This contribution undertakes a comparative analysis of the relatively recent practice of litigation finance, namely the mechanism whereby the costs of litigation are funded by a third party unconnected to the proceedings – often a specialized investment fund – in return for an economic benefit, such as a share of the damages awarded in the event of a favorable outcome. Third-party litigation funding originated in common law jurisdic- tions, specifically in the Australian legal system, before subsequently being adopted in European civil law jurisdictions, including Italy and Germany, albeit with significant differences, as evidenced by the European Commission’s comparative study “Mapping Third Party Litigation Funding in the European Union.” This article further examines the legal and social advantages of employing litigation finance – chief among them the guarantee of fair judicial protection (Article 24 of the Italian Constitution) – including in the field of healthcare litigation, while also highlighting the risks of a potential commodification of justice arising from its pathological use, and suggesting comparative solutions.
Il presente contributo esamina in chiave comparatistica la pratica, relativamente recen- te, della litigation finance, ovvero il meccanismo di finanziamento del contenzioso da parte di un soggetto terzo estraneo alla vicenda processuale, spesse volte un fondo di investimento specializzato, dietro corrispettivo di un vantaggio economico, per esempio una parte del risarcimento, in caso di esito favorevole della controversia. Il Third party litigation funding trae origine dai sistemi di common law, nello specifico dall’ordina- mento australiano, per poi essere accolto anche nei sistemi di civil law europei, tra cui l’Italia e la Germania, sebbene con significative differenze come dimostrato dallo studio “Mapping Third Party Litigation Funding in the European Union” elaborato dalla Commissione Europea. Dopo un’analisi dei vantaggi giuridici e sociali dell’utilizzo della litigation finance – primo tra tutti un’equa tutela giurisdizionale (art. 24 Cost.) – anche nell’ambito del contenzioso sanitario, ci si sofferma, al contempo, sui rischi di una possibile mercificazione del diritto in caso di un suo uso patologico, prospettando soluzioni comparatistiche.
Litigation finance. Un potente strumento di accesso alla giustizia o un pericoloso tentativo di mercificazione del diritto? Analisi comparatistica e prospettive di regolamentazione / Scarchillo, Gianluca. - In: RIVISTA ITALIANA DI MEDICINA LEGALE E DEL DIRITTO IN CAMPO SANITARIO. - ISSN 2499-2860. - 3/2025(2025), pp. 575-591.
Litigation finance. Un potente strumento di accesso alla giustizia o un pericoloso tentativo di mercificazione del diritto? Analisi comparatistica e prospettive di regolamentazione
GIANLUCA SCARCHILLO
2025
Abstract
This contribution undertakes a comparative analysis of the relatively recent practice of litigation finance, namely the mechanism whereby the costs of litigation are funded by a third party unconnected to the proceedings – often a specialized investment fund – in return for an economic benefit, such as a share of the damages awarded in the event of a favorable outcome. Third-party litigation funding originated in common law jurisdic- tions, specifically in the Australian legal system, before subsequently being adopted in European civil law jurisdictions, including Italy and Germany, albeit with significant differences, as evidenced by the European Commission’s comparative study “Mapping Third Party Litigation Funding in the European Union.” This article further examines the legal and social advantages of employing litigation finance – chief among them the guarantee of fair judicial protection (Article 24 of the Italian Constitution) – including in the field of healthcare litigation, while also highlighting the risks of a potential commodification of justice arising from its pathological use, and suggesting comparative solutions.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Scarchillo_Litigation_finance_2025.pdf
solo gestori archivio
Note: Articolo principale
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza:
Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione
424.96 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
424.96 kB | Adobe PDF | Contatta l'autore |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.


