Consumer class actions: is Scotland in pole position for reforms in the UK?

On 20 April 2026, the Law Commission of England & Wales, instructed by the UK Government, launched a project to examine the potential introduction of a consumer class actions regime in England & Wales. While the project remains exploratory, it signals renewed interest in whether existing mechanisms for consumer redress are adequate for mass harm claims. Set against developments in Scotland, however, it also highlights a divergence in both pace and ambition within UK civil justice reform.

What the Law Commission will examine

The Commission’s project is focused on consumer law claims rather than class actions generally. Its terms of reference do not assume reform is necessary. The Commission is to assess the benefits and risks associated with the introduction of a collective class actions regime for consumer law claims, taking into account other available mechanisms such as public enforcement action and alternative dispute resolution. In short, it will look at whether there is a genuine gap in consumer redress which justifies the introduction of a new collective litigation procedure (considering, for example, the enhanced consumer enforcement powers which the Competition and Markets Authority obtained under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumer Act 2024 (the “DMCCA”)).

The Commission will also make recommendations about the design of such a regime, were it to be introduced. That aspect of its project will consider: what should constitute a “consumer law claim” for the purposes of any class action regime; whether the regime should allow for “opt-in” as well as “opt-out” claims; the criteria and process for commencing a class action, including how a “class” should be defined; management of class action proceedings; and damages, costs and settlement, including the funding of claims. The project will not, however, consider whether existing substantive consumer rights, and rights of redress, are sufficient; its focus is procedural remedies.

The Commission has also made clear that its work will take account of two significant reviews which are already underway: the UK Government’s review of the opt‑out collective actions regime for competition claims, and the Civil Justice Council’s review of litigation funding. The clear implication is that any reform of consumer class actions would need to fit coherently within the broader civil justice ecosystem of England & Wales.

Scotland: the potential for opt‑out already exists and reform is pushing further

The Scottish position is materially different.

Primary legislation (the Civil Litigation (Expenses and Group Proceedings) (Scotland) Act 2018) already allows for the possibility of both opt-in and opt-out class actions, without placing any restrictions on the type of claim for which they might be used. Consumer claims can already be brought in group proceedings in the Court of Session on an opt-in basis. It has been left to the Court of Session to decide whether opt-out claims should be introduced and what limits, if any, there should be on their scope. Unlike England & Wales, reform to opt‑out collective procedure in Scotland is not confined to competition law or to consumer claims.

The position on opt-out is now under active review. The Scottish Civil Justice Council has established a Group Procedure Working Group to consider whether group proceedings in the Court of Session should be extended to include an opt‑out regime and, if so, how it should be implemented. The Working Group’s initial call for evidence was completed in January 2026 and a consultation on concrete proposals is the likely next step.

In Scotland, therefore, the debate is not about whether opt‑out class actions should exist at all. It is about how far they should go.

Scope, pace and direction of travel

The introduction of an opt-out regime in either jurisdiction would be a huge change for consumer-facing businesses, markedly increasing their litigation risk. This said, the contrast between the approach to reform in Scotland and England & Wales is striking in two respects.

First, scope. The Commission’s project is confined to consumer claims. The SCJC’s Working Group is considering opt‑out procedure for all categories of claim, without limit on subject‑matter.

Secondly, pace. Opt‑in and opt-out actions are already on the statute book in Scotland. In England & Wales the discussion has a long way to go. Fundamental points of principle are still to be debated before the detail of any regime can be discussed. Even if the Commission finds that collective actions for consumer claims offer more benefits than risks, it is unclear whether there will still be the political appetite to introduce them. A week is a long time in politics, and the question may not be debated until 2028; the Commission’s project will not begin until Autumn 2026. In 2008, recommendations for a consumer claims regime were not taken up by the then UK Government, and an attempt by Robert Buckland MP in November 2023 to amend the DMCCA, so that consumer opt-out claims were added to the existing competition opt-out claims regime, was rejected.

The distinctions may matter. A jurisdiction with an established opt‑out framework, and an active reform agenda designed to extend it, is likely to attract early test cases, claimant interest and litigation funding. Scotland may therefore become the natural forum for collective redress in the short to medium term.

Influence flowing north to south?

This raises a wider question. If Scotland progresses further and faster, will it become the UK’s class actions hotspot and, in turn, influence reform elsewhere?

The Law Commission has indicated that it will look carefully at comparative models. A working opt‑out regime elsewhere in the UK would be a particularly powerful reference point. If Scottish reforms succeed in expanding access to justice without generating procedural excess, they may do much to reduce institutional caution south of the border.

For now, England & Wales is consulting, while Scotland is building. Whether that divergence endures, or whether Scottish experience accelerates reform elsewhere, may determine where the future centre of gravity for UK class actions ultimately lies.