Vannin's IPO setback unlikely to spook buoyant litigation funding market
Litigation funder Vannin this week pulled its proposed IPO - but is this anything more than a bump in the road for the upwardly mobile litigation finance market?
October 12, 2018 at 04:28 AM
5 minute read
The year to date has seen an influx of capital into some of the biggest litigation funders in the market. Last week, Burford Capital raised $250m by selling new shares on the London Stock Exchange – its first issuance of equity into the public market since 2010.
In March, Harbour Litigation Funding launched a new £350m fund, almost doubling its current offering, and in July Augusta raised £150m for its new UK- and Australia-focused fund, while in February Therium also closed its largest fund to date, raising £300m.
This week's news that Vannin Capital has postponed its proposed £70m listing on the London Stock Exchange may have dampened the mood, but many in the market see this as little more than a temporary setback.
In its statement, Vannin said that "volatility" in the equity market in recent weeks had led to "conditions that are not conducive to an IPO".
Stewarts international arbitration partner Matthew Knowles, a former director of litigation funding at Harbour, says the postponement "shouldn't affect the fundamentals" of what Vannin is doing. "Vannin have put a lot of thought into the future, with this year's hires of CEO Richard Hextall, managing director Paul Martenstyn and former Allen & Overy (A&O) senior partner David Morley as chairman, as well as a number of others," he says. "They want to get it right. I suspect it's a counsel of caution and they'll come back to it when things are a bit calmer."
Verity Jackson-Judge, BD director at litigation finance broker TheJudge, agrees: "While some may be quick to assume Vannin's decision is bad news for the firm, I think that would be reading too much into it. It's unlikely to be the case that no IPO equates to no growth for Vannin, and I certainly don't see their decision to postpone as a nod to any concerns over the state of the litigation funding market."
Despite Vannin's hitch, positive results for market leaders such as Burford – which saw income from investments in litigation rise 127% to $318m last year – suggest litigation finance will continue to grow in popularity.
Burford CEO Christopher Bogart says his business has experienced "dramatic" growth in the last couple of years. According to Bogart, the funder committed $1.34bn of new investments in 2017, three times as much as 2016, and has now worked with 70% of the Global 100 and 90% of the Am Law 100, while it also announced yesterday that it had earmarked a $50m fund exclusively for female-led litigation.
Steven Friel, CEO of Woodsford Litigation Funding, tells Legal Week: "Our shareholders are very happy with our performance, and have recently made a further $75m commitment to our business. We are actively considering when and how to raise external finance. We have a number of options open to us, including IPO, although I'm not yet convinced that's the right way to go."
The general sentiment around third-party litigation finance is that it is an industry on the up, and Vannin's recruitment of ex- A&O chief Morley (pictured) is likely to cement that view among litigators.
Linklaters partner Patrick Robinson agrees: "I'm not at all surprised to see someone like David make that move. Funders are part of the litigation landscape now, it's an established and known thing in the market. Any responsible litigator will know the funders and their potential impact on litigation."
Jackson-Grant agrees: "When incredibly successful lawyers like David choose to make the leap from law firm to funder, it shows that there is a belief that the funding market is sustainable and will continue to grow. I don't think you can attract names like that otherwise."
Litigators are also reporting increasing interaction with funders, and feedback is positive. Mona Vaswani, co-head of A&O's UK banking, finance and regulatory practice, recently won a $300m fraud case funded by Harbour – her first experience of working with third-party finance. She tells Legal Week: "It's fair to say that A&O are one of those firms which hasn't had a huge historic exposure to funders. It seemed to me to be a perfect blend of involvement and letting us get on with it. Obviously they were interested in budgets and outcomes, but it was a very positive experience, and I would look to do more funded work."
As the market develops, many think that new arrangements between law firms and funders will come to the fore, as clients become more aware of funding possibilities and begin to raise them in early-stage talks with their lawyers.
Burford managing director Craig Arnott (pictured) explains: "The landscape has changed dramatically in the past two years. The change is driven in part by law firms' own clients saying: 'We want funding to be part of the options you present to us.' Corporate clients are saying to law firms that they want the option of external funding in the mix when they bring their fee proposals or pitch for work. They at least want the option of taking cases off of their own balance sheets."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTo Thrive in Central and Eastern Europe, Law Firms Need to 'Know the Rules of the Game'
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Big Law Media Law Attorneys Brace For Changes Under Trump and Carr’s FCC
- 2Will England Accept that Digital Assets Are ‘Property’?
- 3Congress and Courts Are Considering Litigation Financing: Is Disclosure Imminent?
- 4Bar Report — Nov. 25, 2024
- 5People in the News—Nov. 25, 2024—Eckert Seamans, Klehr Harrison
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250