Please read these API Terms of Use carefully before using the API. By using the API, You agree to be bound by theM In these API Terms of Use, We or API Licensor means [insert company name] (a company incorporated in [England and Wales] under number [insert registered company number] whose registered office is at [insert address]) and You or API Licensee means you (and if you are using the API on behalf of a legal person, business or other organisation (Organisation) includes You and also such Organisation). Plural variations of the terms defined in this section shall be interpreted accordingly. By using the API on behalf of any Organisation, You represent and warrant (promise) that You have all necessary capacity and authority to enter into these API Terms of Use on behalf of such Organisation as a legally binding contract between such Organisation and Us in all applicable jurisdictions and that the Organisation enters into such contract. We may update these API Terms of Use, the [eg the Data Protection Addendum ] and any[

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has announced a campaign calling for legislative change to equalise compensation treatment for all asbestos-related lung cancer victims. The campaign is being conducted in collaboration with the Asbestos Victims Support Group Forum and West Dunbartonshire Labour MP, Douglas McAllister. Under the Compensation Act 2006, mesothelioma victims can obtain full compensation by tracing a single former employer, whereas asbestos-related lung cancer victims must trace all responsible employers or their insurers to receive full compensation. The campaign seeks to extend the same compensation framework to asbestos-related lung cancer victims. McAllister will raise the campaign during an adjournment debate in the House of Commons on 16 March 2026.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) and Forum of Insurance Lawyers (FOIL) have announced for more law firms and insurers to sign up to the Serious Injury Guide, which marks its tenth anniversary in October 2025. The guide, a joint initiative with major insurers launched in 2015, is used for catastrophic personal injury cases with damages exceeding £250,000, excluding clinical negligence and asbestos claims. The guide transforms the claims process into a collaborative approach that places the injured person at the center, according to APIL president Matthew Tuff. Key features include regular updates, agreed timeframes, and early discussions about effective rehabilitation, interim payments, and funding under the Rehabilitation Code.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has called on the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) to establish a mandatory national register for medical products including pacemakers and artificial heart valves. The proposal, made in response to the pelvic mesh scandal that caused life-changing complications for thousands of women, aims to create a publicly accessible database to track device safety issues. APIL also urged the MHRA to implement tougher regulation with more rigorous checks on new medical products entering the UK market.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has highlighted the urgent need for new legislation that guarantees individuals injured in collisions involving driverless cars access to crucial collision data stored on these vehicles to support their compensation claims. As the Department for Transport currently consults on self-driving vehicles to develop safety regulations, APIL states that the law must keep pace with driverless technology, including automated vehicles and those with semi-automated features like lane assist or cruise control. APIL is calling for a duty of disclosure that would require companies to share collision data with insurers and regulators but also with injured parties and their legal representatives. Such a measure would ensure that essential evidence is properly retained and protected, preventing injured individuals from having to battle large corporations for access to data that may confirm that a driverless car was the cause of their harm.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has urged the government to expand the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme (CICS) to enable more survivors of child sexual abuse, including victims of online grooming, to receive compensation. Working with Rotherham MP Sarah Champion, APIL is supporting an amendment to the Victims and Courts Bill, to be debated on 27 October, that would implement recommendations from the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA). The proposal aims to extend the time limit for applications to seven years from when an offence is reported or from a victim’s 18th birthday, and to remove the automatic exclusion of survivors with unspent convictions where such offences are linked to their abuse. APIL’s immediate past president, Kim Harrison, and Champion both stated that these changes are necessary to ensure fair access to redress for survivors who have long faced unjust barriers under the current system.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has published written evidence it submitted to the Justice Committee outlining how successive government reforms have undermined access to justice for injured victims of negligence. APIL argues that such individuals have become ‘second-class citizens’ in civil litigation, as measures including the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 and the Civil Liability Act 2018 have eroded the principle of full compensation and widened a “justice gap” in personal injury claims.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has launched a new Corporate Supporter Scheme, with 14 personal injury (PI) firms signing up as founding members. The scheme is designed to enable law firms to collaborate strategically with APIL and work collectively to address key challenges in the sector. The initiative works on a basis of turnover-related fee structures and benefit packages. The Chief Executive of APIL, Mike Benner, noted that the scheme’s income will be used to expand APIL’s judicial review funding capability, support its research function and develop its Rebuilding Shattered Lives campaign. Benner also indicated that the scheme’s membership is expected to expand beyond the initial 14 firms.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has published a blog post, setting out its opposition to a campaign seeking the repeal of section 2(4) of the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948 (LR(PI)A 1948), which permits clinical negligence victims to recover compensation for private healthcare costs. APIL refers to opinion polling indicating that 51% of UK adults support NHS funding for private treatment where harm has been caused by NHS negligence, while 35% oppose such coverage. It also highlights government analysis showing that therapy and treatment costs, including private healthcare services recoverable under LR(PI)A 1948, s 2(4), account for only 4% of total clinical negligence damages. APIL argues that this demonstrates the provision does not have a significant impact on overall clinical negligence spending and that its repeal would not materially reduce costs, while restricting access to necessary private treatment for victims. It further contends that repeal would require all negligence victims to rely on NHS care, including those injured in road traffic accidents and workplace incidents, whose treatment would otherwise be privately funded through insurance.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has published written evidence submitted to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) highlighting that increases in National Health Service (NHS)’s clinical negligence costs reflect rising compensation for seriously injured patients rather than fault by claimants or their lawyers. The evidence emphasises that compensation payments reflect the need to fairly support patients who have suffered avoidable harm while under NHS care. APIL notes that claimants’ legal costs are higher than the NHS’s because the burden of proof lies with them, and that significant delays over the past decade have further driven up expenses. It reports that claims exceeding £1m—mainly obstetric cases involving babies with lifelong care needs—account for 70% of the rise in spending despite making up fewer than 5% of successful claims. APIL also cites rising social care costs as a key factor and rejects repealing section 2(4) of the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has published polling showing that only 5% of the public consider current whiplash compensation fair, as it prepares evidence for the Ministry of Justice's post-implementation review of 2021 reforms. The Opinium research found that 90% of whiplash sufferers struggle with daily activities, while typical compensation remains at £750 for injuries lasting up to two years. APIL argues that the Civil Liability Act 2018 reforms have damaged access to justice without reducing motor premiums, as motor insurers lobby to extend the tariff system to other injury types.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) has submitted evidence to the House of Commons Justice Select Committee’s inquiry on access to justice, arguing that there is ‘irrefutable prejudice’ against personal injury claimants. In its submission, APIL highlights several contributing factors, including the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, which prevents successful claimants from recovering their full legal costs; fixed recoverable costs that have failed to keep pace with inflation; and the Civil Liability Act’s whiplash reforms, which impose disproportionately low compensation tariffs. The evidence also cites Government Actuary calculations indicating that, under the current personal injury discount rate rules, claimants with a 20-year life expectancy have only a 55% chance of receiving full compensation.