Patent litigation funding on the rise in UK
Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Patent litigation funding on the rise in UK

Recent cases and growing budgets show that UK litigation funding is becoming increasingly sophisticated. The unitary patent, if it happens, will provide a further boost

In May the UK’s biggest provider, Harbour Litigation Funding, announced that it was tripling its available finances, to £180 million. An increasing amount of this is going on patent cases, with Harbour hiring Stephen O’Dowd, a commercial litigator at BT who had worked on several patent cases for the company, at the end of last year.

“Patents are definitely on the rise,” Susan Dunn, Harbour’s head of litigation funding, tells Managing IP. “We normally get two or three inquiries a month concerning patent cases; there were 10 in May.”

Litigation insurance is also increasing, with IPCom winning its appeal in May against Nokia in the Court of Appeal with the help of insurers. IPCom’s patent for accessing a random access channel on a mobile was held valid and infringed.

“IPCom was a classic example of a case that would never have been taken on in the past,” says James Blick of TheJudge, a broker for litigation insurance and funding. “It was high risk, technical and expensive. Its success shows how much more sophisticated the market has become.”

Blick found funding for his first patent case in 2005 and it was the only one that year. Today TheJudge works with 12 different providers, each taking on five to 20 cases a year. “New insurers have entered that market and are often prepared to take on bigger risks,” he says. “And litigation funding, which used to be the preserve of small hedge funds, has seen banks enter, such as Investec.”

Investec was the first bank to begin offering litigation funding in the UK, at the beginning of 2011. In November it said it had lent out £5 million so far.


Greater patent expertise

Historically, patents have been seen by third-party funders as too complicated and unpredictable. While funders like Harbour still turn down cases that seem to turn too much “on the arguments of two sets of experts, neither of which we understand”, according to Dunn, there is increasing expertise in-house and outsourcing to patent lawyers.

Indeed, a patent case can present the perfect fact pattern for a litigation funder: a small, risk-averse company with a specific claim, experience in the area and a counterparty that is good for the costs. “Patents are ripe for growth. They can be very lucrative cases and there are lots of individuals out there looking for help,” says Blick.

Gareth Morgan at Winston & Strawn helps companies such as Harbour understand the cases that come to them. “Patent litigation is still a big call for SMEs. Having spent £100,000 to £150,000 on protecting a patent, the last thing you need is enforcement that could cost up to €1 million. There is no such thing as cheap litigation – even in Germany and the Netherlands it’s often more expensive than people think. Cost awards in the Dutch courts are often above €500,000,” he says. “In that situation third-party funding can be a big help.”

The unitary patent in the EU, the final vote on which has been postponed by the European Parliament, would increase the potential upside for funders while keeping costs relatively stable. “Damages across the EU could be up to eight times what you can get in the UK at the moment,” estimates Morgan.



Food for the trolls

This would of course also be an incentive to patent trolls or NPEs, and the distinction between funders and NPEs has become increasingly blurred. “We have been approached by patent owners who were approached by trolls, but didn’t want to give away control of their case,” says Blick.

The legal principle of champerty prevents third-party funders from taking any active role in a legal case. But the IP rights themselves can be assigned – another benefit of funding IP cases – and Blick refers to a recent case where the funder decided to take on a more active role, rather like an NPE. “Plus the money behind trolls and funders often comes from similar sources – so the distinction can become quite fuzzy,” he says.

“The choice between insurance, funding and NPEs is about control and costs,” says Morgan. “With insurance you cede a lot of the control over how the case proceeds. But the costs are likely lower. Third-party funders will charge something approaching 50%.” And NPEs can charge even more.

“Any patent owner should consider third-party funding, though. If the technology is straightforward and you have a clear claim, funders will be interested,” says Morgan. “Show you are serious. If you have already invested your own time and money in getting a QC’s opinion, for example, that is a good start.”

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

A 36-member team from Zhong Lun Law Firm, including six partners, will join the newly formed East IP Group
The Delhi High Court sided with Ericsson against Indian smartphone maker Lava, bringing the companies' nine-year dispute to a close
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Tennessee has passed the ELVIS Act, a law that fights against AI models that mimic the voice and likeness of music artists
Rob Stien, chief communications and public policy officer at InterDigital, says the EU has forgotten innovators while trying to solve an issue that doesn’t exist
As Australia’s Qantm IP leans towards being acquired by a private equity company, sources discuss what it could mean for IP firms
Law firms that are conscious of their role in society are more likely to win work, according to a survey of over 23,000 in-house professionals
Nghiem Xuan Bac Pham, managing partner of Vision & Associates, discusses opportunities created by the US-China rift as well as profitability issues facing IP practices
Douglas Leite and two of his colleagues were intrigued by Bhering Advogados’s mission to grow its patent litigation practice
Each week Managing IP speaks to a different IP practitioner about their life and career
Gift this article