490,000+ drivers found their agreements with us
After the event insurance, or ATE, is a policy you buy once a dispute has already started, to cover the risk of paying your opponent’s legal costs if your claim fails. It can also cover some of your own disbursements. Since the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act took effect in 2013, most ATE premiums are no longer recoverable from the losing side, bar a narrow clinical negligence exception.
TL;DR:
- ATE premiums are typically non-recoverable from the opponent for claims started after 2013, except in certain clinical negligence cases.
- Premium costs usually range between 30% and 45% of the policy’s coverage amount, with higher rates for late purchases or complex claims.
- Buying ATE early offers lower premiums and broader coverage, while waiting until trial can significantly increase costs.
- Insurers price policies based on case merits, coverage limits, and how the payment is structured, offering options like upfront, staged, or deferred payments.
- ATE remains valuable for commercial, contract, or professional negligence disputes, where QOCS coverage does not apply, or when funders require a cost protection measure.
ATE insurance exists to remove the fear of a costs order against you. The core protection is adverse costs cover: if you lose, the policy pays some or all of the opponent’s legal costs instead of you. According to Pinsent Masons, policy limits vary hugely, from a few thousand pounds for small claims to £10 million or more for complex commercial disputes.
Most policies also cover your own disbursements, the costs you would have to pay regardless of outcome:
Cover is not unconditional. Insurers can decline to pay out if you failed to disclose a material fact or ignored reasonable settlement advice, and every policy has a maximum indemnity limit above which you are exposed again.
Before April 2013, a winning claimant could usually recover the ATE premium from the losing opponent, on top of damages and costs. That changed with section 46 of LASPO 2012, which removed the general right to recover ATE premiums from the other side for policies taken out from 1 April 2013 onwards.
Section 46 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 generally removed recoverability of ATE premiums from the losing party, with limited exceptions, notably certain clinical negligence expert-report premiums.
A narrow exception survives for clinical negligence claims, where premiums covering the cost of expert medical reports can still be recovered under separate regulations. The government’s post-implementation review of LASPO found that despite this shift, demand for ATE held up, largely because claimants and funders still value protection against Part 36 cost risks and disbursement exposure. In practice, this means the premium usually comes out of your own damages or is funded separately, not added to the bill the other side pays.
Insurers price ATE around four things: the merits of your case, the indemnity limit you want, the stage proceedings have reached, and how you intend to pay. A case assessed early, with strong prospects and a modest limit, attracts a lower rate than one bought late with uncertain merits and a high limit.
Premiums can typically run between 30% and 45% of the sum insured, according to Pinsent Masons, though the exact figure depends on the insurer’s own underwriting of your specific claim.
Payment structures vary:
Buying late in proceedings tends to cost more, since the insurer is taking on risk with less time to assess the case properly.
Buying early, ideally before major costs are incurred, usually secures a better rate and wider cover. Waiting until trial is looming is still possible but generally pushes the premium up.
Pro Tip: Ask any insurer to explain exactly how the premium is calculated. A refusal to break down the figure, or a premium that seems disproportionate to your likely damages, is a reason to seek a second quote.
Qualified one-way costs shifting (QOCS) protects most personal injury claimants from paying the defendant’s costs if they lose, which removes much of the traditional case for ATE in that category. QOCS has exceptions though, including fundamental dishonesty findings and cases that are struck out, and it does not extend to most commercial, contract or professional negligence disputes.
This is where ATE remains relevant:
Where a conditional fee agreement is paired with litigation funding, expect ATE to be part of the package rather than an optional add-on, much like arrangements described in guidance on no win no fee collections for creditors.
ATE removes the single biggest financial fear in litigation: a costs order you cannot pay. Insurer underwriting also acts as an informal quality check, since a policy is harder to get for a weak claim. Against that, the claimant or funder usually bears the cost, premiums can swallow a disproportionate share of damages in lower-value claims, and the government’s review of LASPO notes continuing concern about premium levels in parts of the market.
| Factor to check | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Likely opponent costs | Sets the indemnity limit you actually need |
| Your damages level | Low-value claims rarely justify a high premium |
| BTE or QOCS coverage | May make ATE unnecessary entirely |
| Funder involvement | Funders often require ATE as a condition |
| Premium versus damages | A rough affordability check before committing |
As a simple rule of thumb: the higher the opponent’s likely costs relative to your damages, the stronger the case for ATE.
If your questions about ATE stem from a mis-sold car finance agreement rather than a personal injury or commercial dispute, our free check is the first step. We locate your car finance agreements in under 60 seconds, with no vehicle registration or lender paperwork needed from you. We then refer eligible cases to a partner law firm, which handles the claim and advises on any funding or insurance questions, including ATE, where relevant. We do not sell ATE ourselves; our role is finding your agreements and starting the referral.
Before signing anything, ask your solicitor what the policy actually covers, whether the premium is deferred or payable upfront, and whether you can see the full key facts document rather than a summary. Ask too whether independent broker quotes were considered. If BTE cover or QOCS might already apply to your claim, raise that first, since it could remove the need for ATE altogether.
— Jake
We make starting a car finance claim simple: our free check finds your car finance agreements in under 60 seconds, with no registration details or lender paperwork required from you. If your check uncovers an eligible agreement, we refer your case to a partner law firm that handles the claim and, where relevant, advises on costs protection or funding arrangements, including ATE.
Run your free car finance check now to see whether you have an eligible agreement.
This article is general information, not a substitute for advice from a qualified lawyer. Consult a qualified legal professional about your own circumstances before acting on anything here.
It depends on the gap between your likely damages and the opponent’s potential costs. For claims outside QOCS protection, or where a funder requires it, ATE is often worth the premium because it removes the risk of an unaffordable costs order.
Legal costs insurance in the UK comes in two main forms: before the event (BTE), bought in advance often as an add-on to home or motor policies, and after the event (ATE), bought once a dispute has started. ICLR’s glossary notes that BTE cover can sometimes remove the need for ATE entirely.
ATE insurance is a policy bought after a dispute begins that protects you against paying your opponent’s legal costs if you lose. It commonly also covers your own disbursements, such as expert reports and court fees, though solicitor’s fees are rarely included.
Since LASPO took effect, the claimant or any involved litigation funder usually pays the premium, as it is generally no longer recoverable from the losing opponent. A limited exception remains for certain clinical negligence expert-report premiums under the 2013 regulations.