Original Research

“The Case for Class Action and Litigation Funding Reform” - Xavier Boffa and Henry Davis (August 2024)

The Australian class action regime first emerged at the Commonwealth level in 1992. Since then, it has undergone numerous transformations as State and Federal courts have grappled with debates over the funding of litigation, old statutory offences of champerty and maintenance, and the role of the state in facilitating access to justice.

Today, Australia is one of the largest forums for class action litigation in the world, after the United States.

The paper makes a series of recommendations for reform following this discussion. The paper also examines the circumstances leading to an explosion in the number of class actions filed in Victoria as the result of rapid developments in Victoria’s statutory class action regime.

The full paper is available to read and download here.

As with all works published by the Society, the paper reflects the views of the authors, rather than any institutional position.

“Improving Disclosure in Litigation Funding: Proposals for Reform” - Xavier Boffa and Henry Davis (November 2024)

Australia’s litigation funding and class action regimes are among the most permissive in the world. As a consequence, litigation funding has quickly grown into a $200 million p.a. industry in Australia, subject to limited oversight and yet potentially open to serious exploitation by foreign actors.

While governments in other jurisdictions have recognised the risks posed by litigation funding and begun implementing significant regulatory reforms, Australia has been slow to address these emerging threats to our democracy and the rule of law.

The paper recommends a number of reforms aimed at improving transparency and oversight in respect of litigation funding in Australia. It gives particular attention to reforms which may assist in limiting the capacity for litigation funding to be used as a vehicle for foreign interference.

The full paper is available to read and download here.

As with all works published by the Society, the paper reflects the views of the authors, rather than any institutional position.