The case of Essar v Norscot  EWHC 2361 (Comm) was one of the most high-profile international arbitration cases of 2016. Woodsford’s successful funding of this landmark case has driven the development of a range of specialist international arbitration finance solutions.
Read more about Essar v Norscot here
Respondent’s failure to pay
Upfront fees payable to arbitral institutions and the deposit for the tribunal’s costs are usually shared by the parties in international arbitrations. These costs can be significant – in some cases in excess of $100,000 – and if respondents fail to pay their share, claimants are forced to pay.
Seeking third party funding for this unexpected liability is a good option in many cases. As the respondent’s conduct in such circumstances is demonstrably unreasonable, the claimant will, based on the finding in Essar v Norscot, have a good argument that the respondent should be held liable for the third party funding costs.
Woodsford has designed a ‘sliding scale’ product that will allow claimants in this situation to return the pressure to the respondent through the threat of costs sanctions.
With the decision in Essar v Norscot opening up a new avenue of respondent funding, we now deliver Respondent Funding solutions, particularly if the respondent is also a counterclaimant.
Respondent Funding supports respondents who, faced with unmeritorious claims from well-resourced claimants, may find it difficult to fund a defence from their own resources. In due course, the respondent’s funding costs could potentially be recovered from the claimant.
For more information contact: Mitesh Modha