This book represents a comparative study of Third Party Funding (TPF) and its regulation in England, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Netherlands and the Mainland of China. It provides a general review of the background in which TPF grows and the platform where third party funders are allowed to operate. In each and every chosen jurisdiction, the book analyses the legal risks related to TPF, the regulatory measures and the questions surrounding the challenges that lay ahead. This book is featured by the empirical study of the Chinese TPF market. As of the time of this writing, TPF activities operating in China have not been expanded upon in English or Chinese literature. The language barrier may be one reason. The lack of empirical materials may also contribute to this situation. In order to obtain some first-hand evidence of the TPF market in China, the author conducted empirical research in Shenzhen, with the assistance of Chinese third party funders and some local organizations and authorities. The empirical study took the form of questionnaire surveys. The first survey saw in total 175 responses, and the second saw 18 responses. Due to the fact that many funding arrangements for commercial disputes are kept in the dark, it is hard, if not impossible, to measure the size of the Chinese TPF market. This study provides a dataset that serves a humble purpose; namely to offer an insight into the Chinese TPF market, rather than to grasp the full picture of the industry.

This book represents a comparative study of Third Party Funding (TPF) and its regulation in England, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Netherlands and the Mainland of China. It provides a general review of the background in which TPF grows and the platform where third party funders are allowed to operate. In each and every chosen jurisdiction, the book analyses the legal risks related to TPF, the regulatory measures and the questions surrounding the challenges that lay ahead. This book is featured by the empirical study of the Chinese TPF market. As of the time of this writing, TPF activities operating in China have not been expanded upon in English or Chinese literature. The language barrier may be one reason. The lack of empirical materials may also contribute to this situation. In order to obtain some first-hand evidence of the TPF market in China, the author conducted empirical research in Shenzhen, with the assistance of Chinese third party funders and some local organizations and authorities. The empirical study took the form of questionnaire surveys. The first survey saw in total 175 responses, and the second saw 18 responses. Due to the fact that many funding arrangements for commercial disputes are kept in the dark, it is hard, if not impossible, to measure the size of the Chinese TPF market. This study provides a dataset that serves a humble purpose; namely to offer an insight into the Chinese TPF market, rather than to grasp the full picture of the industry.