International Arbitration Information

Online Arbitration Resources

  • International Arbitration Resources
  • Arbitration Cost Calculators
  • Search Engine
  • Model Request for Arbitration
  • Model Answer to Request for Arbitration
  • Arbitration Boutiques
  • Arbitral Institutions
  • International Arbitrators
  • Arbitration Blog
  • Arbitration Laws
  • About
  • Arbitration Lawyers
Home / ICC Arbitration / New English Court Decision Regarding Third-Party Funding Cost Recovery in Arbitration

New English Court Decision Regarding Third-Party Funding Cost Recovery in Arbitration

02/10/2016 by Aceris Law LLC

In 2008, Norscot Rig Management Pvt Limited (“Norscot”), the Claimant, successfully brought a claim in arbitration before the ICC in London, against Essar Oilfield Services Limited (“Essar”), the Respondent. The Arbitrator (Sir Philip Otton) held that the Respondent had breached an operation management agreement relating to an offshore drilling platform and thus was liable to pay over USD 12 million in damages to Claimant.

As such, Claimant sought to recover its costs from the Respondent, including the costs of litigation funding (provided by Woodsford Litigation Funding) it had to incur to pursue its claim.

Third-party funding in international arbitration is defined as “any person or entity that is contributing funds, or other material support, to the prosecution or defence of the case and that has a direct economic interest in, or a duty to indemnify a party for, the award to be rendered in the arbitration.“[1]

In the above-mentioned case, the third-party funding included an advance of £647,086.49 repayable with the greater of either 300% of the sum advanced from the damages recovered, or 35% of the damages.[2]

In the arbitration proceeding, the Arbitrator allowed the recovery of the costs of securing third party funding as costs. The Respondent appealed this decision and argued that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction to determine allocation of third-party funding costs.

The High Court, namely HHJ Waksman Q.C., dismissed the Respondent’s appeal and held, for the first time in the UK, that those costs were recoverable under Section 59(1)(c) of the Arbitration Act 1996 and Article 31(1) of the ICC Rules, on the ground that the expression “legal and other costs” found in Section 59(1)(c) of the 1996 Act includes the third party funding costs.[3]

This ruling enforces the idea that costs orders are at the arbitrator’s discretion, and that the arbitrator’s autonomy in this decision making shall not be questioned by the courts.

It also is encouraging news for claimants who are interested in using third-party funding to pursue their claims.

  • Aurélie Ascoli, Aceris Law SARL

[1] See IBA Guidelines on Conflict of Interest, Explanation to General Standard 6, para. (b), p. 14, 15.

[2] 4 New Square, Landmark decision, High Court appeal allows recovery of third party funding costs in arbitration proceedings, 15 September 2016 (https://4newsquare.com/news/article.aspx?id=305).

[3] Essar Oilfield Services Limited v Norscot Rig Management PVT Limited (2016) QBD (Comm).

Filed Under: Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration Award, Arbitration Damages, Arbitration Information, Arbitration Jurisdiction, ICC Arbitration, Jurisdiction, London Arbitration, Third-Party Funding, United Kingdom Arbitration

About Aceris Law LLC

Aceris Law LLC is a leading international arbitration boutique law firm that provides legal representation for commercial, construction and investment arbitrations globally. To learn more about this topic, please do not hesitate to contact Aceris Law LLC's arbitration lawyers.

Search International Arbitration Information

UNCITRAL Drafts for a Convention on the Enforcement of Mediation Settlement Agreements,

UNCITRAL Drafts for a Convention on the Enforcement of Mediation Settlement Agreements and for a Model Law on International Commercial Mediation and International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation

18/02/2019

Fork in the Road Provision in Investment Arbitration

Fork in the Road Provision in Investment Arbitration

16/02/2019

Arbitration Small Claim

Should an International Arbitration for a Small Claim Even Be Commenced?

12/02/2019

ICC as Appointing Authority in UNCITRAL or Other Ad Hoc Arbitration Proceedings

ICC as Appointing Authority in UNCITRAL or Other Ad Hoc Arbitration Proceedings (2018 ICC Rules)

22/01/2019

IBA Rules v. Prague Rules in International Arbitration

The IBA Rules v. The Prague Rules in International Arbitration

20/01/2019

Terms of Reference ICC Arbitration

The Terms of Reference in ICC Arbitration

18/01/2019

Translation


Follow

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter

Recommended Links

  • Dubai International Arbitration Centre (DIAC)
  • International Centre for Dispute Resolution (ICDR)
  • International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)
  • International Chamber of Commerce (ICC)
  • London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA)
  • Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC)
  • United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)
  • Vienna International Arbitration Centre (VIAC)

About

The arbitration resources on this website are brought to you by the international arbitration law firm Aceris Law.

Copyright © 2012-2019 · IAA Network