Conclusion

The interviews the author conducted with funders suggest that the number of publicly known funded cases is a sample of a much larger number of funded cases unknown to the public. It is likely that the increasing use of TPF in investment arbitration will persist until major changes to the practice are brought into effect. It is not only because investors lack the financial means to bring a claim against States. Even if they do have the financial resources to bring such claims, they simply do not wish to bear the risk of investment arbitration. Investment arbitration is lengthy and full of uncertainties in terms of the result of the case and the recoverability of the award. Disputant parties therefore find TPF particularly appealing where the financial risk is shouldered by funders, though the extent of the transfer of such risks is contingent upon the arrangement between the funder and funded party. In the future, new funding models might develop further to enable States to benefit from TPF, too.