UK-wide: A Litigation PR & Communications Overview

When bringing or defending a claim, both private and corporate clients will find themselves exposed to consistent and complex reputational challenges throughout the legal process. From high-value commercial disputes through to collective actions and employment tribunals, public and media scrutiny of court proceedings is a consistent fact of life. Heightened stakeholder expectations alongside ongoing efforts to expand open justice make an early and thoughtful approach to litigation PR and reputation management a vital part of wider legal strategy.

Why Specialist Litigation PR Matters

London remains a strong market for domestic and international litigation, where the open-justice nature of hearings and pleadings – unless otherwise ordered by the court – can expose litigants to extensive risk throughout the life cycle of a case. Each litigation milestone presents a new opportunity for media scrutiny of potentially damaging allegations, which can impact reputations and threaten stakeholder trust.

Managing the narrative surrounding litigation is essential, in both the immediate and longer term. Bringing litigation PR specialists into a client’s legal team early allows the planning and preparation necessary to position the client favourably in public and stakeholder discourse and help set the tone for media coverage. From a strong foundation, litigation PR specialists can intervene and influence the perception of a client, and their case, throughout. In an era where AI-powered search makes damaging allegations and negative news more easily accessible for longer, controlling the narrative early and ensuring information accuracy is paramount.

Collective Actions and Employment Tribunals

The initial media furore that accompanied the growth of the UK’s collective action regime has subsided, with journalists now typically less likely to cover a case multiple times without substantive developments to report on. However, many collective actions still attract major media interest and pose significant reputational risk to corporate defendants. David and Goliath narratives are incredibly appealing to consumer-focused print and broadcast media, particularly where a claim is centred on issues of public interest.

Claimant firms and their PR teams focus intently on attracting additional claimants and raising public and political pressure on corporate defendants to settle, seeking to build a narrative of moral justification around a claim. Corporate defendants must tread a fine line: silence is rarely an option, while bland, sanitised statements can easily strike the wrong tone and serve to galvanise media scrutiny.

Though traditionally of a much smaller quantum, employment tribunal cases pose a significant and increasing reputational risk for organisations, boards and senior executives – especially with the forthcoming reduction in the qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims (from two years to six months) and the removal of the statutory cap on unfair dismissal compensation, ensuring theoretically unlimited financial damages exposure. Moreover, allegations involving discrimination, whistle-blowing, harassment, bullying, workplace culture, misconduct or the departure of senior individuals are immensely damaging and resonate deeply with customers, colleagues and other audiences.

Any employment dispute can quickly create reputational risk beyond the confines of the legal process – and long before facts are established or legal issues are determined. The public nature of tribunal proceedings, and the evidence bundle produced for them, can expose internal management discussions or details of upcoming projects to media scrutiny. Poorly framed media coverage may affect workforce confidence, leadership credibility, client relationships and broader stakeholder trust, while also increasing pressure on decision-makers at sensitive moments and draining management resources.

Poor communications can alienate stakeholders, prejudice proceedings, undermine settlement discussions, and create material that is later relevant to the tribunal itself. Conversely, skilled and disciplined litigation PR specialists can help organisations maintain confidence and stability while the underlying issues are addressed through the proper process.

Disinformation and AI

Alongside legitimate media reporting, it is increasingly common for malicious disinformation campaigns to target litigants during and following the conclusion of cases. Often intended to place pressure on a party to settle, or disrupt long-term business operations, the scope and impact of these campaigns have been exponentially amplified by AI, making it easier, faster and more impactful for adverse parties to spread false narratives. The global nature of many disinformation networks can also make attempts to hold the perpetrators legally accountable challenging.

As a result, it is more important than ever that private and corporate clients are ready to proactively defend against this threat, by ensuring that accurate data, information and storytelling are disseminated impactfully in recognised, authoritative sources. Embedding a strong, accurate and positive narrative is made more vital by, for example, the use of public source information by due diligence companies, which may take a disinformation campaign at face value and raise concerns with a client’s banking provider. Given the impact that false information can have on reputations and a long-term licence to operate, being prepared to counter such tactics can be existential for clients.

Internal and Stakeholder Communications

As well as direct media engagement, the management of internal and external stakeholder relationships during litigation is also vital. Drawn out proceedings – whatever form they take – can be destabilising for colleagues, clients and investors, with each group requiring careful, tailored communications. A long-term communications strategy that presents a clear and coherent narrative to stakeholders, with regular and open (proceedings permitting) communications, can protect relationships and defend against damaging fallout from the litigation itself and related media coverage. Conversely, poorly planned communications creates a slippery slope. Declining support within any stakeholder group can quickly become contagious, creating greater risk, undermining morale, encouraging leaks to the media, and weakening relationships with politicians or regulators.

Open Justice and the Direction of Travel

In recent years, there have been ongoing efforts from the judiciary to expand open-justice provisions in many courts and tribunals. From the open-reporting provisions in the family court, formalised in the Family Procedure Rules in January 2025, through to the Pilot Practice Direction currently being trialled in the Commercial Court, London Circuit Commercial Court and Financial List, the direction of travel is clear.

Where parties are considering proceedings, careful consideration should be given to the court in which a dispute is filed, and the potential impact on a client’s reputation. While claimants may often prefer a court with greater open-justice provisions, in circumstances where a case may reveal material that is reputationally challenging, alternative forums or means of dispute resolution might be preferred.

In any dispute or litigation scenario, treating reputation management as an afterthought or reactive necessity is a strategic mistake that exposes parties to significant and avoidable risks.

Appointing litigation-specialist advisers early and integrating them into senior leadership and legal team discussions is essential. It ensures consistent, compelling impact across media and stakeholder communications as a dispute develops. Early strategic thinking in litigation communications ensures that you win in the court of public opinion; increasingly, it has also been shown that it can give you the edge inside the courtroom, too.