THIRD-PARTY FUNDING OF ARBITRAL DISPUTES: A MEANS OF ACCESS TO JUSTICE OR THE COMMERCIALIZATION OF DISPUTES?

Abstract

This study analyzes the theoretical foundations, legal problems, and regulatory models of third-party funding in international commercial arbitration (hereinafter – TPF). Alongside examining the role of this financing mechanism in ensuring access to justice, the research also addresses legal issues related to the abuse of dominant position by funders, conflicts of interest between funders and arbitrators, and questions concerning the allocation of arbitration costs. Furthermore, the regulatory models of TPF in England and Wales, Singapore, and Hong Kong are examined from a comparative legal perspective, with particular attention given to their distinctive features. At the same time, the study comparatively analyzes the institutional regulation of TPF through international commercial arbitration rules within the frameworks of the Singaporean and Hong Kong models. On this basis, the advantages and shortcomings of different regulatory approaches in preventing and resolving legal issues associated with TPF are identified. The research concludes that the effective regulation of TPF should be shaped in accordance with the legal system and economic interests of each jurisdiction, while simultaneously ensuring the independence and trans-parency of arbitral proceedings through a balanced legal mechanism.