Justice As An Investment: Third-Party Funding In Arbitration
- IJLLR Journal
- 2 hours ago
- 1 min read
Gaurav Anumula, Dharmashastra National Law University
ABSTRACT
This article discusses the rise of third-party funding (TPF) as a transformative mechanism in Indian dispute resolution, especially with the increasing costs of commercial arbitration, infrastructure litigation and real estate disputes. Tracing its evolution from the Privy Council’s nuanced rejected of the English champerty doctrines in Ram Coomar Coondoo to the Supreme Court’s recognition that TPF enables meritorious claims otherwise suppressed by financial barriers, in Bar Council of India v. A.K. Balaji. Although the ambiguities of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 along with prohibition of contingency fees by the Bar Council of India Rules persist, the emergence of TPF reflects global trend and India’s burgeoning commercial disputes. The analysis balances benefits such as improved access to justice, strict case screening, cash flow management against the risks of funder control, confidentiality breaches and conflict of interest by arbitrators. In contrast to the judicial pragmatic approach adopted in India, the statutory approaches taken in Singapore and Hong Kong promotes a comprehensive regulation to include mandatory disclosures, control safeguards and ethical standards to harness TPF’s efficiency while preserving procedural fairness.
