John Bowie of LawFuel argues that the suggestion by many critics in the wake of the James Hardie case that funders should be required to support a case for a mandated period of time is not a viable option and misses the central takeaway from the case, which is that the aggrieved litigants were able to access justice as a result of the funding, even though the outcome was not what the plaintiffs or the funder would have wanted. Read more.