to issue individual claims and then apply to manage them together through a group litigation order ("GLO"). Collective proceedings: The most recent addition to group litigation in England and Wales is the introduction of "opt-out" collective proceedings. These are currently available only for competition claims. Opt-out claims allow a party to bring a claim on behalf of an entire class without the express consent, or even knowledge, of each member of that class. If the court allows an opt-out claim to proceed, and unless a member of the class opts-out (i.e. serves a notice to be excluded from the claim), then any remedy awarded will be binding on and available to all members of the class. Opt-out claims, depending on the size of the class, can be enormous, and are generally financed by third-party litigation funders. Damages can be awarded on an aggregate basis without undertaking an assessment of the amount of damages recoverable in respect of the claim of each represented person. Representative proceedings: In 2021, the UK Supreme Court handed down its decision on whether an opt-out claim against Google, which was outside of the competition sphere and brought under the CPR, was permitted. The Supreme Court dismissed this claim but determined that such representative actions are conceptually possible where each claimant is functionally identical. The rules concerning representative proceedings in the UK are set out in Rule 19.8 CPR. Representative proceedings in England & Wales are likely to become an important part of the legal landscape due to increased willingness of third parties to provide litigation funding and insurance. Law firms, acting on a CFA basis, are also increasingly likely to utilise AI to assist them process large amounts of data looking for patterns. #patents #classaction #representativeproceedings #rule19CPR

Makate’s court victory against Vodacom is also a victory for litigation funding! After 15 years of dispute, the Supreme Court of Appeal this week ruled in favour of the Please Call Me inventor. Litigation funding is a way for shallow-pocketed litigants to take on the giants and beat them, and presents an opportunity for investors. Vodacom’s long losing streak in the Please Call Me case is not getting any better. This week the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) gave Vodacom 30 days to come up with a reasonable compensation package for Please Call Me inventor Kenneth Nkosana Makate. Given the 15 years of legal dispute and the monstrous legal bills that come with it, Makate would not have made it this far without funding of the kind provided by Sterling Rand Litigation Fund, which has reportedly backed his legal campaign to the tune of millions of rands. The fund is in line for a handsome payout once the case is finally settled, and should Makate clear the next hurdle at the Constitutional Court – where Vodacom has vowed to appeal the SCA decision. Litigation funding occupies an interesting, if limited, space in SA lawfare. In 2020 it was estimated by the Swiss Re Institute that litigation finance was worth $17 billion a year in funding, and is a global phenomenon that is gaining traction in the insurance and other sectors. A report by GRM Intelligence says litigation funding has exploded in recent years and “will become a mainstream asset class in Africa”. Asset class being the crucial phrase here, since litigation funding requires investors who are looking for a handsome return. It’s a way for shallow-pocketed litigants to take on the giants and beat them. Third party funders typically take a percentage of the winnings, anywhere between 25% and 50%. Sometimes these percentages are not disclosed. Third party litigation funder Augusta Ventures has a £585 million (R14 billion) war chest to assist claimants around the globe, effectively placing a Patriot missile in the hands of woefully underarmed combatants. Litigation funders are pretty choosy in the cases they take on – they will only pick those they believe they can win, and where the claims are substantial. They also set a cap on how much they’re prepared to spend on the case. Augusta Ventures wants a 1:8 costs-to-awards ratio, meaning the total budget to run the case must be no more than an eighth of the claim value. “Litigation funding is generally not considered a loan, but rather as a form of an asset purchase as the funding does not have to be repaid if the plaintiff’s lawsuit is unsuccessful. If the litigant loses, he does not have to repay the money,” says corporate finance analyst Maano Andy Thovhakale CA(SA) Is this legal? Pretty much. #litigationfunding https://lnkd.in/dj5qRq9Q

We are proud that 17 Global Commercial Disputes lawyers have been recognized in the 2024 Chambers USA guide:   - A special congratulations to James C. Martin for his Band 1 ranking: Litigation: Appellate - Pennsylvania and Jose Astigarraga for his Band 1 ranking: International Arbitration: Counsel - Nationwide - Martin Bishop and Steven Hamilton (Healthcare - Illinois) - Daniel Booker (Litigation: General Commercial - Pennsylvania: Pittsburgh & Surrounds) - Raymond Cardozo (Litigation: Appellate - California) - Julie Hardin-Energy and Life Science Trial Lawyer (Litigation: General Commercial - Texas: Houston & Surrounds) - Shannon McClure Roberts (Litigation: General Commercial - Pennsylvania: Philadelphia & Surrounds)  - James C. Martin (Litigation: Appellate - California)  - Ed Mullins (Litigation: General Commercial - Florida) - Kurt Peterson, Amir Shlesinger and Ken Smersfelt (Healthcare - California) - Brian Rostocki (Chancery - Delaware) - Francisco A. Rodriguez (International Arbitration: Counsel - Nationwide) - Karlin Sangdahl and Will Weltman (Litigation: General Commercial - Illinois) - R. Alan York (Litigation: Appellate - Texas)    Additionally, we have been recognized in the following practice ranking categories: - Litigation: Appellate – California - Litigation: General Commercial in California, Florida, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Texas. - International Arbitration: The Elite – Nationwide    We thank our clients and peers for their recognition of our efforts.   #ReedSmithNews #ChambersUSA #congratulations 

Third party litigation funding allows businesses and individuals with a meritorious case for commercial litigation or arbitration the opportunity to pursue it without having to worry about the legal fees associated with it. Find out more: https://bit.ly/3Fz4Qzz #litigation #litigationfunding

It appears as though litigation finance is getting under the skin of corporate America, in this case it’s Johnson and Johnson. This article highlights both perspectives on the use of litigation finance. The real question is whether there is sufficient science to back-up claims and whether the complex science is being appropriately interpreted by those making decisions, especially in the context of mass tort product liability cases. There are now a number of instances of the industry ‘poking the bear’ and it does make me wonder what happens when the bear rises from its slumber. Knowing the legal profession, we may eventually find out when someone goes too far in the name of seeking “justice”. Spoiler Alert: we’ll now never know what J&J was planning to do with this information.

It will be interesting to see how the Government’s announcement regarding PACCAR is reflected in the context of antitrust collective actions. The Government must carefully balance the interests of funders and claimants with the interests of defendants who continue to face a flurry of opt out collective actions despite the initial concerns following PACCAR. A number of collective claims have been blessed without challenge by the CAT of the underlying funding arrangements. Further, the Court of Appeal's ruling on the CAT’s funding decision in Sony is likely to bring at least some clarity to this area. So, from an antitrust perspective at least, it is not clear what any legislative changes might mean for those defending or bringing antitrust claims.

The Lord Chancellor's announcement teases a resolution to PACCAR-related issues, but for some it might be a case of "be careful what you wish for" in bringing the prospect of regulation along with certainty over the DBA Regs. A wider review of third party funding offers an opportunity to broaden the debate on regulation that has circulated in funding circles for quite some time now. This may well raise interesting questions on whether "consumers" (or individuals, or other categories of litigants) should be treated separately, and hopefully progresses beyond a debate around % caps, but we should brace ourselves for the inevitable oversimplifications that we have seen whenever this issue is raised.... As Alice notes, we will keep one eye on this space for the foreseeable! 👁 Whilst we ought to be realistic in what we can expect to see when it comes, today's announcement is a welcome step for access to justice and our legal system.

Third party litigation funding allows businesses and individuals with a meritorious case for commercial litigation or arbitration the opportunity to pursue it without having to worry about the legal fees associated with it. Find out more: https://bit.ly/3Fz4Qzz #litigation #litigationfunding