The Case for Urgent Action: Why the Legal Profession Is Calling Time on PACCAR Delays
Four months after the Civil Justice Council’s report, the PACCAR ruling continues to dominate the UK litigation funding debate. Leading law firms are urging the government to act on the Civil Justice Council’s recommendations and reverse PACCAR. Apex explores why continued delay threatens access to justice, and why clarity is critical for SMEs and the legal professionals who represent them.
The Case for Urgent Action: Why the Legal Profession Is Calling Time on PACCAR Delays
Four months have passed since the Civil Justice Council (CJC) published its landmark report on the future of litigation funding, a report that offered clear, evidence-based recommendations for restoring confidence in the sector.
Yet, despite near-unanimous agreement across the legal community, the government has yet to act.
Now, leading law firms including Mishcon de Reya, Leigh Day and Stewarts, along with almost twenty other legal organisations, have written to Justice Secretary David Lammy urging immediate legislation to reverse the effects of the PACCAR ruling. Their message is direct: the continued delay is harming access to justice and undermining the UK’s reputation as a world leader in commercial dispute resolution.
The Turning Point That Never Came
When the CJC published its final report in June 2025, it seemed to mark a new era for UK litigation funding reform.
The Council made it clear that the Supreme Court’s PACCAR judgment, which classified litigation funding agreements (LFAs) as damages-based agreements (DBAs), had introduced unnecessary complexity and uncertainty into a vital part of the justice system.
The CJC’s recommendation was simple: reverse PACCAR through standalone legislation, ensuring LFAs are lawful, enforceable and distinct from DBAs.
The message was well received across the profession. Funders, solicitors and claimant representatives were united in their support. But since then, little has changed.
A Sector Losing Patience – PACCAR ruling latest developments UK litigation funding
The recent letter to the Ministry of Justice reflects growing frustration. Legal professionals are seeing first-hand the consequences of the PACCAR ruling delay:
- Claimants with limited means are struggling to secure funding.
- Funders are withdrawing capital from the UK market due to uncertainty.
- Law firms are forced to turn away meritorious cases because they cannot absorb the financial risk themselves.
According to data reported by the Financial Times, only three collective proceedings have been filed at the Competition Appeal Tribunal so far this year, compared with eleven in 2024 and seventeen in 2023. A decline directly attributed to the chilling effect of PACCAR.
The letter rightly points out that the CJC already delivered a “thorough and nuanced perspective.” Waiting for further review or additional consultation serves only to prolong uncertainty, and, in doing so, denies justice to those who need it most.
Why This Matters for Small and Mid-Sized Claims
For large-scale, multi-million-pound disputes, the funding ecosystem remains relatively resilient. But for small to mid-sized commercial claims, the very space Apex operates in, the effects are far more acute.
When funding dries up, these cases simply don’t proceed.
That means SMEs, insolvency estates and individual claimants are left unable to recover what they are rightfully owed. The imbalance between well-resourced defendants and underfunded claimants grows wider – precisely the gap litigation funding exists to close.
At Apex, we see every week how carefully structured, non-recourse funding allows meritorious claims to proceed where they otherwise wouldn’t. Without legislative clarity, that route is narrowing.
Following the Evidence
Prime Minister Keir Starmer has pledged to “follow the evidence.” The CJC’s report is the evidence. It offers proportionate, light-touch regulatory recommendations that would protect claimants, support responsible funders, and re-establish market confidence.
Meanwhile, other jurisdictions have moved decisively.
In Australia, litigation funding continues to underpin class actions despite regulatory adjustments.
In the United States, litigation finance remains robust across commercial disputes, with rising demand among law firms and corporates.
The UK, by contrast, risks losing its position as a global centre for dispute resolution, not through overregulation, but through indecision.
Apex’s Position
Apex Litigation Finance continues to fund small to mid-sized commercial claims on a fast, fair, and flexible non-recourse basis.
We remain committed to supporting law firms, insolvency practitioners and corporate recovery specialists in pursuing meritorious cases, despite the uncertainty the sector currently faces.
Access to justice shouldn’t depend on the size of a company’s balance sheet or the pace of government reform.
We join our colleagues across the legal profession in calling for immediate legislative action to reverse PACCAR and restore confidence in the UK litigation funding regime.
Sign up to our mailing list to stay up to date with the PACCAR ruling latest developments UK litigation funding.
Read our earlier summary of the Civil Justice Council’s report on PACCAR.