Civil Reform Bill 2025: The Impact of the Civil reform Bill 2025 on Insurance Litigation

The Civil Reform Bill 2025 (“the Bill”) aims to deliver some of the most significant reforms to civil litigation in recent times. The aim of the Bill is to encourage greater access to justice by promoting the prosecution of claims in a more streamlined, cost-effective and timely manner.

The Bill proposes to increase the jurisdiction threshold of the District and Circuit Courts, overhaul the discovery process and streamline other key litigation processes relating to adjournments and the discontinuance of actions. The Bill also provides for the creation of case conduct principles and extending the use of pre-action protocols beyond clinical negligence proceedings.

We examine the proposed changes and how they will impact on those involved in the arena of Insurance litigation.

Discovery

The Bill provides for a total overhaul of the discovery system.

Rather than completing discovery after pleadings are closed, the Bill instead envisages the earlier production of documentation between the parties. The claimant must provide all relevant documents that they intend to rely on at trial within 28 days of the service of the claim form. The respondent must similarly reciprocate within 42 days of service of their defence. Early document retention and production procedures will be crucial to ensure defendants to litigation can comply with these accelerated timelines.

The Bill requires that both parties make further production of any additional documents which they believe have become relevant and material, no later than 28 days prior to the date of trial.

This new system will allow parties to consider the evidence for or against their case at a much earlier stage of the litigation, with the intention of obviating the need to formulate and engage in prolonged negotiation of discovery categories.

Parties can still apply to the Court to order production of documents, but this will likely occur in circumstances where the production of documents made by a party is considered deficient, and will therefore likely be a more targeted application than a traditional discovery application seeking categories of documents.

Jurisdiction

The Bill proposes to raise the monetary jurisdiction of the District Court from €15,000 to €20,000 and the Circuit Court from €75,000 (€60,000 for personal injury) to €100,000 with the aim of reducing overall legal costs by allowing more non-complex cases to be heard in the lower courts.

The reality is that far fewer personal injury cases will now be issued in the High Court. This will increase the volumes of claims issued in the Circuit Court and also in the District Court. Provincial High Courts lists are dominated by personal injury claims, therefore, the reduction in High Court claims as a result of the changes could impact the frequency of some provincial sittings and possibly render some provincial venues unviable.

An amended fee scale will be required to cater for the increase in jurisdiction from €15,000 to €20,000 in the District Court.

While the possibility of broadening fee scales was mooted in 2025 in the Government’s Action Plan on Competitiveness and Productivity, the Bill is silent on implementing scale fees in the Circuit Court.

Case Conduct & Pre-action Protocols

The Bill seeks to encourage the just and expeditious prosecution of litigation in such a manner as to minimise legal costs, including the potential expansion of pre-action protocols to other types of litigation beyond clinical negligence claims.

The Bill encourages earlier constructive discussion between the parties with a view towards identifying and narrowing the central issues of law and fact. It also aims to promote Alternative Dispute Resolution and the earlier settlement of disputes.

The Courts will also be tasked to oversee, in a manner than minimises conflict between the parties, that the parties adhere to any case conduct and pre-action protocols principles implemented in a proactive and expeditious manner.

The Courts will be impowered to stay actions or make costs awards against any party who has not complied with the pre-action protocols.

Presumption against granting of Adjournments

Adjournments shall not be granted unless the Court is satisfied that there is sufficient reason for doing so. The agreement of the parties to the adjournment shall not in itself be sufficient reason for granting the adjournment.

The Court may impose a penalty on the party seeking the adjournment to reflect non-compliance with any implemented case management protocols.

Deemed Discontinuance of Civil Actions

The Bill provides a mechanism to prevent the build-up of inactive or slowly prosecuted claims. In this regard, where no steps are taken by a party for 6 months, and where an action has not been set down for trial, a party may serve a notice on the other party notifying them of their intention to lodge an application for deemed discontinuance.

If no steps have been taken within 28 days of service of this notice, the serving party may lodge an application for deemed discontinuance with the appropriate Court office.

Proceedings are considered discontinued on the date of lodging the application for deemed discontinuance. The Court Office shall issue a notification to all parties confirming the discontinuance.

Plaintiffs in Personal Injuries Actions to Distinguish between Pre Existing Injuries and the subject matter of the claim

The Plaintiff will now be obliged to provide full particulars of any relevant pre-existing medical condition, both injuries and illnesses and distinguish those from the injuries that are the subject of the claim.

Time Limit for Furnishing a Bill of Costs & Non-Compliance

The Bill provides that the party who is awarded an order for costs shall furnish a bill of costs within three months of the conclusion of proceedings.
In the event that the bill issues but there is no application for an adjudication date, within a period to be specified by Rules of Court, the party who is the subject of the order to pay costs may, on expiry of that period, then apply for such adjudication.

Failure to provide a bill of costs within the proposed time limit will result in the loss of any entitlement to interest on those costs.

This section should encourage the quicker resolution of legal costs. However, the consequences for the party not providing costs might not be significant enough to give this section sufficient teeth to encourage compliance. More meaningful costs consequences on the actual professional fee, postage or Scheduled items and/or provision necessitating an application to the Court to seek leave to serve a bill of costs after expiry of the time limit and explain the delay could be more effective.

Overall Practical Implications

The Bill promotes the front loading of litigation by encouraging the earlier gathering of relevant discovery documentation and other evidence by all parties, which will also significantly impact how claims are strategically managed by Plaintiffs and Defendants both at pre-litigation and post-litigation stages. If parties are forearmed with key evidence earlier in the claims process, this in turn could encourage earlier settlements.

A potential drawback is that the proposed changes are unlikely to apply retrospectively to matters already litigated at the date of its enactment. This will result in a dual system of litigation operating for a period of time.

Conclusion

The publication of the Bill marks the culmination of a broader effort by the Government to digitise and modernise how civil litigation is conducted. The reforms have the potential to culminate in a more structured, cost-effective and expeditious litigation system together with more Court oversite in how claims are prosecuted.

We will continue to track the Bill as it makes its way through what can sometimes be a lengthy legislative process. The next legislative steps include drafting the heads into a comprehensive Bill, introduction in the Dáil (First Stage), committee review (Second/Committee Stage), debate and amendment (Third/Report Stage), final approval (Fourth/Final Stage in Dáil), and then it must undergo a similar process in the Seanad. It is also possible that various sections could be enacted at different times, rather than all together.