In response to the article in the FD of November 28, 2017, about mass claims and mass damage settlements, Edo Smid wrote the following reader's comment:  That litigation funding is not nonsense, but a necessity, to help large groups of injured parties is abundantly demonstrated in cases such as high-interest insurance policies, interest rate derivatives, earthquake damage in Groningen, competition infringements, investment fraud, etc. Funding mass damages claims is highly commendable and is a proven means in several countries to guarantee access to justice (the rule of law principle of "access to justice") for large groups of injured parties. In many cases, individual access to justice is far too expensive and therefore theoretical. To address this, third parties are allowed to take over claims and litigate on them. It must be ensured that lawyers do not operate on a no-cure-no-fee basis. In the Netherlands, sound principles have been elaborated in the Claim Code 2011. The Dutch Act on Collective Settlement of Mass Damages (WCAM) has been in place since 2005. This puts the Netherlands at the forefront of continental Europe. An additional advantage is that judgments by Dutch courts are enforceable in Europe. The Zuidas region competes with London in this respect. Rejecting a new form of legal protection that can demonstrably have cross-border effects would be short-sighted and smacks of provincial nostalgia.  (Link: https://fd.nl/ondernemen/1229352/investors-zien-massaclaims-als-een-mooie-diversIFICation-van-portefeuille)