Loser-pays is a non-starter in a country like the US that uses private civil litigation to enforce everything from workplace racial discrimination laws to environmental regulation.
Honestly, if you study the system a little bit, at least in the US, the problem isn't too much litigation, it's too little litigation. E.g. people complain about all the medical malpractice suits, but a Harvard Medical School study a few years ago suggested that far more people with meritorious claims failed to file suit than the number of people with unmeritorious claims who did file suit. There are tons of meritorious environmental law suits that don't get filed because polluted communities either don't realize they can sue or don't want to take on a big corporation.
"Loser pays" really favors big companies and the status quo, and in the absence of a big pro-active government to vindicate peoples' rights really results in those big companies trampling on those rights.
Honestly, if you study the system a little bit, at least in the US, the problem isn't too much litigation, it's too little litigation. E.g. people complain about all the medical malpractice suits, but a Harvard Medical School study a few years ago suggested that far more people with meritorious claims failed to file suit than the number of people with unmeritorious claims who did file suit. There are tons of meritorious environmental law suits that don't get filed because polluted communities either don't realize they can sue or don't want to take on a big corporation.
"Loser pays" really favors big companies and the status quo, and in the absence of a big pro-active government to vindicate peoples' rights really results in those big companies trampling on those rights.