Third party funding for dispute resolution: a comparative study of England, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Netherlands and Mainland ChinaZhang, B., 2019, [Groningen]: University of Groningen. 301 p.
Research output: Thesis › Thesis fully internal (DIV)
This thesis seeks to review Third Party Funding (hereafter TPF) from a comparative perspective. TPF is often defined as the provision of funding to parties in litigation and arbitration by a third party on a non-recourse basis in exchange for a proportion of the final proceeds. It serves not only access to justice but also various other public and private interests. Nonetheless, TPF is not risk-free. Abuses associated with TPF are not unobservable in practice. The question that needs to be asked is how to integrate TPF into the legal system without compromising the integrity of the law and the legal profession. With the focus on commercial cases, this book is allowed to employ the comparative method to examine the practice and the regulation of TPF in more than one jurisdiction. It includes not only jurisdictions with well-developed TPF markets but also new emerging markets where the regulation of TPF is absent or has not been put to the test on a large scale. With these efforts, this thesis aims to report new developments of TPF and the related legal instruments. It also manages to analyze and compare the distinctive features of TPF and its regulation in the chosen jurisdictions. Comparative results are taken into account when making policy prescriptions for China. Apart from these results, Chinese legislators are suggested to contemplate the legal tradition and the existing laws in China.
|Qualification||Doctor of Philosophy|
|Place of Publication||[Groningen]|
|Publication status||Published - 2019|
No data available