Group litigation lets individuals with similar compensation claims unite and seek justice together.
Once primarily a US phenomenon, it has evolved into a powerful force in the UK, addressing large-scale legal issues, expanding access to justice, and holding big corporations accountable for misconduct.
In this guide, we explore the evolution of group litigation – from early challenges to modern breakthroughs.
What is Group Litigation?
Group litigation is a legal process in which multiple claimants with similar claims band together to pursue a case against one or more defendants.
Group litigation is crucial in tackling mass wrongdoings, providing efficiency and cost savings, especially when individual legal action would be too costly or impractical.
Media reports drawing on Thomson Reuters data indicate that the total value of UK competition collective actions rose from around £4 billion in 2021 to approximately £26 billion in 2022 — a dramatic increase in both the scale and number of claims being pursued.
Early beginnings: The origins of group litigation in the UK
Group litigation, though not formally known by that name at the time, was a common feature of medieval English law starting around the 1200s.
These early forms of group lawsuits involved collective legal actions in which groups of people, often organised around existing societal structures such as villages, towns, parishes, and guilds, would sue or be sued collectively in common-law courts.
However, between 1400 and 1700, this practice gradually shifted from being the norm to an exception. Over time, individual legal actions became more prominent, and the courts moved away from encouraging group-based litigation.
In the 19th century, group litigation began to evolve, particularly with the development of representative actions in the Chancery courts. These legal mechanisms allowed individuals with similar claims to be represented by one or more claimants, but they were limited in scope. The process wasn’t yet formalised for large-scale cases, and several challenges remained:
- Coordinating multiple claimants: Managing a large group of individuals with diverse but related claims was a logistical hurdle.
- Cost and complexity: Large-scale litigation was often prohibitively expensive, especially for individuals with limited financial resources.
- Lack of legal framework: Courts were often hesitant to take on cases involving many claimants without structured procedures in place.
Despite these early hurdles, group litigation began to take shape as the legal system slowly recognised the need for a formal mechanism to address cases involving widespread harm3.
Key milestones in the evolution of group litigation
Several pivotal changes have shaped the evolution of group litigation in the UK, making it more accessible and efficient. These included:
Group Litigation Orders (GLOs)
Introduced in May 2000, GLOs provide a structured way for managing multiple claims. They require claimants to “opt-in” to an action and streamline the legal process by consolidating similar claims and avoiding duplication of court proceedings. GLOs have been a game-changer, allowing courts to address mass litigation more effectively.
Supreme Court rulings
Cases such as the Supreme Court’s Uber drivers’ ruling, which confirmed that Uber drivers were workers rather than self-employed, have demonstrated how collective legal challenges can lead to wide-ranging outcomes affecting thousands of individuals.
Successful settlements
Seeing group actions succeed can also encourage fresh claims. For example, in 2022, Volkswagen agreed to pay around £193 million in compensation to around 91,000 UK car owners after it was accused of installing emission cheating software in some of its diesel vehicles. This was one of the largest group settlements in the UK and it has led to similar claims against other car manufacturers.
Litigation funding
The rise of third-party litigation funding has made it easier for solicitors to pursue justice without worrying about costs. Funders provide financial backing to law firms in exchange for a portion of any winnings.
No-win, no-fee agreements
No-win, no-fee arrangements became vital in group litigation after the Access to Justice Act 1999 reduced legal aid for civil cases.
Under Conditional Fee Agreements (CFAs) – commonly called no-win, no-fee – solicitors only charge their clients if the case is won, making it easier for people to pursue legal claims without upfront costs.
Originally introduced for personal injury cases in 1995, CFAs were later extended to other types of law, including group litigation.
The combination of CFAs with the growth of third-party litigation funding – where external investors finance cases in exchange for a share of any winnings – has made group actions even more viable.
Changes to the legal system
Recent procedural decisions have also clarified that, in certain circumstances, courts may permit the use of a single claim form in group actions, even where there are limited differences between individual claims — helping to reduce unnecessary complexity.
Modern developments
Case management technology
Advancements in technology have played a decisive role in reshaping how group litigation operates in practice. What was once a slow, paper-heavy process is now increasingly supported by digital systems that allow law firms to manage large groups of claimants efficiently and consistently.
Modern legal technology enables firms to handle thousands — sometimes millions — of individual claimants within a single action. Digital onboarding tools allow information to be collected in a structured and secure way, ensuring eligibility criteria are applied consistently across the group. Evidence can be gathered, stored, and reviewed at scale, reducing duplication and administrative burden.
Technology has also transformed how law firms communicate with claimants. Secure portals, automated updates, and centralised case management systems make it possible to provide timely information to large groups, improving transparency and reducing uncertainty for those involved. This is particularly important in group litigation, where cases can run for several years.
From a case-management perspective, technology helps firms track deadlines, manage court directions, and analyse large datasets — including financial records, transactional data, or disclosure materials — that would be unmanageable using traditional methods alone.
Overall, these technological developments have made group litigation more viable, more scalable, and more accessible.
Media coverage
The media has played a critical role in the rise and impact of group litigation. One of the most striking examples is the Post Office Horizon Scandal. This landmark case highlights the profound effect of journalism, media attention, and public exposure when it comes to raising awareness, shaping public opinion, and forcing organisations to take accountability for their wrongdoing.
Consumer claim hubs
A significant modern development in the group litigation landscape is the rise of consumer claim hubs such as Join the Claim.
Rather than acting solely as referral platforms, these hubs play a broader role in raising awareness, explaining rights, and helping the public understand when collective legal action may exist.
Claim hubs focus on making complex legal issues more visible and accessible. They use plain-English guidance, research, and digital tools to help people recognise potential consumer harms, understand how group litigation works, and decide whether taking further steps is right for them.
In some cases, this may include signposting to regulated law firms running group actions — but that is not their sole or universal function.
Claim hubs are particularly valuable because they:
- Raise awareness at scale: Many large group claims fail to reach affected individuals simply because people do not know they exist. Claim hubs use online content, media, and educational resources to bring widespread consumer issues into the public eye.
- Improve understanding of rights: By breaking down legal concepts and explaining eligibility in clear terms, claim hubs help people understand whether an issue may affect them — without requiring prior legal knowledge.
- Lower barriers to engagement: Where appropriate, tools such as eligibility checkers or registration forms can reduce friction and confusion, making it easier for individuals to explore their options at their own pace.
- Support participation in collective justice: By increasing visibility and understanding, claim hubs help ensure that collective actions better reflect the scale of harm — particularly in cases where losses are widespread but individually modest.
The impact on access to justice
One of the biggest impacts of the evolution of group litigation is its improvement of access to justice.
Previously, individuals were often deterred by high costs and complex legal processes, but group litigation has broken down these barriers.
In short, by empowering people to join forces and collectively challenge large entities, group litigation is making it easier to seek justice and accountability for corporate wrongdoing.
In this way, claim hubs are helping to shift group litigation away from being a hidden or specialist process, and towards a more transparent, informed, and inclusive model of consumer justice — one that starts with awareness, not obligation.
Join the Claim connects consumers with SRA-regulated lawyers. Keep an eye out for updates on any potential claim and possible eligibility checks/registration opportunities.
- Last Updated: Febuary 2026
- Next Update Scheduled: Febuary 2027
