UK Law Commission opens review of potential opt-out consumer class actions regime

The Law Commission of England and Wales has launched a new project to examine whether the UK should introduce an opt-out collective actions regime for consumers, a move that could significantly expand avenues for mass redress and reshape the enforcement landscape for consumer protection claims.

The government has asked the Commission to assess whether enforcement of consumer law could be strengthened through a new class actions framework. The review will consider both the benefits and risks of collective proceedings, alongside existing tools such as public enforcement and alternative dispute resolution.

The project also will explore how any future regime should be structured, including procedural safeguards, scope, and interaction with current enforcement mechanisms.

The consultation marks one of the clearest signals yet that policymakers are considering broader collective redress beyond the competition sphere, where opt-out claims are already available in the Competition Appeal Tribunal.

Professor Solène Rowan, the Law Commissioner for Commercial and Common Law, said the Commission welcomed the opportunity to bring its evidence-based reform expertise to the issue. She said the review would examine the advantages and drawbacks of a consumer class actions system and make recommendations on how such a framework might operate.

Supporters of collective proceedings said the current system leaves many consumers without a practical route to recover losses where harm is widespread but individual claims are too small to pursue alone.

Martyn Day, co-president of the Collective Redress Lawyers Association, said the Commission’s decision was a timely step toward closing the UK’s justice gap. He said current routes for large groups of claimants with similar grievances remain limited, and a mechanism enabling consumers to combine claims more easily would make practical sense.

Day also pointed to developments in Europe, where EU member states are implementing the Representative Actions Directive, which enables collective consumer claims in multiple jurisdictions. He said the UK risked falling behind continental counterparts if it failed to modernize its own redress framework.

He added that a well-designed regime could improve access to justice while increasing corporate accountability, and urged claimant firms to engage with the consultation process.

Litigation finance is already emerging as a central issue in the debate, with industry participants arguing that collective actions cannot function at scale without external capital.

Jeremy Marshall, chief investment officer at Winward Litigation Finance, said a consumer class actions regime would be a positive development for the UK by giving consumers a realistic means of seeking compensation when harmed.

But he said the government would need to recognise and protect the role of litigation funding, describing it as the mechanism that converts legal rights into real-world outcomes. Marshall added that policymakers should study Australia, where funders and consumer groups have worked together in collective redress claims.

The role of third-party funding has become increasingly scrutinized in the UK following recent court decisions and policy debates, making it likely to feature prominently in any eventual reform proposals.

Neil Purslow, chair of the executive committee of the International Legal Finance Association, said it was encouraging that the government had tasked the Law Commission with examining ways to expand consumer redress.

He said consumers and small businesses often lack a realistic route to hold corporate wrongdoers accountable, while the existing opt-out regime in the Competition Appeal Tribunal is already beginning to demonstrate its value.

Extending collective redress beyond competition law would be a significant step toward narrowing the justice gap for consumers and smaller enterprises across the UK, he said.

The Law Commission is inviting responses to an Initial Scoping Questionnaire (available here) from businesses, practitioners, consumer groups, academics and other stakeholders. Responses are due by 30 October 2026, and should be sent to [email protected].