Pre-action protocols

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

Reform proposals

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) published an interim report on the subject of the pre-action protocols (PAPs) in November 2021. The interim report was said to address the role PAPs should play in a modern and increasingly digitalised civil justice system. In particular, it canvassed a number of reform options to the Practice Direction Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols (setting out 'revised draft text and a proposed joint stocktake template' at Appendix 4) and the existing PAPs, plus the creation of new PAPs in certain areas. However, no recommendations were made at that stage, but rather the interim report was said to have been published for the purposes of allowing the CJC to consult as widely as possible.

Having provoked considerable discussion among the legal profession and other interested parties, the CJC published its final report (part 1) in August 2023. The key recommendations were summarised at para 1.7, and included:

  1. •

    the overriding objective being amended to include express reference to the need to comply with, and enforce, PAPs

  2. •

    the Practice Direction Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols being replaced with a new PAP which should be included

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Dispute Resolution News

New value thresholds for case transfers in the Commercial Court and London Circuit Commercial Court

The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary (CATJ) has published a practice note, dated 6 June 2025, announcing new financial thresholds for case transfers between commercial courts, effective 1 July 2025. The Commercial Court will now transfer claims valued at £7m or less to the London Circuit Commercial Court (LCCC), increased from £5m. The LCCC will transfer claims below £1m to County Courts, increased from £500,000. The practice note maintains existing transfer practices under CPR Parts 58 and 59, with parties retaining the right to make representations before transfers. The practice note is signed by signed by the President of the King's Bench Division, the Judge in Charge of the Commercial Court and the Judge in Charge of the LCCC.

Regulation of the debt enforcement sector consultation opened by Ministry of Justice

The Ministry of Justice has launched a consultation on proposals to establish an independent statutory regulator for the debt enforcement sector in England and Wales. The regulator would oversee enforcement agents, High Court Enforcement Officers, and their firms using the Taking Control of Goods procedure, aiming to protect vulnerable individuals, enhance accountability, and raise industry standards. While the Enforcement Conduct Board currently provides voluntary oversight, concerns over inconsistent protections and the treatment of vulnerable debtors have prompted calls for statutory regulation. The proposed reforms would empower the regulator to accredit firms and individuals, gather and share data, monitor compliance, handle complaints, and recommend sanctions. The Government will consider responses before bringing forward legislation when Parliamentary time allows. The consultation will run for eight weeks until he 21 July 2025.

Ministry of Justice response to Taking Control of Goods Regulations consultation

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has published its response to the 2023 consultation on amending the regulations that govern fee recovery for enforcement agents (EAs) and High Court Enforcement Officers (HCEO). The regulations in question include the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013, SI 2013/1894, and the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014, SI 2014/1. The response proposes reforms that extend notice periods and allow for payment by instalments at the compliance stage. These measures aim to give debtors more time and affordable options to settle their debts early, while ensuring that enforcement practitioners receive fair remuneration and the sector remains sustainable—fees that may be charged are to be increased by 5% (the new charges are set out in Appendix B).

UKSC hosts international law event with Professor Dapo Akande

The United Kingdom Supreme Court (UKSC) has hosted an event entitled ‘The Future of International Law’ on 4 June 2025, during which UKSC President Lord Reed, Lord Lloyd-Jones, and Professor Dapo Akande discussed the evolving relationship between international and domestic law. Professor Akande is the UK’s candidate for election as a judge to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for the term 2027–2036. The event was attended by senior legal representatives, officials from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, and several representatives from London-based diplomatic missions. The discussion explored the increasing role of international law within domestic courts, noting that international legal principles have become central to contemporary litigation practices. The speakers examined how human rights instruments, such as the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act, are being incorporated into domestic decision-making, and they emphasised the expanded regulatory function of international law, which now governs not only inter-state relations but also interactions involving individuals and private entities. They also highlighted the significance of domestic court decisions in contributing to the development of customary international law while stressing that any new legal norms should be established with broad international consensus.

View Dispute Resolution by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

Limitation—professional negligence claims

Limitation—professional negligence claimsThis Practice Note looks at the limitation period for professional negligence (prof neg) claims and explains how to determine the date of accrual in respect of claims in both contract and in tort.For more background information on limitation, see:

After a letter of claim is sent, is there a time limit (apart from the 30-day limit) on when to issue a

After a letter of claim is sent, is there a time limit (apart from the 30-day limit) on when to issue a claim under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims? If a letter of claim was sent a year ago, is an updated letter of claim required, or can the claim be issued?We have assumed that It is assumed

Limitation—amending a party name and substituting or adding (joinder) of parties

Limitation—amending a party name and substituting or adding (joinder) of partiesThis Practice Note considers the circumstances when a court may allow the parties to proceedings to be changed (in particular, a new party being added (joined) or substituted for another party) following a relevant

Limitation—fraud, deliberate concealment and mistake

Limitation—fraud, deliberate concealment and mistakeThis Practice Note considers section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980). In particular, it addresses how a court might apply this provision when considering the postponement of limitation periods in claims involving a fraud, deliberate
Limitation—professional negligence claims

Limitation—professional negligence claims

Limitation—professional negligence claimsThis Practice Note looks at the limitation period for professional negligence (prof neg) claims and explains how to determine the date of accrual in respect of claims in both contract and in tort.For more background information on limitation, see:

After a letter of claim is sent, is there a time limit (apart from the 30-day limit) on when to issue a

After a letter of claim is sent, is there a time limit (apart from the 30-day limit) on when to issue a

After a letter of claim is sent, is there a time limit (apart from the 30-day limit) on when to issue a claim under the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims? If a letter of claim was sent a year ago, is an updated letter of claim required, or can the claim be issued?We have assumed that It is assumed

Limitation—amending a party name and substituting or adding (joinder) of parties

Limitation—amending a party name and substituting or adding (joinder) of parties

Limitation—amending a party name and substituting or adding (joinder) of partiesThis Practice Note considers the circumstances when a court may allow the parties to proceedings to be changed (in particular, a new party being added (joined) or substituted for another party) following a relevant

Limitation—fraud, deliberate concealment and mistake

Limitation—fraud, deliberate concealment and mistake

Limitation—fraud, deliberate concealment and mistakeThis Practice Note considers section 32 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980). In particular, it addresses how a court might apply this provision when considering the postponement of limitation periods in claims involving a fraud, deliberate