Michael Cumming-Bruce

Legal Business: Disputes Perspectives with Adrian Chopin.

We’re delighted to announce that we are sponsoring the much-anticipated LF Dealmakers, European Edition.

Next month, Istanbul Arbitration Week will kick off its second year. Lawdragon chatted with one of the main organizers of the conference, Ayse Yazir, about the topics, panelists and special events taking place at ISTAW this year.

Ayse Yazir’s early career in insurance taught her how to spot a good investment. Now, as a litigation funder, she sorts through securities cases, class actions and more that come to her from across the globe, searching for the cases her firm’s funding can make into headline successes.

Bench Walk the Plank Summer Party 2023

Bench Walk Chambers & Partners rankings 2023

Bench Walk Award Winners Announced by Lawyer Monthly, 2022

Adrian Chopin chosen at ‘Litigation Funding Adviser of the year’ 2022, by Lawyer Monthly

Ayse Yazir Shortlisted for ‘Woman of the Year’ award.

Vogue interview Ayse Yazir.

Bloomberg interview with Ayse Yazir at Istanbul Arbitration Week 2022

Istanbul Arbitration Week kicks off next week, running October 10 to 14. This is the second year for the event, hosted by the Energy Disputes Arbitration Center, or EDAC. Topics include collecting on claims, ADR mechanisms, the Energy Charter Treaty, litigation funding and other subjects pertinent to arbitration.

You were awarded the Turkish National State Scholarship to study Turkish Law at Başkent University and studied English Law at Nottingham Law School, England. Tell us about your experiences studying in two separate countries and what made you decide to become a lawyer…..

In my prior blogs I examined “implied probability of loss” as a way of analysing the risk and price of transactions in the litigation funding market.

Let’s take for example (and with all the usual caveats about being reductive) a funder that determines that a case has, say, a 2/3 chance of winning and generating for both the claimant and the funder lots of money, and a 1/3 chance of losing with an attendant destruction of the funder’s entire investment. When pricing this case that funder must charge, on a win, $1.5 for every $1 invested just to break even. This is because the funder has a 1 in 3 chance of losing 100% and a 2/3 chance of winning 150%, which yields, on average, 100% (that is, a mere return of the funder’s investment).

Litigation funding has typically focused on claimant side investment. Defence funding feels less valuable because it does not so obviously unlock an asset. In addition, the cash benefit of having a funder pay defence legal costs will often be dwarfed by the potential cash payout by the defendant on a loss. And finally, a defendant worth suing is usually not cash constrained in the same way as many claimants who seek funding. But as the funding market has matured, some funders, defence lawyers and their clients have begun to express interest in defence funding.

Litigation funding has typically focused on claimant side investment. Defence funding feels less valuable because it does not so obviously unlock an asset. In addition, the cash benefit of having a funder pay defence legal costs will often be dwarfed by the potential cash payout by the defendant on a loss. And finally, a defendant worth suing is usually not cash constrained in the same way as many claimants who seek funding. But as the funding market has matured, some funders, defence lawyers and their clients have begun to express interest in defence funding.

Litigation funding has typically focused on claimant side investment. Defence funding feels less valuable because it does not so obviously unlock an asset. In addition, the cash benefit of having a funder pay defence legal costs will often be dwarfed by the potential cash payout by the defendant on a loss. And finally, a defendant worth suing is usually not cash constrained in the same way as many claimants who seek funding. But as the funding market has matured, some funders, defence lawyers and their clients have begun to express interest in defence funding.

Litigation funding has typically focused on claimant side investment. Defence funding feels less valuable because it does not so obviously unlock an asset. In addition, the cash benefit of having a funder pay defence legal costs will often be dwarfed by the potential cash payout by the defendant on a loss. And finally, a defendant worth suing is usually not cash constrained in the same way as many claimants who seek funding. But as the funding market has matured, some funders, defence lawyers and their clients have begun to express interest in defence funding.