Vickie Waye
Published: 2007
Total Pages: 324
Get eBook
This book provides a critical analysis of law and policy issues regarding possible future markets for trading in legal claims. The cost of litigation significantly impedes access to justice. Permitting potential plaintiffs to sell their legal claims to litigation entrepreneurs who can deal with claim prosecution efficiently would provide a means of redressing the imbalance that exists between legal costs, risks and claim values. However, the well-entrenched doctrines of maintenance and champerty prohibit legal claim assignment, primarily on the grounds that it would amount to the commodification of justice. The advent of litigation funding and its acceptance on access to justice grounds by Australian courts and, to a lesser extent, the UK and US judiciaries has challenged the status quo. Together with other measures, such as the introduction of conditional fee agreements, the resistance to full claim alienability has been significantly weakened.This book reviews the current positions in Australia, UK and US regarding claim alienability and provides a comparative analysis of the divergent paths that have developed in relation to matters such as litigation funding, conditional fee agreements and legal costs insurance, all of which portend towards claim commodification. The author examines regulatory options that would be required to ensure that claim holders in any future legal claim market are protected from exploitation and that the market operates fairly and efficiently, such as statutory and common law restrictions regarding unconscionability and misleading and deceptive conduct, licensing, mandatory disclosures, cooling off and default contractual terms. The book reviews costs and abuse of process issues that markets for legal claims may create and analyses conflicts of interest that may arise between claimholders, lawyers and entrepreneurs and how these may be resolved. The author concludes that legal claim markets are justified on both policy and efficiency grounds as a means of improving access to justice.