Litigation Capital Manag... Share Discussion Threads

[nchanning] 30/8/2023 13:23

If you're a Minervini disciple , you'd say there's a nice VCP forming as a base has formed while volume and volatility are declining , just waiting for a big breakout day on high volume now

[hunter154] 30/8/2023 13:16

Really good video, once again highlighting how good LIT are at assessing potential cases.

[someuwin] 30/8/2023 11:34

Good new Panthera Resources interview - very positive on LIT too.

[someuwin] 30/8/2023 11:02

...Not me (had to look that one up!) But by looking at charts rather than animal entrails, my prediction is that we'll be trading at a new high by the time of the results in three weeks time:

[someuwin] 30/8/2023 07:07

30 August 2023

Litigation Capital Management Limited

("LCM" or the "Company")

Notice of Results

Litigation Capital Management Limited (AIM:LIT), an alternative asset manager specialising in dispute financing solutions internationally, will announce its results for the full year ended 30 June 2023 on Tuesday, 19 September 2023.

A webinar presentation for analysts will take place at 9:30 a.m. BST on the day. Analysts wishing to attend should contact [e-mail] to register.

As part of its commitment to engaging equally with all investors, LCM will also be hosting a webinar for investors at 11 a.m. BST on 19 September. If you would like to attend this presentation, please register using the following link:



The presentation is open to all existing and potential shareholders. Investors who already follow LCM on the Investor Meet Company platform will automatically be invited.

Questions can be submitted pre-event via your Investor Meet Company dashboard up until 9am the day before the meeting or at any time during the event.

[nchanning] 25/8/2023 11:01

I guess this will be virtually instant cash payment from the Australian government then ....

[boozey] 25/8/2023 10:04

someuwin good find that answers my question above. Thanks.

[someuwin] 25/8/2023 10:01

Court approves $137.2 million toxic foam compensation

Fri, 25 August 2023 at 8:38 am GMT+1

Thousands of landowners affected by toxic firefighting foam at air force bases across Australia will share more than $130 million in compensation from the federal government.

About 30,000 landowners living in seven sites claimed they were affected by toxic PFAS chemicals found in the foam.

The Federal Court on Friday approved the $132.7 million sum after the parties reached an in-principle, binding agreement in May.

Sites near Royal Australian Air Force bases at Richmond and Wagga Wagga in NSW, Bullsbrook in Western Australia, Darwin in the Northern Territory, Edinburgh in South Australia, Townsville in Queensland and Wodonga in Victoria are covered under the agreement.

The so-called "forever chemicals", which accumulate in the body and do not naturally degrade, are linked to cancers, birth defects and diseases.

The suit alleged the Commonwealth did not adequately prevent the toxic chemicals in the foam from escaping and contaminating soil and groundwater.

Handing down his decision, Justice Michael Lee said the settlement amount was fair and in the interest of group members.

The government has not admitted liability in the terms of the settlement.

Payout sizes for each affected owner will not be divided equally and individuals will be assessed based on a range of factors including the type of property they owned and the particular community they lived in.

The investigation into PFAS-impacted communities revealed the widespread and damaging impact toxic substance is to properties and the environment, Shine Lawyers' Craig Allsopp said.

The joint head of class actions reminded people that claims for personal injury for all PFAS affected communities can still be brought.

"This does not have to be the end of the battle for compensation and acknowledgement," Mr Allsop said.

The Department of Defence previously agreed to pay landholders in Katherine (NT), Oakey (Queensland) and Williamtown (NSW) in a 2020 settlement worth $212.5 million.

[makinbuks] 25/8/2023 09:33

SEC raised no comments following a review of BUR's financial disclosures:

"Following our engagement and correspondence with the SEC staff, we are pleased to report that on August 24, 2023 the SEC staff confirmed that they have completed their review with no further comments. Burford's accounting approach to fair value of capital provision assets will remain as previously disclosed."

Fair Value accounting is the way forward

[makinbuks] 25/8/2023 09:15

Interesting that it gets so publicly exposed. You might have thought LCM would want that supressed for commercial competitive purposes. On the other hand PAT have the obligation to disclose financial data to the market

[74tom] 25/8/2023 07:40

I particularly like the last paragraph re. monetising a part of the license if it is awarded. Further extracts from the PAT RNS;

"LCM's detailed examination, supported by advice from multiple legal, mining and valuation experts over many months reinforces the view that an actionable expropriation, amongst other Treaty breaches perpetrated by India, has occurred to an asset of substantial value to the Company."

"The claim for compensation will involve, among others, an assessment of the market value of the Bhukia Project immediately before the expropriation. The Company believes that the market value of Bhukia is substantial with the project ranking among the top undeveloped gold projects in the world."

Presumably this will be a fund 2 investment & therefore the total LIT exposure here is ~$3.4m, so right in their sweet spot & a small part of the the overall portfolio, with very significant upside potential.

[someuwin] 25/8/2023 07:30

LIT go ahead with the Panthera Resources Arbitration Funding...

AFA with LCM

LCM Funding is a subsidiary of Litigation Capital Management Limited ("LCM"), a firm quoted on the AIM Market of the London Stock Exchange. LCM is a leading global disputes funder with significant expertise in international arbitration and cross-border disputes, including bilateral investment treaty claims over mineral resource assets.

Upon issuance of the FCN, LCM Funding will provide up to US$13.6 million in non--recourse financing to IGPL for use in prosecuting its Treaty claims against India. If no award and/or recovery are achieved, then LCM Funding is not entitled to any repayment of the Facility.

In the event that there is an award and/or recovery, LCM Funding shall be entitled, in the first instance, to the amounts it has deployed from the Facility, as well as the greater of:

a) approximately US$1.36 million being 10% of the Funding Limit (which is the amount of the Facility);

b) a Funder's commission (the "Commission") of between 5% and 15% of the damages recovered, based upon the number of years that have passed from the date of the Funding Confirmation Notice; or

c) a multiple (the "Multiple") of between 2 and 4.25 times the total of the Facility, based upon the number of years that have passed from the date of the Funding Confirmation Notice.

In the event that the settlement or award includes the value or benefit of any property other than cash, pursuant to the terms of the AFA, IGPL are required to realise and convert a portion of its interest in the property, or secure external finance, to secure sufficient cash and then apply it in accordance with the above...

[boozey] 25/8/2023 05:41

I wonder reference PFAS whether we will get an RNS this morning about whether the Federal Judge in the PFAS case has determined that the agreed settlement is fair and reasonable. It was due to be heard at 10:15 this morning Australian time.

[maddox] 23/8/2023 09:58

Hi Hunter,

You need to look at these firms in the round. BUR may have a lower IRR but its deploying a huge amount more capital [$6.6bn] than LIT or MANO. Also, obviously the prior performance doesn't include the enormous YPF case (probably worth several billion dollars for an investment of <$100m).

[williamcooper104] 23/8/2023 09:22

Hence only real measure is cash balance sheet growth over time plus any dividends

[williamcooper104] 23/8/2023 09:21

IRR can be very misleading; especially at high return levels as it assumes that you can reinvest all cashflows at the IRR - on a bond YTM that's not so wrong but on 70 IRRs it's usually rubbish Run a quick excel calc 100 out at T=0, 100 back at T=1, 100 at T=1, 100 at T=5 Now do same again but with 300 back at T=5 So if you get a few big wins early doors you are set up for a mega IRR - all the large PE houses have been dining out on this for years There's an excel function MIRR that's better as it allows you to assume reinvestment rates

[someuwin] 23/8/2023 09:11

I see Panthera due diligence period now extended until 25 August. All very odd, but getting closer and closer. (Wondering if its worth having a punt on PAT but I don't know much about the case).

[hunter154] 22/8/2023 16:23

BUR is way behind. Looks like they lose more than the other two.

[maddox] 22/8/2023 15:33

One basis of comparison is to look at their performance metrics on their complete record of fully resolved cases.

The Internal Rate of Return (IRR) is I think the best metric as the time/value of the investment is accounted for. Of the three quoted Lit Fin firms MANO is top with a stellar IRR of 131%, then LIT with a 79% IRR and BUR 29%.

These are all excellent returns on capital. You need to look beyond the beyond the metrics to assess whether they are a good investment - recent P/L figures I'd argue aren't a fair reflection of the inherent value.

[williamcooper104] 22/8/2023 14:34

Have done in the past It'll be easier to do when they all report on same basisWorth also looking at OBL (Australia listed) too

[hunter154] 22/8/2023 13:27

Has anyone done relative analysis of LIT v Burford?
If so, how does the metrics look?

[someuwin] 21/8/2023 21:50

Interesting report that IAG - Insurance Australia Group (Australia's largest insurance group) is facing $7bn legal claims linked to trade credit insurance policies.

Remember that just two weeks ago LIT posted an article titled "THE USE OF DISPUTES FINANCE IN TRADE CREDIT INSURANCE CASES"



Coincidence? I don't think so. Especially when you add in the Australia connection!


IAG has disclosed $7 billion in legal claims stemming from insurance written by a former commercial partner, most of which is represented by policies issued to collapsed financier Greensill Capital.

In a detailed footnote to its full-year financial statements, IAG said it is dealing with 20 separate legal claims in Australia’s Federal Court linked to trade credit insurance policies issued by Sydney-based Bond & Credit Co. IAG owned a 50 per cent stake in BCC until April 2019...

[hunter154] 21/8/2023 13:43

Just looked at Burford. Looks like ca. 40% institutional holding.
We have Collins only at 12%. Plenty of scope.

[maddox] 21/8/2023 13:03

IMHO with what we're anticipating from the forthcoming results LIT could buck the trend. It'll look ridiculously undervalued and an attractive investment that is uncorrelated, or negatively correlated, with the general economy. We currently have very little institutional money onboard - hopefully, the post-results road show will generate some institutional interest.