ALR 121. 101 Submission 25 (IMF Bentham Ltd). See Bolitho v Banksia Securities Ltd (No 4) [2014] VSC 582 (26 November 2014). 102 [2.140] [2.208]. – 103 This is consistent with expectation that funders consider including in funding agreements an obligation for the lawyer to give priority ASIC’s to the instructions over those of the funder: Australian Securities and Investments Commission, Regulatory Guide 248—Litigation plaintiff’s Schemes and Proof of Debt Schemes: Managing Conflicts of Interest (April 2013) RG 248.59. 32 104 Submission 25 (IMF Bentham Ltd).
ALR 121. 101 Submission 25 (IMF Bentham Ltd). See Bolitho v Banksia Securities Ltd (No 4) [2014] VSC 582 (26 November 2014). 102 [2.140] – [2.208]. 103 This is consistent with ASIC’s expectation that funders consider including in funding agreements an obligation for the lawyer to give priority to the plaintiff’s instructions over those of the funder: Australian Securities and Investments Commission, Regulatory Guide 248—Litigation Schemes and Proof of Debt Schemes: Managing Conflicts of Interest (April 2013) RG 248.59. 32 104 Submission 25 (IMF Bentham Ltd).
VLRC_Litigation_Funding_and_Group_Proceedings_Report_forweb.docx