• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제29권4호
• /
• pp.77-100
• /
• 2019

Third-party funding in international and domestic disputes is a fast-growing trend and it is increasingly used by large, solvent companies that simply wish to share risk in their finance. On January 10, 2017, the Civil Law Amendment Bill was passed in Singapore and on June 2017 an "Arbitration and Mediation Legislation (Third Party Funding) Bill" in Hong-Kong had a third-party funding to finance the international arbitration and other dispute resolutions expressly approved. This arbitral tribunal's expanding discretion over critical interim measure of security cost was in issue. In Essar v. Norscot (2016), the arbitrator found that the additional third-party funding costs were recoverable as "other costs of the parties." In here, the decision showed the issue of a tribunal's power over cost measures could spread out to be reviewed and broadened through the legislative process. A recent investor-state arbitration case of ICSID, RSM Production Corporation v. Saint Lucia, covered the express awarding of security for costs where a claimant was funded by a third-party funder. It seems inevitable that the volume of third-party funding industry will grow more as time goes on. The next step would be to formulate guidelines on how to determine criteria against which an application for security for costs is measured.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제30권3호
• /
• pp.137-167
• /
• 2020

As arbitration is widely used as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism, third-party funding, which is a person or entity with no prior interest in the legal dispute providing non-recourse financing for one of the parties, has become more prevalent with increasing costs of international arbitration. In particular, Hong Kong and Singapore are the first jurisdictions to adopt and implement legislations to specifically permit third-party funding of international arbitration. Thus, in this article, relevant issues with respect to third-party funding of arbitration, such as, conflicts of interest, disclosure, privilege and confidentiality of information, cost allocation, security for costs, and control over arbitral proceedings by the third-party funder are examined with pertinent provisions of the recent legislations. While the respective legislations of Hong Kong and Singapore may not directly address every issue raised by third-party funding of arbitration, as they make it clear that such is no longer prohibited by the old common law doctrines of champerty and maintenance, they have clarified conflicting case law as well as proactively promoted themselves as leading seats of international arbitration.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권2호
• /
• pp.55-79
• /
• 2013

As arbitration becomes an increasingly popular mode of resolving disputes, neighboring industries begin to take notice. This interest is reflected in the increasing utilization of third party funding in international arbitration claims. In this regard, the third party funding industry appears particularly interested in investor-state arbitration claims because they typically involve considerable claim amounts and substantial legal fees. To examine this trend more closely, this paper, firstly, examines the investor-state arbitration more precisely in Chapter II. In Chapter III, this study continues to examine some legal issues which can arise as a result of a conflict of interest between the parties to the funding agreement including, inter alia, 1) a dispute in which the funder terminates the agreement during the arbitration proceedings, 2) a dispute in relation to a funder's intervention in arbitration proceedings, and 3) a dispute on the responsibility for adverse costs orders, if any. This paper further identifies major legal issues which can arise in relation to 1) disclosure of existence of the funding agreement, 2) attorney-client privilege. Lastly, in Chapter IV, this paper provides some lessons from an in-depth case study on third party funding agreements and solutions to avoid and to solve prospective disputes in the future.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제33권3호
• /
• pp.95-106
• /
• 2023

This informative piece delves into the intriguing and crucial history of third-party funding in Nigeria and its application in the Arbitration and Mediation Act of 2023. The article analyses the impact of this funding on cross-border transactions while addressing concerns about mandatory disclosure. The absence of remedies or sanctions for non-disclosure is also a matter of concern that warrants thoughtful examination. The article looks closer at the role of courts, tribunals, and arbitral institutions in addressing gaps in the Act. Ultimately, it presents a well-considered set of recommendations for moving forward. Overall, this piece provides a comprehensive and insightful look into the intricate world of third-party funding and its significance within the Nigerian legal system.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제31권4호
• /
• pp.3-27
• /
• 2021

Recent Discussions on Third-Party Funding (TPF) in the forums of UNCITRAL, ICSID, and ICC are making different levels of progress towards finalizing the rules. However, they also have similarities in dealing with legal issues related to TPF, such as definitions, disclosure, allocation of costs, and security for costs. International treaty tribunals have dealt with TPF issues, too. When it comes to the standing of funded claimants, the tribunal in Ambiente v. Argentina did not accept the argument that claimants were controlled by the TPF provider. Concerning the scope of the disclosure, the tribunal in Tennant v. Canada ordered the disclosure of the TPF arrangement. As for the allocation of costs, the tribunal in Kardassopoulos v. Georgia noted that there is no reason why a TPF agreement should be treated differently than an insurance contract. Regarding the security for costs, the tribunal in South American Silver v. Bolivia considered the mere existence of a third-party funder as not an exclusive factor to determine costs in the earlier stage of the proceedings. Lastly, relating to TPF as a ground for annulment, the tribunal in Teinver v. Argentina declined the respondent's argument that the TPF agreement was the vehicle of fraud.

• 한국화재소방학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국화재소방학회 1997년도 International Symposium on Fire Science and Technology
• /
• pp.44-48
• /
• 1997

The Swedish Fire Research Board was established in 1979 to initiate and fund relevant fire research efforts. The Board is responsible for a long term research programme revised every third year, and the Board is one of two major Swedish sponsors of all fire research. Beside the Board we also have the Swedish National Rescue Services, funded by the government. BRANDFORSK gives very high priority for the industry and the insurance company and the need they express for fire research. Research that the Rescue Services Board are funding is mainly focusing the need for the fire department. The Swedish Fire Research Board, BRANDFORSK, is the joint agency of the Swedish government, the insurance industry and the business sector, for the initiation, funding and supervision of different kinds of fire research. Work is directed by a Programme Board and is performed in the form of projects at universities, research institutes, state authorities and private firms. The Secretariat of BRANDFORSK shares the premises of the Swedish Fire Protection Association, SFPA, and the SFPA is the principal and the party which enters into agreement with the State. The programme for the period 1997-1999 has been drawn up on the basis of both damage development and the trends in society which can be noted, and the evident fire problems of the interested parties and their need for fire research. The inputs in the programme have been broken down seven problem areas. In every problem area different project areas are set out, and these primarily specify the aim of the work. Our seven problem-areas are; Costs and benefits of fire protection measure. The role and behaviour of people and organizations Fire In buildings Fire in underground facilities Rescue operations fire in industries Fire and the environment. In comparison with previous fire research programmes, cost/benefit studies have been accorded higher priority, and this is also reflected in other problem areas. Grater Emphasis