header-logo header-logo

24 September 2025
Issue: 8132 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Regulatory , Legal services , Consumer
printer mail-detail

Is the end nigh for ‘no win no fee’?

Regulators plan to ‘step up’ their action against poor practice in high-volume consumer cases such as data breaches, diesel car emissions and housing disrepair claims

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has already closed down five firms, is currently investigating 76 law firms involved in these types of claims, and has written to more than 500 other firms asking them to complete a mandatory declaration of compliance.

Last week, it formally asked lawyers for their views on the issue by 14 November, in a discussion paper, ‘How can the high-volume consumer claims market work better for consumer?’. It is exploring five areas in particular—transparency and clarity, risks around third-party litigation funding, after-the-event insurance, regulating a changing marketplace, and wider improvements for consumers across the system.

One potential reform under consideration concerns the use of ‘no win no fee’, which the SRA paper states ‘falsely implies that there is nothing to be lost in commencing such litigation, which is clearly not the case’. The SRA asks, ‘Should we seek to restrict, prevent or caveat use of the term “no win, no fee”? Should this marketing term be banned across the board?’

The regulator said it will shortly issue further warning notices to firms highlighting their obligations regarding ‘no win no fee’ cases and use of litigation funding.

Chair of the SRA board Anna Bradley said: ‘The risks and issues we are seeing in the high-volume consumer claims market are unprecedented.

‘Too many firms don't have their house in order, so we need to use all the levers at our disposal to protect consumers and identify poor practice.’

Law Society president Richard Atkinson said effective regulatory oversight was ‘essential’ but cautioned against ‘going too far. Over-regulation, or any measures could restrict access to justice and harm people that these services are meant to protect’. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll