The LexisNexis Restructuring & Insolvency practical guidance team, in partnership with Mark Beaumont of Annecto Legal Ltd, has published a new Practice Note—‘Insurance alternatives to litigation funding’. This Practice Note discusses insurance alternatives to litigation funding, more particularly work-in-progress insurance and creditor funding with the benefit of capital protection insurance.

Commercial-Ireland analysis: The LexisNexis Ireland—Commercial practical guidance team has published a new Practice Note which tracks the progress of Irish legislation (including Bills in progress, Acts in force and Statutory Instruments), judgments of the Irish Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, consultations and inquiries related to Irish commercial law in 2024.

The LexisNexis Ireland—Commercial practical guidance team has published a new Practice Note which tracks the progress of Irish legislation (including Bills in progress, Acts in force and Statutory Instruments), judgments of the Irish Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, consultations and inquiries related to Irish commercial law in 2024.

Ireland—Dispute Resolution analysis: The LexisNexis Ireland—Dispute Resolution practical guidance team has published a new Practice Note which provides guidance on what a default judgment is (also referred to as judgment in default, judgment in default of appearance and judgment in default of defence) and the conditions that must be satisfied before a court can enter default judgment. It considers the procedure for obtaining a default judgment. It also provides guidance on unless orders, the circumstances in which the court must set aside a default judgment and the provisions that apply when seeking to enforce a default judgment.

The LexisNexis Ireland—Commercial practical guidance team has published a new Practice Note which considers the steps which a business can take to review its commercial contracts with a view to extracting maximum value and minimising costs. The Practice Note explains the circumstances which might prompt a legal contract review, what should be reviewed and who should be involved in the review process. It also explains the key elements of the contracts reviewed from both a customer’s and a supplier’s perspective.

The LexisNexis Restructuring & Insolvency practical guidance team has published a new Practice Note: ‘Legal professional privilege in insolvency’. This Practice Note, produced in partnership with Joseph Evans of Charles Russell Speechlys LLP, considers some common practical issues which arise in relation to legal professional privilege in the context of insolvency, more particularly the general principles in both corporate and personal insolvency, the relationship between the insolvency office-holder’s statutory powers and privilege, the waiver of privilege, the position concerning communications by the office-holder, and privilege in the context of assigned claims.

The LexisNexis Restructuring & Insolvency and Dispute Resolution practical guidance teams have published a new Practice Note called ‘Litigation funding agreements—Dispute Resolution’. This Practice Note is one of a series of short Practice Notes, by Tanya Lansky and Tets Ishikawa, Managing Directors of LionFish Litigation Finance Ltd, aiming to provide for those involved in negotiating and considering litigation funding agreements and their associated documents a better understanding of the factors at play. It considers dispute resolution, more particularly the commitment to act in good faith to resolve disputes, the appointment of an expert or mediator and fall back on an arbitration.

The LexisNexis Restructuring & Insolvency and Dispute Resolution practical guidance teams have published a new Practice Note called ‘Litigation funding agreements—adverse costs and security for costs’. This Practice Note is one of a short series of Practice Notes by Tanya Lansky and Tets Ishikawa, Managing Directors of LionFish Litigation Finance Ltd, aiming to provide for those involved in negotiating and considering litigation funding agreements and their associated documents a better understanding of the factors at play. It considers adverse costs risks for funders and security for costs.

The LexisNexis Restructuring & Insolvency and Dispute Resolution practical guidance teams have published a new Practice Note called ‘Litigation funding agreements—co-funding’. This Practice Note is one of a series of short Practice Notes, by Tanya Lansky and Tets Ishikawa, Managing Directors of LionFish Litigation Finance Ltd, aiming to provide for those involved in negotiating and considering litigation funding agreements and their associated documents a better understanding of the factors at play. It considers co-funding, more particularly alignment of interest and approach on issues such as funder returns, funding documentation and communications between the litigant/solicitor and co-funders, and the working relationship between co-funders.

The LexisNexis Restructuring & Insolvency and Dispute Resolution practical guidance teams have published a new Practice Note called ‘Litigation funding agreements—control’. This Practice Note is one of a series of short Practice Notes, by Tanya Lansky and Tets Ishikawa, Managing Directors of LionFish Litigation Finance Ltd, aiming to provide for those involved in negotiating and considering litigation funding agreements and their associated documents a better understanding of the factors at play. It considers the funder’s involvement in a case and control, more particularly the different approaches to control, the input of solicitors and counsel, and decisions at key stages of the litigation.

The LexisNexis Restructuring & Insolvency and Dispute Resolution practical guidance teams have published a new Practice Note called ‘Litigation funding agreements – drawdown processes’. This Practice Note is one of a series of short Practice Notes, by Tanya Lansky and Tets Ishikawa, Managing Directors of LionFish Litigation Finance Ltd, aiming to provide for those involved in negotiating and considering litigation funding agreements and their associated documents a better understanding of the factors at play. It considers drawdown processes, more particularly the overriding objective, drawdown submissions and timings, submission verifications, the advancement of a significant portion (and at times the entirety) of the committed funding amount or the advancement of monies against verified invoices and good practices for finance teams.

The LexisNexis Restructuring & Insolvency and Dispute Resolution practical guidance teams have published a new Practice Note called ‘Litigation funding agreements—investment top-ups’. This Practice Note is one of a series of short Practice Notes, by Tanya Lansky and Tets Ishikawa, Managing Directors of LionFish Litigation Finance Ltd, aiming to provide for those involved in negotiating and considering litigation funding agreements and their associated documents a better understanding of the factors at play. It considers investment top-ups, more particularly how terms may change, effecting the change, keeping the ATE insurer abreast of any funding top-up, topping–up with other funders and timing of the top-up.