Contra Giving Wealth a 'Monopoly of Justice Against Poverty' : Comparative Insights on Public Class Action Funding
(2023) In Civil Justice Quarterly 42(1). p.93-110- Abstract
- Funding is central to the viability of a class action regime. Wherever class actions have been adopted, legislators have used an array of design points to shape regimes that facilitate the requisite economic enablers and conditions. Yet one facet that has received insufficient attention in research and reforms is the potential of a public funder to advance collective claims and promote public interests. Drawing on comparative analysis of a Canadian regime, this paper situates third party funding in the ‘access to justice’ paradigm and its broader context, before raising the potential of introducing a public funder for class actions in England and Wales. In so doing, the paper explores the experience of the comparator regime of Ontario and... (More)
- Funding is central to the viability of a class action regime. Wherever class actions have been adopted, legislators have used an array of design points to shape regimes that facilitate the requisite economic enablers and conditions. Yet one facet that has received insufficient attention in research and reforms is the potential of a public funder to advance collective claims and promote public interests. Drawing on comparative analysis of a Canadian regime, this paper situates third party funding in the ‘access to justice’ paradigm and its broader context, before raising the potential of introducing a public funder for class actions in England and Wales. In so doing, the paper explores the experience of the comparator regime of Ontario and its Class Proceedings Fund as an instructive model of a viable and effective public funder for future reforms in this jurisdiction. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/8fa7d616-ab7a-43a6-881d-f2105e2a9095
- author
- Molavi, Michael LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2023
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Civil Justice Quarterly
- volume
- 42
- issue
- 1
- pages
- 93 - 110
- ISSN
- 0261-9261
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 8fa7d616-ab7a-43a6-881d-f2105e2a9095
- alternative location
- https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/I381177B0771911EDBB5E826DB7EA2F62/View/FullText.html
- date added to LUP
- 2022-10-13 12:00:08
- date last changed
- 2023-08-24 15:15:38
@article{8fa7d616-ab7a-43a6-881d-f2105e2a9095, abstract = {{Funding is central to the viability of a class action regime. Wherever class actions have been adopted, legislators have used an array of design points to shape regimes that facilitate the requisite economic enablers and conditions. Yet one facet that has received insufficient attention in research and reforms is the potential of a public funder to advance collective claims and promote public interests. Drawing on comparative analysis of a Canadian regime, this paper situates third party funding in the ‘access to justice’ paradigm and its broader context, before raising the potential of introducing a public funder for class actions in England and Wales. In so doing, the paper explores the experience of the comparator regime of Ontario and its Class Proceedings Fund as an instructive model of a viable and effective public funder for future reforms in this jurisdiction.}}, author = {{Molavi, Michael}}, issn = {{0261-9261}}, language = {{eng}}, number = {{1}}, pages = {{93--110}}, series = {{Civil Justice Quarterly}}, title = {{Contra Giving Wealth a 'Monopoly of Justice Against Poverty' : Comparative Insights on Public Class Action Funding}}, url = {{https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/I381177B0771911EDBB5E826DB7EA2F62/View/FullText.html}}, volume = {{42}}, year = {{2023}}, }