Comparative Analysis of Litigation Funding Rules in the DIFC and the ADGM

The team at WinJustice provides a comparative analysis of litigation funding rules in the DIFC and the ADGM, explaining that while both the DIFC and ADGM have embraced third-party funding as part of their push to become leading dispute resolution hubs, the DIFC offers a more flexible, disclosure-driven regime with no capital thresholds for funders, whereas the ADGM imposes stricter eligibility criteria, capital adequacy requirements and capped returns, creating a more regulated environment that may appeal to institutional funders seeking greater certainty.

Read more (LinkedIn login required).