header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
13 October 2023 / Lucy Keane
Issue: 8044 / Categories: Features , Profession , Litigation funding
printer mail-detail

Litigation funding: Keep on truckin’?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
142552
Lucy Keane assesses the damage after Paccar Inc v CAT drove a juggernaut through the UK litigation funding industry
  • Looks at the facts, law and reasoning in Paccar Inc v CAT.
  • Assesses the impact of the case on the litigation funding industry.

In July 2023, the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) took many by surprise when it issued its judgment in an appeal brought by Paccar Inc, DAF Trucks NV and DAF Trucks Deutschland GmbH against the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), UK Trucks Claim Ltd (UKTC) and the Road Haulage Association (RHA). To the astonishment of many, the court’s decision struck at what had hitherto been regarded as solid ground and the foundation for very many litigation funding arrangements in the UK. The implications of this surprising decision are reverberating around the litigation funding industry in the UK with many players expressing concern about whether funding in its previously accepted form can continue.

The UKSC’s judgment that litigation funding agreements (LFAs) that take the form of a damages-based agreement

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
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll