A recent UK Supreme Court Decision marks an incremental, but important step in strengthening the enforceability of ICSID awards by narrowing one of the former procedural routes used to resist enforcement.

As collective proceedings continue to gain traction in the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), the approach to adverse costs—and how actively parties manage that risk—is coming into sharper focus. A recent costs judgment offers a timely reminder that costs exposure in these claims is not just about headline numbers, but about conduct, strategy, and procedural engagement throughout the life of a case.

For some time, a working assumption has emerged in UK securities litigation: that trials—particularly under sections 90 and 90A of the Financial Services and Markets Act—can be sensibly split, with key claimant issues like reliance and loss deferred to a later stage. However, a recent decision in California State Teachers’ Retirement System v Boohoo Group plc challenges that assumption.

The government has renewed its commitment to reverse the 2023 PACCAR ruling, bringing much-needed clarity to litigation funding in England and Wales. For funders and claimants alike, this promises to restore confidence, flexibility, and access to justice in cases where funding is critical.

In this article, Sarah Breckenridge, investment manager at Erso Capital, discusses the ramifications of the Civil Justice Council's final report on litigation funding for the funding market, and sets out practical takeaways for funders and practitioners alike.

The CJC has expressly carved out arbitration proceedings from its recommendations in the Final Report on its Review of Litigation Funding — what will it mean for the future of litigation and arbitration funding?

Litigation funding in England and Wales is undergoing a period of accelerated change, shaped largely by developments in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT). While class action cases in the CAT—especially opt-out claims—may seem a niche concern, the legal and commercial issues arising from them are setting precedents with much broader implications for funded litigation across the jurisdiction.

The Court of Appeal’s ruled unanimously today in Gutmann v Apple Inc & ors , that litigation funders can take their fee before any damages are distributed to class members.

We are pleased to share that Sarah Breckenridge recently spoke at the TL4 Competition Next Gen Summit, contributing to a panel discussion on "Securing Litigation Funding and Examining the Standards for Funding Structures/Returns Across Jurisdictions."