Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting (QOCS) explained
Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting (QOCS) is the technical name for the legal protection that stops most personal injury claimants having to pay the defendant’s legal costs if they lose their case. Introduced in 2013 as part of the Jackson Reforms, QOCS is the reason most modern PI claims can run on a no-win-no-fee basis without putting the claimant at risk of crippling costs bills. This page explains how QOCS works in 2026, when it doesn’t apply, and how it interacts with the wider CFA and ATE framework.
In this guide
- What QOCS does
- How QOCS technically works
- When QOCS applies
- When QOCS is disapplied — the exceptions
- The 2023 reform of QOCS
- QOCS interaction with ATE
- Strategic implications
- Frequently asked questions
- Related guides
- Our Partner's Fees Explained
- Check If You Could Claim Compensation For Your Injury
Most people who come to us would rather not handle a personal injury claim themselves. Our legal partner runs claims like this on a no win, no fee basis, gathers the evidence, deals with the other side’s insurer, and only takes a fee if your claim succeeds. You can also instruct a solicitor directly free of charge if you would rather, and the law gives you the same rights either way.
What QOCS does
In ordinary civil litigation, the losing party usually pays the winning party’s legal costs — “loser pays”. This rule is sensible in commercial disputes between businesses, but it creates a massive financial risk for individual personal injury claimants. A claimant who loses a PI case might face a defendant insurer’s costs bill of £20,000, £50,000 or more, on top of having lost the case itself.
Before QOCS, this risk was managed by After the Event (ATE) insurance — the premium for which was recoverable from defendants. The Jackson Reforms abolished that recoverability, replacing it with QOCS. The rule is set out in CPR 44.13-17:
- In personal injury claims, the claimant has presumed costs protection.
- Even if the claimant loses, the defendant cannot enforce a costs order against the claimant’s assets.
- There are specific exceptions (“qualifications”) that disapply QOCS — hence “qualified” in the name.
How QOCS technically works
QOCS doesn’t prevent the court from making a costs order against an unsuccessful claimant. Rather, it prevents enforcement of that costs order. So:
- The court can still order the unsuccessful claimant to pay the defendant’s costs.
- But QOCS prevents the defendant from actually recovering those costs from the claimant’s assets, salary, etc.
- Specifically, the defendant can only enforce up to the amount of any damages or costs the claimant has been awarded in the same case.
- In a case where the claimant gets nothing, the defendant gets nothing — even though they “won”.
This creates a kind of stalemate that protects the claimant’s wider assets while still leaving the defendant’s costs technically recoverable in limited circumstances.
When QOCS applies
QOCS applies to:
- Personal injury claims — defined broadly to include claims for damages for personal injuries, fatal accidents claims under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976, and Law Reform Act 1934 estate claims.
- Claims by the claimant against the defendant — not counterclaims or third-party claims, which are governed separately.
- Claims where the claimant is an individual — corporate claimants don’t get QOCS protection.
QOCS does NOT apply to:
- Most non-PI civil claims (contract disputes, property claims, etc.).
- Claims by companies (with limited exceptions).
- Some specific PI-adjacent claims (the boundary is sometimes contested).
When QOCS is disapplied — the exceptions
QOCS is qualified — there are specific exceptions. The most important:
1. Fundamental dishonesty (the biggest exception)
Under CPR 44.16(1), if the court finds that a claim is “fundamentally dishonest” — meaning the claimant or those acting on their behalf have lied or significantly exaggerated material facts — QOCS protection is removed. The defendant can then enforce costs orders in full against the claimant.
Section 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 supplements this by allowing courts to dismiss the entire claim (even otherwise valid parts) if any part of it is found to be fundamentally dishonest, unless the claimant would suffer “substantial injustice”.
Fundamental dishonesty findings have become more common in recent years, particularly in cases involving:
- Exaggerated injuries (claiming severe disability while social media shows full activity).
- False or inconsistent accident accounts.
- Bogus claims for losses (lost earnings claims by claimants who weren’t actually working).
- Surveillance evidence contradicting the claimant’s case.
The bar for “fundamental” dishonesty is higher than ordinary dishonesty — the claim must be substantially undermined by the dishonesty, not just contain some inaccurate detail.
2. Claim struck out (CPR 44.15)
Where a claim is struck out under CPR 3.4 (essentially, dismissed as having no real prospect of success or as an abuse of process), QOCS protection can be removed.
3. Mixed claims (CPR 44.16(2)(b))
Where a single proceeding includes a PI claim and a non-PI claim (e.g. PI plus property damage), QOCS may be modified or partially disapplied.
4. Failure to beat a Part 36 offer
The 2023 reform of QOCS
A significant change came into force on 6 April 2023 — the rules on QOCS were tightened to allow enforcement of costs orders against:
- Damages and interest awarded to the claimant — even where these were paid pursuant to a Part 36 offer accepted by the claimant.
- Costs orders the claimant has against the defendant — i.e. the defendant can set off costs they’ve been ordered to pay against costs they’re owed.
The 2023 changes followed the Supreme Court decision in Ho v Adelekun [2021] UKSC 43, which had restricted defendant set-off rights — Parliament effectively reversed that decision by amending CPR 44.14.
QOCS interaction with ATE
After the Event (ATE) insurance explained.
Strategic implications
QOCS has shifted the negotiating dynamic in PI litigation significantly:
- Claimants face less financial pressure to settle than they did pre-2013.
- Defendants can use Part 36 offers to create cost pressure (failure to beat the offer reduces QOCS protection).
- Surveillance and dishonesty defences have become more strategically important to defendants as a way of breaking through QOCS.
- Cases of weak prospects are still risky, but the risk is more about wasted time and stress than financial exposure.
Frequently asked questions
Does QOCS mean I can’t lose money on a PI claim?
Mostly yes — provided you act honestly and follow your solicitor’s advice. The main route to losing money under QOCS is a fundamental dishonesty finding, which is avoidable by being completely truthful with your solicitor and the court.
What if I exaggerated something accidentally?
Honest mistakes don’t typically lead to fundamental dishonesty findings — the test requires the dishonesty to be deliberate and material. But discrepancies between what you said and what evidence shows can damage your credibility. Always tell your solicitor about anything that might be raised — they can manage it openly rather than being caught out.
How does QOCS interact with my CFA?
The two are complementary. The CFA protects you from paying your own solicitor’s fees if the case is lost. QOCS protects you from paying the defendant’s costs. Together they remove most of the financial risk of bringing a PI claim.
Do I need ATE if QOCS protects me?
Sometimes yes, sometimes no — depends on the case. ATE covers the gaps QOCS doesn’t (fundamental dishonesty, unrecovered disbursements). For low-risk cases, QOCS alone may be sufficient. Your solicitor will recommend based on the case profile.
What does “fundamentally dishonest” actually mean?
The court asks whether the dishonesty went to “the heart” of the claim — whether the case would have looked materially different if the truth had been told from the start. Lying about how an accident happened, faking injuries, claiming losses you didn’t suffer — all fundamental. Misremembering a minor detail or being inconsistent about peripheral facts — generally not.
Can the defendant still take my damages if I win?
Following the 2023 reforms, yes — costs can be set off against damages even where damages have been awarded. This was a meaningful tightening of QOCS for claimants. In practice, it mainly arises where a claimant fails to beat a Part 36 offer.
Are corporate claims protected by QOCS?
Generally no — QOCS is for individual personal injury claimants. Corporate claimants (e.g. a company suing for damage to a vehicle) don’t get the protection.
Related guides
- No win, no fee explained
- Conditional fee agreements (CFAs) explained
- After the Event (ATE) insurance explained
- Part 36 offers explained
- Fixed Recoverable Costs (FRC) explained
Check If You Could Claim Compensation For Your Injury
If you were injured in an accident that wasn’t your fault, you may be entitled to compensation. Start a free claim check in minutes — no upfront cost. No win, no fee if your claim is accepted.
