Law Commission research into consumer class actions

On 20 April 2026, the Law Commission announced a new project to examine the benefits and risks of introducing consumer class actions in England & Wales. The research - a link to which is provided below - is seeking views on the issues raised via a scoping questionnaire which will be open for replies until 30 October.

This research is important on two fronts. First, in substance, it follows the Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) 2025 review of third party litigation funding - which is critical to mass consumer claims - and has, unusually, been published before the conclusions of the Department of Business and Trade’s (DBT) review of the current opt-out collective proceedings regime for consumer competition claims, as provided for by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Second, the express use of the term “class actions” is a noteworthy departure from the concepts of collective / group proceedings that have characterised the debate about reforming mass claims in England & Wales.

This use of language may prove important. The label “class actions” has, in the past, seemed to be associated with perceived abuses and excesses of an aggressive US-style litigation culture. Policymakers have tended to prefer more neutral terms such as collective redress (in the European Union) or collective proceedings (in England & Wales). That the Law Commission has now adopted the term in the title of its latest project might signal that the negative connotations have become regarded as less significant.

The 2015 Act allowed collective proceedings only for competition claims. The Law Commission’s project is much broader than that single area: its terms of reference talk of a “class actions regime for consumer law claims”, which should be understood as a general regime for any type of dispute (the word “all” could easily be inserted after “for” in the phrase quoted).

Although such a regime, if introduced, could improve access to justice for a very wide range of consumers, it could also signal a significant expansion in the use of collective claims and therefore brings risks for all business trading with consumers - a significant proportion of the UK economy - and for insurers who provide them with any form of liability cover. It is therefore critical that insurers engage with the project, provide views and evidence at this first stage, and begin to consider the impacts of potential reforms.

After its scoping phase closes, the Law Commission’s research is likely to involve a formal consultation, possibly before the end of 2027, which would be followed by specific recommendations for reform sometime afterwards. During this period, legislation to regulate third party litigation funding following the CJC reviews is expected and the results of the DBT’s review of collective consumer claims should be published. Both these developments could happen before the end of 2026 and look highly likely to influence the direction of the Law Commission’s project.

This brief article should not be understood as suggesting that the eventual outputs from the Law Commission would, in due course, lead to the introduction in England & Wales of a US-style litigation culture. The absence here of jury awards of damages - which may produce so-called ‘nuclear verdicts’ against defendants - and the existence of ‘the loser pays’ costs rule are among the key features of our civil justice system mitigating that consequence.

However, the launch of this project and its adoption of the somewhat charged ‘class actions’ label will surely heighten the ongoing debate about reforming the mechanics of mass claims, their effectiveness in securing access to redress for consumers, the associated funding arrangements, the costs generated by such cases, and their impact on businesses facing them and on the economy overall. This debate will inevitably intensify over the medium term as the project evolves and as anticipated changes to the regulation of litigation funding are put in place.

The home page for the new project may be found here: Consumer class actions - Law Commission