The government must consider evidence that civil court costs rules and funding limitations are preventing people who have suffered human rights abuses at the hands of UK companies from seeking redress, the Joint Committee on Human Rights said today.

In its report on business and human rights, the committee urged the government to consider costs and funding implications as part of its response to Lord Justice Jackson’s review of civil litigation costs.

Legal and evidential difficulties, problems with limitation periods, unduly restrictive local rules on bringing group actions, complex corporate structures, and a lack of awareness of the alleged victims were also cited by the committee as barriers to bringing a case.

Andrew Dismore MP, chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, said: ‘In the modern world, the law is increasingly failing to address the impact of the private sector on individual rights.’

The committee urged the Ministry of Justice to consider its findings when deciding on the rules for allowing opt-out group actions. Earlier this year, the government rejected the substance of the Civil Justice Council's proposal to allow opt-out group litigation, preferring instead to examine group actions on a case-by-case basis.

The committee stopped short of calling for the law to be changed, saying that there was not enough evidence for such a ‘trailblazing’ move. However, it asked the government to review company and trades union law, as well as clarify its policy on business and human rights at home and overseas, and produce new guidance for businesses.

The committee took evidence from lawyers, UK multinational companies, unions, campaigners, and government ministers.