header-logo header-logo

Litigation funding legislation to reverse PACCAR

06 March 2024
Issue: 8062 / Categories: Legal News , Litigation funding
printer mail-detail
The government has confirmed it will introduce a law to restore the position that existed before the Supreme Court’s PACCAR ruling last year on litigation funding

Legislation introduced by Alex Chalk, Lord Chancellor, will make it easier for people to secure litigation funding from third parties when pursuing complex claims against wealthy corporates or other large organisations such as the Post Office. Litigation funding was essential to the subpostmasters’ claim, led by former subpostmaster Alan Bates, which challenged the Post Office’s reliance on its flawed Horizon accounting system.

It will effectively reverse R (PACCAR) v Competition Appeal Tribunal [2023] UKSC 28, in which it was held that litigation funding agreements where payment is based on the amount of damages recovered are damages-based agreements, and therefore mainly unenforceable.

Chalk said: ‘It’s crucial victims can access justice—but it can feel like a David and Goliath battle when they’re facing powerful corporations with deep pockets.’

He said the government is considering options for a wider review of the litigation funding sector and how third-party litigation funding is carried out, including whether more regulation and safeguards are required.

Martyn Day, co-president of the Collective Redress Lawyers Association (CORLA), said: ‘This is a very sensible and welcome development from government.

‘It will ensure that groups of claimants seeking redress resulting from wrongdoing by large corporations and other bodies will be able to focus on bringing claims without those corporations tying up court time and money in trying to unpick the funding agreements that make the claims possible.

‘Collective redress is a vital legal mechanism by which ordinary people can seek justice when wrong is done to them by mighty corporations and other bodies. We will work closely with government on any reform that gives clarity, certainty and fairness to claimants and those who support them in bringing their claims.’

Issue: 8062 / Categories: Legal News , Litigation funding
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll