Hong Kong: Third Party Funding In Hong Kong

Last Updated: 20 November 2015
Article by Simon McConnell

Third party funding has become increasingly common in numerous common law jurisdictions over the last decade. Hong Kong is at a relatively early stage of development in this regard, likely due to the fact that third party funding of litigation with a view to profit may potentially constitute both tort and the criminal offences of champerty and maintenance in Hong Kong. As regards third party funding of arbitrations in Hong Kong, the position is not clear although that may be about to change.

This Article considers the restrictions on third party funding in Hong Kong, the current position in relation to third party funding of litigation in Hong Kong, as well as the much anticipated Consultation Paper recently released by the Law Reform Commission of Hong Kong recommending that third party funding for arbitrations should be permitted in Hong Kong.

The restrictions on third party funding in Hong Kong

Third party funding is historically prohibited under the traditional common law doctrines of maintenance and champerty, which were developed in mediaeval England to prevent "oppression of poor men by rich men, through the means of legal proceedings"1. "Maintenance" is defined as "an officious intermeddling in a suit which in no way belongs to one by maintaining or assisting either party with money or otherwise to prosecute or defend it."2 "Champerty" is defined as a form of maintenance, and occurs when the person receives consideration for the maintenance out of the proceeds of successful litigation; in other words, taking a share of any damages award.

Traditionally the doctrine involves value judgements as to whether: (i) third party funding "may encourage the perversion of justice and endanger the integrity of judicial processes"3 where a "champertous maintainer might be tempted, for his own personal gain, to inflame the damages, to suppress evidence, or even to suborn witnesses"4, and (ii) third party funding may involve "a stranger to the litigation in "trafficking" or "gambling" in the outcome of the litigation"5, which should be made unlawful. As a result, exceptions exist including an exception for those who have a legitimate common interest in the outcome of the litigation.

In March 2014, the Hong Kong Government considered the issue of whether to abolish the offences of maintenance and champerty. It was decided that the offences should be preserved for the time being, as the abolition would raise legal and public concerns including those of recovery agents and litigation funding companies.6

Despite the abolition of prohibition of maintenance and champerty in some other common law jurisdictions7, the crimes and torts of maintenance and champerty, and the common law rules which make them a basis for rendering contracts unenforceable as against public policy, are still part of Hong Kong law today.

Current position as to third party funding of litigation in Hong Kong

Third party funding arrangements that have been considered acceptable by the Hong Kong courts generally have involved the funder providing funds at arm's length to the funded party in the event that the plaintiff is successful in its pursuit of the litigation and in obtaining financial recovery. The funded party retains control of the proceedings and the third party funder assumes liability for the costs and disbursements of the plaintiff, Adverse Costs Orders and Security for Costs Orders, if so ordered by the Court.

In Siegfried Adalbert Unruh v Hans- Joerg Seeberger8, the Court of Final Appeal in 2007 held that the doctrines of maintenance and champerty continue to have effect in Hong Kong but recognise several exceptions to the common law rules. These are:

(a) the "common interest" category, whereby persons with a legitimate interest in the outcome of the litigation are justified in supporting the litigation;

(b) cases involving "access to justice" considerations9; and

(c) a miscellaneous category of practices accepted as lawful, such as the sale and assignment by a trustee in bankruptcy of an action commenced in the bankruptcy to a purchaser for value10; and certain insolvency proceedings11

Do the same principles apply to arbitration?

In Hong Kong, the answer may be "no"; but clarity is needed.

A High Court decision by Mr Justice Kaplan in the 2005 decision of Cannoway Consultants Limited v Kenworth Engineering Limited12 concluded that "....the law of champerty does not apply to arbitration proceedings".

However, in 2007 in Unruh v Seeberger, Mr Justice Ribeiro of the Court of Final Appeal left open the question as to whether maintenance and champerty apply to arbitrations in Hong Kong, given it did not need to be decided.

The position in Singapore, by contrast, is clear. The Court of Appeal in 2007 (Otech Pakistan v Clough Engineering) found that "it would be artificial to differentiate between litigation and arbitration proceedings and say that champerty applies to one because it is conducted in a public forum and not to the other because it is conducted in private". In Singapore, champerty applies to both.

Hong Kong publishes consultation paper on third party funding in arbitration

For arbitration in Hong Kong, it is uncertain whether the operation of the doctrines of maintenance and champerty also apply12.

On 19 October 2015, a Law Reform Commission Sub-committee published its Consultation Paper on "Third Party Funding for Arbitration" in Hong Kong. It was unanimously agreed by the sub-committee that "reform of Hong Kong law is needed to make it clear that third party funding for arbitrations taking place in Hong Kong is permitted under Hong Kong law provided that appropriate financial and ethical safeguards are complied with"13.

It is recommended that the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 609) be amended to provide that third party funding for arbitration taking place in Hong Kong is permitted under Hong Kong law. This would provide a firmer and statutory footing. It also recommends that clear ethical and financial standards for third party funders providing third party funding to parties to arbitration taking place in Hong Kong should be developed.

To that end, the Law Reform Commission has invited submissions on a number of issues, as follows: .

  1. Whether the development and supervision of applicable ethical and financial standards for third party funding of arbitration taking place in Hong Kong should be conducted by a statutory or governmental body, or a self-regulated body;
  2. How the applicable ethical and financial standards should address other matters such as (a) conflicts of interest; (b) confidentiality and privilege; (c) control of the arbitration by the third party funder; (d) disclosure of third party funding to the tribunal and other party/parties to the arbitration and (e) grounds for termination of third party funding;
  3. Whether a third party funder should be liable for adverse costs orders in a matter it has funded and whether the Arbitration Ordinance should be amended to provide an arbitral tribunal with power to order security for costs against a third party.

Responses to the above recommendations are invited by 18 January 2016.

The way forward regarding third party funding of arbitration in Hong Kong

It appears from the research by the Law Reform Sub-committee that nearly all major international arbitration centres now allow third party funding in arbitration.

Specific concerns have been raised in the context of international arbitration, where the presence of such funding is likely to be far less transparent in the arbitration process and also less likely to be the subject of public scrutiny. A few specific concerns are as follows14:

  1. Confidentiality and privilege issues. The lawyer's duty of confidentiality to the client seeking funding could be compromised by providing information about the claim to the funder in the standard due diligence process.
  2. Disclosure of funding and costs. A question arises as to whether a claimant is obliged to disclose the participation of a funder to a respondent or an arbitral tribunal. The Respondent may well want to use that knowledge to take steps to seek security for its arbitration costs.
  3. Conflict of interest. This issue can emerge sharply in the context of settlement negotiations, particularly in circumstances where the funder and client may be in disagreement over whether or not to settle a claim. Another potential conflict of interest, or perceived conflict of interest, could arise between a funder and one of the arbitrators appointed to arbitrate a dispute, for example, where the arbitrator is a partner of a law firm with which the funder has a relationship. Disclosure of such a connection could cause particular difficulties where the funding has been kept confidential until the arbitration process is well under way.

Introducing third party funding in arbitration to take place in Hong Kong with appropriate financial and ethical safeguards, would not only resolve the present uncertainty over whether the doctrines of maintenance and champerty in Hong Kong apply, but also enhance Hong Kong's competitive position as an international arbitration centre.

The current uncertainty regarding whether the archaic doctrines of maintenance and champerty applies to Hong Kong arbitration does need to be removed. The Law Reform Sub-committee currently recommends that third party funding should be permitted in arbitration taking place in Hong Kong. Hong Kong law could therefore soon be reframed to expressly permit third party funding in the context of arbitration, with appropriate safe guards to mitigate perceived negative implications.


1 Bradlaugh v Newdegate (1883) LR 11 QBD 1 at p.7

2 Unruh v Seeberger (2007) 10 HKCFAR 31, para 82

3 Unruh v Seeberger (2007) 10 HKCFAR 31, para 82

4 Re Trepca Mines Ltd (No 2) [1963] Ch 199 at p.219

5 Unruh v Seeberger (2007) 10 HKCFAR 31, para 101

6 See the report of the Legislative Counsel Panel on Administration of Justice and Legal Services, Abolition of the common law office of champerty, LC Paper No. CB(4)486/13-14(04), paras 11-12

7 For example, in the United Kingdom, the Criminal Law Act 1967 has abolished the offences and torts of maintenance and champerty, though the principles remain potentially relevant to tainted agreements as unenforceable for being contrary to public policy or otherwise illegal. Similarly several Australian states have also abolished maintenance and champerty as both a tort and a crime, but champerty remains relevant when considering the illegality and enforceability of tainted agreements

8 [2007] HKCU 246

9 See Ram Coomar Coondoo v Chunder Canto Mookerjee (1876) LR 2 App Cas 186; see also Beijing Tong Gang Da Sheng Trade Co. Ltd v Allen & Overy [2015] HKCA 232 in which the Court of Appeal upheld the first instance decision that a litigation funding agreement and assignment of a cause of action were champertous as there were vastly disproportionate potential returns for the outlay in the funding agreement and the assignment, which were significant to the genuineness of the impugned transaction. The "access to justice" ground relied upon by the Plaintiff failed

10 See Berman v SPF CDO I Ltd [2011] HKCU 522

11 One clear exception has been that relating to claims by insolvent companies. In the case of Re Cyberworks Audio Video Technology Limited [2010] HKCU 974, the assignment of a cause of action to a litigation funding company by liquidators under s.199(2)(a) of the old Companies Ordinance (Chapter 32 of the Laws of Hong Kong), was held to be a lawful exception to the prohibition on maintenance and champerty

12 [1995] 1 HKC 179

13 See Unruh v Seeberger (2007) 10 HKCFAR 31, para 123, where Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ leaves open the question whether maintenance and champerty apply to agreements concerning arbitrations taking place in Hong KongConsultation Paper on "Third Party Funding for Arbitration" by the Law Reform Commission of Hong Kong – Third Party Funding for Arbitration Sub-committee, October 2015, para 1.31

14 C Bowman: K. Hurford; S. Khouri, "Third party funding in international commercial and treaty arbitration – a panacea or a plague? A discussion of the risks and benefits of third party funding"

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions