Maintenance and champerty were historically torts and crimes under English law, and the case can_x000D_ be made that they technically remain so under Singapore law. It would, however, be better to deal with third party litigation funding within the rubric of third party orders—at the interlocutory stage, for the third party to provide security for costs, and at the close of proceedings, for the third party funder to be liable for costs. This would jettison archaic and technical English case law relating to maintenance and champerty, and enable the Singapore courts to transparently facilitate access to justice whilst reigning in unwarranted forms of third party funding.