header-logo header-logo

06 March 2024
Issue: 8062 / Categories: Legal News , Litigation funding
printer mail-detail

Litigation funding legislation to reverse PACCAR

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

Sharpe Pritchard—Victoria Heald-Barraclough

Sharpe Pritchard—Victoria Heald-Barraclough

Magic Circle hire strengthens Sharpe Pritchard’s infrastructure finance capability

Lewis Silkin—Iskander Fernandez

Lewis Silkin—Iskander Fernandez

Lewis Silkin adds corporate crime specialist to growing dispute resolution team

Morr & Co—Michael Charalambous

Morr & Co—Michael Charalambous

Morr Co strengthens private client team with partner appointment

NEWS
Should every solicitor found to have acted dishonestly face automatic striking off? The answer, argues John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke LLP in NLJ this week, is no 
Winning an arbitral award against a state is one thing; enforcing it is another
Can government success in court tell us whether the rule of law is healthy? 
Poorly drafted dispute resolution clauses can trigger litigation before the real dispute is even addressed
As cryptocurrency becomes mainstream, family lawyers are increasingly confronting the challenges it creates on divorce
back-to-top-scroll