Funders had hoped that the uncertainty caused by last summer’s Paccar decision in the Supreme Court would be removed when the Litigation Funding Agreements (enforceability) Bill became law (see our earlier article here). However, the general election was called before the bill finished its passage through parliament and was lost. The new government has indicated it will await the outcome of the Civil Justice Council’s ongoing Review of Litigation Funding before deciding what to do. The CJC has just produced its interim report and opened a consultation period ahead of a final report next summer.

The interim report raises specific questions in six broad areas (reflecting its terms of reference) as follows: 

• Whether and how, and if required by whom, third party funding should be regulated and the relationship between third party funding and litigation costs
• Whether and, if so to what extent a funder’s return on any third party funding agreement should be subject to a cap
• How third party funding should best be deployed relative to other sources of funding, including but not limited to: legal expenses insurance, and crowd funding
• Questions concerning the role that should be played by rules of court and the court itself in controlling the conduct of litigation supported by third party funding or similar funding arrangements
• Questions concerning provision to protect claimants
• Questions concerning the encouragement of litigation

There is no indication of what the final recommendations might be, but comments such as the one below regarding current self-regulation might suggest that recommendations for reform will be made in the final report in summer 2025. Whether the CJC will recommend PACCAR is overturned remains to be seen. For now it is here to stay.