A legal battle concerning third-party litigation funding is heading to the UK Privy Council, where two Indian lawyers

are set to present opposing arguments. The case stems from an appeal filed in November 2025 by OGD Services Holdings

Limited, a Mauritian company belonging to the Essar Group. OGD is challenging a Supreme Court of Mauritius ruling that

upheld the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award in favor of another Mauritian entity, Norscot Rig

Management.

Norscot has confirmed its intention to contest the appeal and submitted its objections in December 2025. The Privy

Council is expected to schedule a hearing for the matter next year.

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London serves as the ultimate court of appeal for Mauritius. Under the

legal framework of Mauritius, parties can seek leave to appeal judgments from the Supreme Court of Mauritius to the

Privy Council. If granted, the Privy Council then assesses whether the Mauritian courts correctly handled the

recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award.

In September 2025, the Supreme Court of Mauritius granted OGD Services Holdings Limited the right to appeal. This

decision allows OGD to bring the dispute before the Privy Council, which will now determine whether the Mauritian courts

were justified in enforcing the arbitral award for Norscot.

Previously, OGD challenged a partial award in the High Court of Justice in England & Wales, arguing that third-party

litigation funding costs should not be recoverable. However, the High Court rejected this challenge, stating that the

statutory power to award "legal and other costs" under the Arbitration Act was broad enough to encompass such funding

costs. Subsequently, OGD resisted enforcement proceedings of the final award in Mauritius, but the Supreme Court of

Mauritius dismissed the challenge and permitted the award's enforcement.

This appeal is closely related to the UK Supreme Court’s July 2023 decision in PACCAR Inc v Road Haulage Association

Ltd, a ruling that significantly impacted litigation funding in England and Wales. The PACCAR decision established that

litigation funding agreements, where funders receive a percentage of recovered damages, qualify as damages-based

agreements. Because these agreements are subject to strict legal requirements, the ruling has rendered many common

third-party funding arrangements unenforceable.

The Privy Council appeal occurs as the UK government considers legislation to address the uncertainty created by the

PACCAR ruling on litigation funding agreements.