Qualified One Way Costs Shifting
In the absence of the provision of an approved mechanism for dispute resolution, available through an independent regulator without cost to the complainant, together with an adjustment to the Civil Procedure Rules to require or permit the court take account of the availability of cost free arbitration as an alternative to court proceedings, qualified one way costs shifting should be introduced for defamation, privacy, breach of confidence and similar media related litigation as proposed by Lord Justice Jackson.
- Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, which would have addressed costs in claims against publishers, was never commenced and was repealed by section 50 of the Media Act 2024, effective 24 July 2024 (Media Act 2024, Section 50, legislation.gov.uk).
- No alternative mechanism providing cost-free access to justice for individuals bringing media-related claims has been established through legislation or regulation to March 2026.
How was this evidence gathered?
Response
Not Accepted
Response
Not AcceptedThis recommendation was not implemented. The government did not formally respond to civil justice recommendations in the Prime Minister's statement of 29 November 2012. Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013, which would have created a costs incentive mechanism, was enacted but never commenced. On 1 March 2018, the Secretary of State announced that Section 40 would not be commenced and would be repealed. Section 40 was repealed by Section 50 of the Media Act 2024 (Royal Assent 24 May 2024). Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/leveson-consultation-response
Published Evidence
Published assessments of progress from inspectorates, select committees, official progress reports, and other sources. Source type badge indicates whether each assessment is independent or government self-reported.
Qualified one-way costs shifting for media-related litigation was not introduced. The absence of both QOCS and Section 40 means the cost barriers to bringing claims against major publishers remain prohibitive for most individuals.
View detailed findings
Not implemented. Cost barriers to media litigation remain as they were before Leveson.