Friday, 9 March 2012 These ‘interim’ measures, date back to October 2009 [2] when the Court held that the litigation funder in the Brookfield Multiplex Ltd v International Litigation Funding Partners Pte Ltd [3] case was a “managed investment scheme” under s9 of the Corporations Act. As result, all current and subsequent litigation funders would need to hold an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL) to continue operating. Under ASIC’s relief measures, litigation funders are not required to hold an AFSL. Therefore funders would not be required to provide claimants information such as a product disclosure statement. IMF, the largest litigation funder in Australia, disagrees with ASIC’s decision. IMF’s MD, Hugh McLernon stated in Lawyers Weekly that obtaining an AFSL licence (which would protect and inform claimants) is neither expensive nor time consuming [4]. The interim relief measures, although allowing claimants to access the necessary funding for legal relief, creates an uncertain environment for the litigation funding industry. Litigation funders are unsure how ASIC will implement the removal of relief measures, which expire on 30 September 2012, and have no indication of the costs they will incur. Therefore this is an interesting space to keep an eye on, as uncertainty lingers in the growing business of litigation funding. The question at the forefront of the litigation funding industry is, will there be any changes to the litigation funding landscape when 30 September 2012 rolls around or will the relief measures once again be extended? This post has been jointly written by Sasikala Kandiah and David Lam and first published internally on 09/03/2012. [1] ASIC press release 12-35AD [2] Multiplex Ltd v International Litigation Funding Partners Pte Ltd [2009] FCAFC 147 [3] [2009] FCAFC 147 [4] http://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/news/litigation-funders-can-remain-unlicensed