header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Claimants & QOCS: caught in a trap?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
21 April 2023 / Samuel Hayman , Tom Jenkinson
Issue: 8021 / Categories: Features , Personal injury , Costs , Procedure & practice , Damages
printer mail-detail
119231
Have the changes to the qualified one-way costs shifting regime tipped the scales too far in favour of defendants? Samuel Hayman & Tom Jenkinson examine the perilous new situation for claimants
  • Changes to QOCS rules from 6 April 2023 mean there will be an increased risk of adverse costs for claimants in personal injury litigation.
  • The rules won’t be enforceable for cases initiated prior to 6 April 2023.
  • It seems the new rules only benefit claimants where the claim is discontinued and there are no damages or costs at all.

The qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS) regime for cases issued prior to 6 April 2023 was clarified in two key cases: Cartwright v Venduct Engineering Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1654, [2018] All ER (D) 99 (Jul) and Ho v Adelekun [2021] UKSC 43, [2021] All ER (D) 17 (Oct).

These cases meant that costs orders in a defendant’s favour are unenforceable, unless there are ‘damages ordered’ in the context of CPR 44.14—essentially

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Law Society calls for clarity on AML
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Turning corporate liability into opportunity
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
NLJ this week: A prince no more?
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
NLJ this week: Shareholder secrecy sunk
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
NLJ this week: The expanding remit of national security law
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll