Mass Tort brief
Mass Tort Litigation Shifts Under Court Rulings
High-stakes judicial rulings in London and the US reshape the landscape for emissions liability, pregnancy painkillers, and consumer group actions.
Mass Tort
The High Court has narrowed the definition of illegal emissions software — stripping billions of pounds in potential damages from UK class-action law firms.
BackgroundGroup litigation allows hundreds of thousands of individual claimants to consolidate their lawsuits against major corporations, sharing legal costs and resources. The "dieselgate" emissions scandal has triggered massive class-action lawsuits globally, accusing manufacturers of using software to cheat emissions tests.
- The High Court ruled that software only constitutes an illegal defeat device if it objectively detects a regulatory test and operates to alter performance, raising the bar for future vehicle emissions claims.
- While Ford, Renault, and Nissan vehicles were cleared of carrying prohibited devices, Mercedes-Benz and Peugeot-Citroën were found to have infringing systems, narrowing the scope of potential damages.
- No damages were immediately awarded, meaning any potential recoveries remain subject to future quantum trials and inevitable appeals that could drag on for years.
Mass Tort
By narrowing judges' power to screen out expert science, the US court revived 500 paracetamol lawsuits — paving the way for parallel UK group actions over pregnancy safety.
BackgroundProduct liability litigation allows consumers to sue manufacturers if a product causes injury due to design defects or inadequate warnings. Paracetamol is one of the most widely used over-the-counter drugs globally and has long been considered the safest pain relief option during pregnancy.
- The appeals court ruled that the lower district court erred in excluding key expert witnesses, allowing the scientific debate to go before a jury and reviving hopes for billions of dollars in damages.
- Circuit Judge Guido Calabresi emphasized the ruling was about the admissibility of expert scientific methodology rather than final medical causation, leaving the core scientific dispute unresolved.
- UK product liability specialists are reviewing the ruling as claimant firms prepare to assess similar litigation strategies in British courts, potentially challenging NHS safety guidance.
Mass Tort
By allowing thousands of car buyers to sue on a single form, the Court of Appeal lowered filing costs — unlocking high-volume, low-value mass litigation across the UK.
BackgroundCivil Procedure Rules in the UK govern how legal claims are managed, with the small-claims track designed for low-value disputes resolved without massive legal fees. Lenders often try to split mass consumer claims into individual trials to make the litigation uneconomic for funders.
- Lenders sought to break up the mass action alleging they failed to disclose discretionary commission arrangements in car finance agreements, which would have made individual litigation too costly.
- Lord Justice Coulson ruled that claimants can use single "omnibus" claim forms grouped by defendant, dramatically lowering upfront court filing fees for claimant law firms.
- The ruling provides a clear procedural blueprint for litigation funders to scale low-value mass consumer claims efficiently across the UK, opening the floodgates for similar claims.
Unlock the full brief
Sign in to read every signal, takeaway, and source. Free account — Apple, Google, or email.