General information only — not legal advice. Published by Edward & Amaury Solicitors, solicitors regulated by the SRA (no. 800525). How that affects what you read.

QOCS — Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting

England & WalesLast reviewed 2 August 2026

Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting protects personal injury claimants from paying the defendant's legal costs if their case fails. Introduced in April 2013 as part of the Jackson Reforms, QOCS is a cornerstone of the post-LASPO no win no fee regime.

How Does QOCS Work?

Direct Answer: Qualified One-Way Costs Shifting (QOCS) protects personal injury claimants from paying the defendant's legal costs if their claim fails. It applies automatically to most PI claims under CPR 44.13–44.17, with limited exceptions for fundamentally dishonest, struck-out, or fraudulent claims.

Under the traditional English costs rule ("loser pays"), the unsuccessful party is ordered to pay the successful party's legal costs. This created a significant financial barrier for personal injury claimants — the risk of having to pay the defendant's (usually an insurer's) substantial legal costs if the case failed.

QOCS fundamentally changes this calculus for personal injury claims. Under CPR 44.14, orders for costs made against the claimant may be enforced only up to the aggregate amount of damages and interest awarded to the claimant. In practice, if the claimant recovers nothing (because they lose), the defendant's costs order cannot be enforced at all.

This creates a form of "one-way" costs shifting: the defendant remains liable for the claimant's costs if the defendant loses, but the claimant is largely protected from the defendant's costs if the claimant loses.

When QOCS Applies

QOCS applies to "proceedings which include a claim for damages for personal injuries" (CPR 44.13(1)). This covers:

  • Road traffic accidents
  • Employers' liability and workplace injuries
  • Public liability (slips, trips, falls)
  • Clinical and medical negligence
  • Product liability
  • Fatal accident claims (including dependency under Fatal Accidents Act 1976)
  • Industrial disease (asbestosis, NIHL, HAVS)
  • Abuse claims (physical and sexual)

When QOCS Protection Is Lost

QOCS protection is "qualified" — it can be lost in three circumstances:

1. Fundamental Dishonesty (CPR 44.16(1))

If the court finds that the claim is "fundamentally dishonest," QOCS protection is removed entirely. The court can enforce the full costs order against the claimant. This was codified by s 57 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, which also requires the court to dismiss the entire claim if any part of it is fundamentally dishonest (unless substantial injustice would result).

2. Strike Out (CPR 44.15)

If the claim is struck out on grounds that it discloses no reasonable cause of action, is an abuse of the court's process, or the claimant's conduct is likely to obstruct the just disposal of proceedings, QOCS protection is lost.

3. Mixed Claims (CPR 44.16(2))

Where proceedings include a claim for damages that is not a personal injury claim (e.g., a claim for property damage alongside personal injury), the court may order costs against the claimant to the extent that those non-PI claims fail. In practice, the court exercises discretion on a case-by-case basis.

QOCS and Part 36 Offers

If the defendant makes a Part 36 offer and the claimant fails to obtain a judgment more advantageous than the offer, the usual Part 36 costs consequences apply — the defendant is entitled to their costs from the date the relevant period expired. However, under QOCS, the defendant can only enforce those costs up to the amount of damages awarded. This means the defendant can effectively "offset" their costs against the claimant's damages, but cannot pursue the claimant for any shortfall.

QOCS and ATE Insurance

QOCS and ATE insurance are complementary, not duplicative. QOCS protects the claimant from the defendant's costs. ATE insurance protects the claimant from their owndisbursements (expert fees, court fees, counsel's fees). A claimant with QOCS protection but no ATE insurance who loses their case would still face potentially thousands of pounds in unrecovered disbursements. Most no win no fee solicitors arrange both CFA + ATE as a standard funding package.

Frequently Asked Questions

You May Also Be Interested In

Where this applies: This page covers England and Wales. The rules in Scotland and Northern Ireland are different.

Sources for this page

Every rule stated above is based on the primary sources below. Each link goes to the legislation, court rule or regulator itself so you can check it. Last verified 2 August 2026.

  1. Civil Procedure Rules, Part 44 (incl. rr.44.13–44.17, QOCS)

    Qualified one-way costs shifting and its exceptions. Rule 44.14 was amended with effect from 6 April 2023.

  2. Civil Procedure Rules, Part 36 (offers to settle)

    Cost consequences of rejecting an offer and failing to beat it at trial.

  3. Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, ss.44–46 · in force from 1 April 2013

    Ended recoverability of success fees and ATE premiums from the losing party. Did not create or regulate CFAs.

Who wrote and checked this page

Written and published by
Edward & Amaury Solicitors (Edward & Amaury Ltd, company no. 12195443), regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under no. 800525.
Legal review
Checked for England & Wales by Edward & Amaury Solicitors Solicitors regulated by the SRA (no. 800525) (verify on the regulator’s register).Review is recorded against the firm. The individual reviewer is not named on this page.
Review dates
Last reviewed 2 August 2026. Next review due 2 February 2027.

Fee rules change. California’s medical malpractice fee limits changed on 1 January 2023, and the QOCS rules in England and Wales changed on 6 April 2023. If you spot something out of date, tell us — we publish corrections.

Where this applies: This page covers England and Wales. The rules in Scotland and Northern Ireland are different.

Sources for this page

Every rule stated above is based on the primary sources below. Each link goes to the legislation, court rule or regulator itself so you can check it. Last verified 2 August 2026.

  1. Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, s.58 (conditional fee agreements)

    The provision that makes CFAs lawful and enforceable. CFAs derive from this section, not from LASPO.

  2. Conditional Fee Agreements Order 2013, arts. 4–5 · in force from 1 April 2013

    Art. 4 caps the success fee at 100% of base costs. Art. 5 caps what may be taken from damages in personal injury at 25% of PSLA plus past pecuniary loss, net of CRU, at first instance.

  3. Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, ss.44–46 · in force from 1 April 2013

    Ended recoverability of success fees and ATE premiums from the losing party. Did not create or regulate CFAs.

  4. Civil Procedure Rules, Part 44 (incl. rr.44.13–44.17, QOCS)

    Qualified one-way costs shifting and its exceptions. Rule 44.14 was amended with effect from 6 April 2023.

Who wrote and checked this page

Written and published by
Edward & Amaury Solicitors (Edward & Amaury Ltd, company no. 12195443), regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under no. 800525.
Legal review
This page has not yet been through independent legal review. It is written from the primary sources listed below, which you can check directly.
Review dates
Last reviewed 2 August 2026. Next review due 2 February 2027.

Fee rules change. California’s medical malpractice fee limits changed on 1 January 2023, and the QOCS rules in England and Wales changed on 6 April 2023. If you spot something out of date, tell us — we publish corrections.