Originally from Handbook on Third-Party Funding in International Arbitration, Second Edition

PREVIEW PAGE

PART ONE. THE THIRD PARTY FUNDING LANDSCAPE

1.  The TPF market in Belgium

1.1.  Please shortly describe the TPF market in your Jurisdiction.

For now, the use of third-party litigation funding has remained relatively limited, which might be because its admissibility has not yet been judicially confirmed. Moreover, the costs of Belgian judiciary proceedings are relatively low compared to the legal costs incurred in other jurisdictions. Similarly, the proceeds resulting from litigation or arbitration proceedings under Belgian law tend to be lower than in other – particularly common law – jurisdictions, since concepts such as punitive damages are not available under Belgian law. Additionally, as Belgian courts encounter substantial backlogs, the time frames within which they handle cases are generally very long, especially as compared to other countries. In turn, this proves to be an important drawback to Funders. Therefore, third-party litigation funders have shown a relatively modest interest in the Belgium market so far, which has prevented litigants from making wide use of third-party litigation funding.

However, on 13 September 2022, the European Parliament passed a resolution regarding recommendations to the European Commission on regulations of litigation funding in the European Union. These recommendations may encourage the start of a legislative process at the European and national levels and therefore, may stimulate the third-party litigation funding market in countries such as Belgium.

Consequently, there is not yet a particular Belgian market regarding third-party litigation funding. However, changes might be ahead soon, especially given the fact that foreign actors from more mature markets are gradually starting to deploy their activities in Belgium.