Quick Average Durations – it's no Accident

About 97% of the cases in which Manolete invests are completed within around 12 months of the date of assignment. This relatively fast turnaround time has held up over the life cycle of Manolete’s business. Of all of our invested cases, we show a 12.7 month average duration over all completions in Manolete’s history.

The obvious consequential benefit of short average durations for our completed cases is to prevent the accumulation of unnecessary costs and so presents a more efficient and just solution for the creditors.

As an Associate Director of Manolete since 2019, I have seen, on countless occasions, the impact of our work on insolvency litigation, as we create a robust three-way partnership with Insolvency Practitioners and their solicitors. We have carved out a new position in the market and sometimes it is worth reflecting on how we make all aspects of the model work.

How do we exactly settle cases quicker than our peers? The success rate is no accident; it is the result of a carefully cultivated approach.

A Strong Commitment to Insolvency Litigation Expertise
The key to Manolete is our specialist expertise in insolvency litigation. We focus exclusively on UK insolvency cases, allowing us to build a deep base of knowledge and experience. Our legal team comprises 16 solicitors with extensive backgrounds in insolvency and litigation. This expertise enables us to quickly assess the merits of a case, identify potential challenges and devise effective strategies to work them through.

Rigorous Case Selection and Assessment
We have a very rigorous case selection and assessment process. We meticulously evaluate each potential assignment to ensure it meets our stringent criteria. This thorough ‘take on’ process ensures we only invest in cases when we feel confident we can make an efficient, economic return for all stakeholders. By focusing on quality over quantity, we can dedicate the necessary resources and attention to each case, increasing the chances of a favourable outcome.

Strong Relationships with Insolvency Practitioners
Our strong supporting relationships with Insolvency Practitioners across the UK are another vital part of our model. Insolvency Practitioners will trust us to handle their cases with professionalism and efficiency because we take a transparent and collaborative approach. By working closely with Insolvency Practitioners, we ensure all parties are completely aligned, which helps to streamline the process and achieve speedier settlements focussing on commercially acceptable solutions. This does not mean settling cases cheaply but rather achieving the best value realistically obtainable.

Innovative Funding Solutions
Manolete’s funding solutions are also a key element in our ability to achieve swift settlements. We provide Insolvency Practitioners with the financial backing they need to pursue litigation. This funding model not only removes financial risk but also aligns our interests with those of the Insolvency Practitioners. Our success is directly tied to the outcome of the case, which motivates our lawyers to work diligently and efficiently to secure a settlement.

Focused and Efficient Case Management
Efficient case management is another cornerstone of our approach. From the moment we take on a case, we employ a structured and disciplined process to ensure every aspect of the litigation is handled promptly and effectively. This includes everything from the initial case assessment and strategy development to ongoing case management and settlement negotiations. It all contributes to us being able to move quickly towards resolution.

Proactive Settlement Strategies
Our proactive approach to settlements is another key factor in our ability to resolve cases rapidly. From the outset, we focus on identifying potential settlement opportunities and work towards them vigorously. This involves engaging with opposing parties early in the process, presenting compelling evidence and arguments and negotiating in good faith. By taking a proactive stance, we can often reach settlements before cases become protracted and costly.

The ability of Manolete to achieve settlements within 12 months of taking assignment is the result of a combination of specialist expertise, rigorous case selection, strong relationships, innovative funding solutions, efficient case management, advanced technology and proactive settlement strategies. These ingredients work together to create a powerful recipe, enabling us to deliver swift and favourable outcomes with costs kept to a minimum.

Andrew Cawkwell
Head of Business Development and Associate Director for the North East

Q&A

Tracy Halson
Financial controller aand office manager

What is your career background?
I have worked in finance and administration for all my working life. Qualified by experience.

How long have you been at Manolete?
I joined Manolete in November 2014 when we were a team of three, Steven Cooklin, Mena Halton and myself working from a small office in Buckinghamshire. I run all the day-to-day finance and office administration for the business.

What have been your main impressions?
Little did I know in 2014 what the future would hold. Manolete has gone through huge growth and to be part of that and see the company become what it is today has been very exciting and a privilege. I look forward to an ever-exciting future.

What are the other highlights?
The standout moment was when we floated the business in 2018 and going to the Stock Exchange on a cold December morning. To see the Manolete signs flashing round the screens was a sight to behold.

What do you do outside of work?
I live in Buckinghamshire and enjoy spending time with my family and two grandchildren. I enjoy the theatre, eating out and plan to resume my travel plans.

Stephen Baister writes
May I take you to the correspondence?

“May I take you to the correspondence?” is one of a number of questions the judge almost never wants to hear. “The correspondence” is usually tucked away at the end of the trial bundles in a fat separate file (numbered C/17 or something equally unmemorable). No one will have even cracked it open so far.

The honest answer to the captioned question is, of course, “No”. A more temperate answer may be, “If you really must.”

Sir Christopher Clarke got off lightly in Excalibur Ventures LLC v Texas Keystone Inc and ors. His judgment records:

“I have been spared sight of much of the 5,000 pages of inter solicitor correspondence. It is apparent to me, however, from what I have seen that some of the correspondence from Clifford Chance has been voluminous and interminable, in some circumstances highly aggressive and in others unacceptable in content. These have included ill-founded allegations of criminal conduct in the form of insider dealing, misleading the market and misleading the public about the relationship between Gulf and Texas. Whilst interminable and heavy-handed correspondence is becoming a perverse feature in some commercial litigation, it is not in any way to be accepted as a norm and parties whose solicitors engage in it should not be surprised if, in a case such as this, they end up paying the costs on an indemnity scale.”

The approach of the defendants’ solicitors to their opponents in ATB Sales Ltd v Rich Energy Ltd & Anor, which include the comment “This is quite frankly an imbecilic request by you,” similarly attracted adverse comment. The judge said:

“I do not consider that there are any circumstances in which one solicitor in the course of his professional duties should accuse another in writing of making imbecilic requests. That language is far removed from the professional courtesy which solicitors are expected to show each other and those they deal with. If a trainee solicitor sent the letter, as the reference suggests, the fact that it was sent in this form suggests a failure by the supervising solicitor properly to supervise.”

In Collier & Ors v Bennett Saini J complained:

“[T]hat the evidence and correspondence before me include a lengthy and, I regret to say, often intemperate debate between the parties’ respective Solicitors in relation to alleged waiver of without prejudice privilege and allegations of professional misconduct. Those are irrelevant satellite issues. I informed the parties at the Skype hearing that I would not be drawn into these matters […] I express no views as to who was in the “right” on these matters. I do not need to consider the claimed without prejudice material to decide this claim and have ignored that material in the evidence and substantial correspondence bundle before me.”

As in most things to do with litigation there can be no hard and fast rules. I will not, however, let that stop me from offering a few, almost all of which I broke myself on more occasions I care to remember.

1. Remember that anything you write may be read out in court, so don’t say anything in correspondence that you wouldn’t want the judge to read. (There are, alas, occasions on which the judge’s reluctance to read the correspondence is overcome.)
2. Keep your letters or emails as short as possible: the less you say, the less you’ll get wrong. (You may think you are a Titan of the contentious world, but believe me, you aren’t.)
3. Avoid answering anything immediately unless you absolutely have to. Think for a while before you write.
4. If in doubt show what you intend to write to someone else before you send it. And don’t send it if that person advises you not to.
5. Don’t answer anything unless you are reasonably sober. (I once broke that rule and did something I’d never have dared do while of sound mind. It worked brilliantly, but that was just luck. I never risked it a second time.)
6. Avoid cliché. “We are surprised that you say…” (No you aren’t.) “We take exception to…” (You don’t really.)
7. (Almost) never threaten to report someone for anything unless it’s serious. It makes you look weak and peevish. (Also it’s usually more trouble than it’s worth.)
8. Don’t be aggressive. A good point requires no extra punch.
9. Avoid pointing out his/her stupidity to your opponent. If he/she is stupider than you are, be grateful: you don’t want the other side putting someone brighter on the job and changing the odds against you.
10. Remember: you always meet everyone again.

Team recruitment
Welcome to Amber Holt

Amber Holt joined Manolete earlier this month as Business Development and Marketing Manager and works alongside the Head of Business Development, Andrew Cawkwell while also supporting the wider BD and Legal teams.

Within her role, Amber has a comprehensive range of responsibilities but ultimately is responsible for supporting the day-to-day operational delivery of Manolete’s wide ranging business development activity. Amber has significant experience in professional services business development and marketing gained over the last 15 years working within the legal sector.

Team training
Free lunch & learn sessions - book yours now!

Our insightful Lunch & Learn sessions are free and available to book now.

We are currently offering the following sessions:

• Director Loan Accounts and Dividends: Ensuring Accountability
• Investigations
• Anatomy of a Claim
• Bounce Back Loans

Our one-hour sessions are led by a Manolete litigation finance expert with a focus on practical insights and shared experiences, rather than formal legal training, to foster an environment of collaborative learning.

There are also options to host the session at your offices, online or as a hybrid event, at a time convenient for you. All we need you to do is provide the venue and food and we will do the rest!

So why not sharpen your teams’ skills, learn new tips, and ultimately improve your results with insolvency litigation by booking one or more sessions today?

Contact Head of Business Development Andrew Cawkwell by emailing andrew@manolete-partners.com or call him on 07702 319421.

Case study
The Manolete Model in Action

R3 Northern Forum: 19 September 2024