UK Class actions

Foreword UK competition class actions: An overview of national case law in the first five years

Five years ago, on 1 October 2015, the UK introduced a class action procedure for competition claims. Following a public consultation on the proposed new regime, the Government summed up its decision to introduce an opt-out mechanism as follows: “…it is very clear that the current system of collective redress [which does not include an opt-out class action procedure] does not work. Consumers are not currently getting redress for breaches of competition law… Consumer groups have been clear that they would not take another case under an opt-in system… It is also clear that… there are some cases that could only ever be brought on an opt-out basis…”. In the consultation process, the UK Government also noted that business groups had different concerns, including that an opt-out mechanism could lead to exaggerated claims and that the U.S. class action model should be avoided.

Read more
CMS Cameron McKenna (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 679 visits
CMS Cameron McKenna (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 679 visits
Simmons & Simmons (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 679 visits

Anticompetitive practices

 The UK Government publishes the long-awaited draft Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill which introduces a broad range of reforms in respect of competition and consumer law
Hogan Lovells (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 1744 visits
,
Hogan Lovells (London)
Royaume-Uni 14 contributions 4577 visites
,
Hogan Lovells (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 381 visits
…
On 25 April 2023, the UK Government published the long-awaited draft Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill (the “Bill”). The Bill will introduce a broad range of reforms (including in respect of competition and consumer law). In relation to digital markets, the Bill fleshes out a (...)

The UK Competition Authority introduces a new Subsidy Advice Unit which will provide non-binding advice to authorities on State subsidies and replace the former notification requirement
Gleiss Lutz (Brussels)
Belgium 17 contributions 2165 visits
This article has been nominated for the 2022 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. For many Britainophiles in the EU, the noise of the Brexiteers and their shouting about “world-beating Britain” during the last five years of the departure (...)

The UK Competition Authority issues an infringement decision finding that a football club and a sports equipment retailer colluded to restrict competition in the sales of sports-branded clothing and replica kit (Leicester City FC / JD Sports)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
Royaume-Uni 27 contributions 8811 visites
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 13 contributions 3479 visits
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 189 visits
…
CMA Fines Leicester City FC for Anticompetitive Pricing Practices* On 31 July 2023, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) issued an infringement decision finding that Leicester City Football Club and JD Sports had colluded to restrict competition in the sales of Leicester City-branded (...)

The UK Supreme Court delivers a landmark decision to clarify the legal status of litigation funding agreements (Trucks Cartel)
University of East Anglia
United Kingdom 14 contributions 26579 visits
,
Maitland Walker (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 88 visits
,
Maitland Walker (Minehead)
1 contribution 88 visits
Competition litigation funding doesn’t grow on trees – unintended consequences of the UKSC’s PACCAR decision* The recent Supreme Court decision in PACCAR has put litigation funding in competition opt-out actions high on the agenda. In this blog post we critically analyse an obiter (...)

The UK Supreme Court rules that many litigation funding agreements are unlawful and unenforceable in relation to a collective damages claim against a cartel of truck manufacturers (Trucks Cartel)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 2305 visits
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 13 contributions 3479 visits
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 472 visits
…
Supreme Court Rules Most Litigation Funding Agreements are Unlawful* Over the past two decades, litigation funding in the UK has become increasingly important and more commonly used. Once deemed contrary to public policy and unlawful, litigation funding is now regarded as playing a (...)

The UK Supreme Court rules that many litigation funding agreements are unenforceable (Trucks Cartel)
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 34988 visits
,
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 27 contributions 13738 visits
,
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 331 visits
…
In a heavy blow to the litigation funding industry, the UK Supreme Court has held that many litigation funding agreements are damages-based agreements and must comply with the relevant regulatory regime. Funders will be urgently reviewing their funding agreements amid widespread concern that (...)

The UK Supreme Court rules that litigation funding agreements are damage-based agreements and are likely unenforceable (Trucks Cartel)
Shearman & Sterling (London)
United Kingdom 6 contributions 1269 visits
,
Shearman & Sterling (London)
United Kingdom 30 contributions 14278 visits
,
Shearman & Sterling (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 14262 visits
…
In a decision of major importance for litigation in the UK, the UK Supreme Court has held that litigation funding agreements (“LFAs”) under which a litigation funder receives a percentage of any damages recovered by the claimant are damages-based agreements (“DBAs”) for the purposes of s58AA (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal delivers a landmark ruling to confirm the applicability of compound interest in the calculation of damages, following a private claim against a truck cartel (Royal Mail / DAF Trucks)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 5909 visits
The Competition Appeal Tribunal’s recent decision in the trucks cartel claim raises some serious questions about expert economic evidence. In this post I want to flesh out some of the challenges and then float some suggestions for improvements. The context Many readers will know the basic (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal endorses the award of compound interest in a damages claim against the truck cartel as opposed to simple interest to reflect the “real world” and the economic and commercial reality of businesses (Royal Mail / DAF Trucks)
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 1139 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 594 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United States 3 contributions 723 visits
How much is £1 from 1997 worth now? Such a question may appear very simple at the outset. However, ask it twice and you will probably obtain two different answers. Applied in the context of a damages claim in a lawsuit, a number of parameters need to be considered to properly address this (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal issues an opt-out certification decision in a class action filed against a Big Tech company (Liz Coll / Google)
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 20 contributions 5342 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 2025 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 1499 visits
On 31 August 2022, the Competition Appeal Tribunal released its judgment in Elizabeth Helen Coll v Alphabet Inc. and Others [2022] CAT 39, which confirms that consumer champion Liz Coll is authorised to bring an opt-out collective claim against Google for alleged competition law infringements (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal gives the go-ahead for a follow on damages claim in a vehicle cartel case (Trucks Cartel)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 2577 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 604 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 1406 visits
This article has been nominated for the 2023 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On 8 June 2022, the Competition Appeal Tribunal ("CAT") handed down judgment in respect of two applications for collective proceedings (heard jointly) (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal allows planned forex class action against big banks with the proviso that class members must opt-in to the litigation (Evans / O’Higgins)
Hausfeld (London)
United States 11 contributions 5141 visits
London, 31 March 2022 – Today, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has handed down its judgment in FX Claim UK, the opt-out collective action brought by Phillip Evans, deciding that the proposed FX collective proceedings can be certified, but on an opt-in basis only. Mr Evans intends to (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal rules that class action proceedings may only be brought on an opt-in basis where the class of potential complainants is sophisticated (Evans / O’Higgins)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
Royaume-Uni 45 contributions 9502 visites
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 699 visits
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 699 visits
The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT“) has ruled for the first time that collective proceedings can only proceed on an opt-in basis, rather than the opt-out basis sought by the class applicants. The ruling came in the O’Higgins/Evans case, concerning two competing applications for a (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal declines to certify two claims advanced against a number of UK banks for their participation in a forex spot rate manipulation cartel as opt-out collective proceedings (Evans / O’Higgins)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 604 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 2577 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 1406 visits
On 31 March 2022, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (’CAT’) refused to certify two claims advanced against a number of UK banks for their participation in a foreign exchange spot rate manipulation cartel as opt-out collective proceedings. The novel issue before the CAT at the certification (...)

The England & Wales High Court dismisses a €480M follow-on damages claim against a smart card chip cartel on the ground that the suit is barred by the statute of limitations (Gemalto / Thales / Infineon / Renesas)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 2577 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 1406 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 604 visits
The English High Court has ruled that, on the facts of the case, claimants Gemalto had sufficient information about the smart card chips cartel to support a reasonable claim for damages at the point at which the European Commission issued its statement of objections to defendants Infineon and (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal certifies the first competition class action on behalf of 46 million consumers who suffered loss as a result of anti-competitive interchange fees imposed by a payment company between 1992 and 2008 (Merricks / MasterCard)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 2577 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 2576 visits
On 18 August 2021, the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal ("CAT") certified the application by Mr Walter Merricks CBE to bring an opt-out class action on behalf of 46 million UK consumers who suffered loss as a result of anticompetitive interchange fees imposed by Mastercard between 1992 and (...)

The UK Supreme Court confirms that English courts may set the terms of global licences to portfolios of standard essential patents (Unwired Planet / Huawei)
Bristows (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 4673 visits
,
Bristows (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 264 visits
English courts given green light to set terms of global FRAND licences* On 26 August 2020, the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) gave its eagerly awaited judgment in Unwired Planet v Huawei and Conversant v Huawei & ZTE. In a unanimous policy-driven decision, the Court dismissed the appeals (...)

The UK Supreme Court hands down a judgment involving a software and a telecommunications company, providing answers to questions concerning the English Courts’ approach to FRAND disputes (Unwired Planet / Huawei)
Hogan Lovells (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 595 visits
,
Hogan Lovells (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 595 visits
,
Hogan Lovells (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 595 visits
The UK Supreme Court has handed down its long-awaited judgment in the Unwired Planet v Huawei and Conversant v Huawei & ZTE proceedings ([2020] UKSC 37), providing answers on several key questions concerning the English Courts’ approach to FRAND disputes. In a unanimous judgment, the (...)

The UK Supreme Court confirms that it is possible to set global FRAND rates and global licences to portfolios of standard-essential patents (Unwired Planet / Huawei)
Baker Botts (Brussels)
Belgium 28 contributions 21199 visits
,
Baker Botts (Brussels)
Belgium 15 contributions 5325 visits
The U.K. Supreme Court’s 26 August ruling on standard-essential patents (SEPs) is the latest in a series of recent decisions that are likely to have a profound effect on FRAND license negotiations across the globe, in particular for the next generation 4G and 5G mobile telecommunication (...)

The UK Competition Authority fines 3 pharmaceutical companies £2.3 million for having an anti-competitive agreement in the supply of the life-saving drug fludrocortisone and secures £8 million in damages for the National Health Service (Aspen / Amilco / Tiofarma)
UK Competition & Markets Authority - CMA (London)
United Kingdom 406 contributions 100816 visits
CMA levies fines of £2.3m and secures £8m for NHS in pharma probe* The CMA has formally concluded that 3 pharmaceutical companies took part in an illegal arrangement in relation to the supply of life-saving medicine. The investigation by the Competition and Markets Authority into the (...)

The UK Supreme Court partially dismisses an appeal concerning the two payment processing networks on the basis that their multilateral interchange fees restricted competition (Sainsbury’s / Visa / MasterCard)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
Royaume-Uni 27 contributions 8811 visites
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 21 contributions 22303 visits
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 716 visits
…
On 17 June 2020, the Supreme Court handed down a much anticipated judgment concerning the default multilateral interchange fees (MIFs) set by Mastercard and Visa (together, the Appellants). The case considered appeals relating to three separate damages actions brought by retailers against (...)

The UK Supreme Court dismisses an appeal concerning the two largest payment processing networks on the basis that their multilateral interchange fees restricted competition (Sainsbury’s / Visa / MasterCard)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
Belgium 389 contributions 94710 visits
On 17 June 2020, the UK Supreme Court dismissed Mastercard and Visa’s appeal against a 2018 ruling by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales and ruled that their multilateral interchange fees (“MIFs”) unlawfully restricted competition. The Supreme Court’s ruling potentially exposes (...)

The UK Supreme Court finds a competition law infringement caused by payment card schemes used in supermarkets (Sainsbury’s / Visa & MasterCard)
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 1292 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United States 6 contributions 1081 visits
The UK Supreme Court recently handed down its eagerly anticipated Judgment in respect of unlawful interchange fee claims against MasterCard and VISA, following almost a decade of litigation. The Judgment provides welcome clarity to merchant retailers as to the unlawfulness of MasterCard’s and (...)

The UK Supreme Court finds that payment card schemes used in supermarkets infringe competition law (Sainsbury’s / Visa / MasterCard)
Morgan Lewis (London)
United Kingdom 28 contributions 16465 visits
,
Morgan Lewis (London)
United Kingdom 27 contributions 10063 visits
,
Davis Polk (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 459 visits
On June 17, 2020, the UK Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the appeals on the lawfulness of multilateral interchange fees, or swipe fees, (MIFs) in Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd (Respondent) v. Visa Europe Services LLC and Others (Appellants) and Sainsbury’s Supermarkets Ltd and Others (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal upholds a ruling which declared that the national rail track operator abused its dominance by restricting suppliers’ access to its infrastructure (Network Rail / RISQS)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 35 contributions 17101 visits
,
ADNOC Group (Abu Dhabi)
United Arab Emirates 29 contributions 5497 visits
The Court of Appeal on 5 March 2020 handed down a judgment upholding the ruling of the Competition Appeal Tribunal ("CAT") of July 2019 which found Network Rail had infringed the Chapter I and II prohibitions of the Competition Act 1998 by requiring, in its schemes governing suppliers’ access (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal rules on which part of the EU Commission’s settlement decision is binding on a defendant and that it is an abuse of process for defendants to deny in follow-on damages claims the findings that are contained in settlements (Trucks Cartel)
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 264 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 352 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 3336 visits
In an important judgment for follow- on damages claims, the Competition Appeal Tribunal has ruled that a number of findings made by the European Commission in its Trucks ‘settlement’ Decision are binding on the defendants and the Tribunal; and that, subject to limited exceptions, it is an (...)

The UK Competition Authority closes its pharma probe by fining 4 companies more than £3.4 million and requiring a payment of £1 million directly to the NHS for breaches of competition law in relation to the supply of an antidepressant (King Pharmaceuticals / Accord-UK / Lexon / Alissa Healthcare Research)
UK Competition & Markets Authority - CMA (London)
United Kingdom 406 contributions 100816 visits
Over £3m in fines and £1m for NHS in CMA pharma probe* Following an investigation, the CMA has found that 4 pharmaceutical companies broke competition law in relation to the supply of an antidepressant. The probe by the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) into the supply of (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal clarifies principles governing competition damages and reiterates that judges must base their decisions on the evidence before them by exclusively focusing on the loss of the claimant (BritNed / ABB)
University of Buckingham
United Kingdom 4 contributions 2032 visits
The Court of Appeal in BritNed v ABB [2019] EWCA Civ 1840 has again had to clarify the principles governing competition damages. It reaffirmed the English High Court’s rejection of the claimant’s approach to damages but took issue with the trial judge’s position that damages should err on the (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal slashes a cartel follow-on damages award and emphasises claimants’ burden to prove losses in a claim brought by power cable manufacturers for market-sharing and customer allocating (BritNed / ABB)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 1406 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 2577 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 93 visits
BritNed Development Limited ("BritNed") brought a claim against ABB arising from the European Commission’s 2014 power cables cartel decision. In October 2018, the High Court found that there had been no overcharge but awarded damages for "baked-in inefficiencies" and "cartel savings" plus (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal hands down a follow-on damages claim against a power cable cartel member (BritNed / ABB)
KPN (Amsterdam)
Netherlands 33 contributions 7327 visits
,
Bird & Bird (London)
United Kingdom 28 contributions 3541 visits
On 31 October 2019, the Court of Appeal of England and Wales ("Court") handed down a significant judgment in relation to BritNed’s follow-on damages claim against a power cable cartel member, ABB. The Court allowed ABB’s cross-appeal in relation to cartel savings, finding that the High Court (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal adopts a practical approach to the realities of collective actions damages due to the Truck cartel decision (Trucks Cartel)
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 11 contributions 1642 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 1292 visits
A recent judgment by the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) in the Trucks collective actions regarding funding and adverse costs arrangements is welcome news for class claimants and undoubtedly positive for the development of the UK’s young collective actions regime. The judgment (...)

The England & Wales High Court rejects econometrics analysis in a cartel damages case for being too complex (BritNed / ABB)
University of Buckingham
United Kingdom 4 contributions 2032 visits
BritNed Development Ltd v. ABB AB and ABB Ltd [2018] EWHC 2616 (Ch). (“BritNed”) is the first English cartel damage judgment and the first to consider an econometric approach to calculating overcharges. The court rejected the claimant’s econometric analysis as ‘too complex’ and “unspecific”. (...)

The England & Wales High Court delivers its first follow-on cartel damages case judgment in the electricity interconnected cable market (BritNed / ABB)
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 135 visits
,
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 135 visits
The High Court has delivered its decision in the claim brought by BritNed Development Limited (BritNed) against ABB AB and ABB Ltd (together ABB). The case is significant as it is the first cartel damages claim to reach final judgment in the English courts. BritNed alleged that it suffered (...)

The England & Wales High Court rejects methodology for estimating overcharges on cables based on economic evidence (BritNed / ABB)
The Brattle Group (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 697 visits
ABSTRACT In the first cartel overcharge claim brought in the English High Court, the claimant’s methodology for estimating ABB overcharges on the BritNed cable was comprehensively rejected. The Court concluded that the claimant’s econometric analysis was insufficiently grounded in facts and (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal grants an application by the claimant in a damages action in the automobile industry for disclosure of licensing arrangements made by the defendant (Peugeot / NSK)
2 contributions 257 visits
,
Matheson (Dublin)
Ireland 6 contributions 1363 visits
This article has been nominated for the 2019 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. CAT Rules on Disclosure in Peugeot S.A. and others v NSK Ltd and others* The CAT’s specific disclosure ruling addresses the use of licensing to support (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal provides guidance on the extraterritorial scope of EU law in a cartel case (Iiyama)
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 20 contributions 5342 visits
Although cartels with a global reach are increasingly common, recent decisions from courts in both the United States and United Kingdom have narrowly interpreted the territorial scope of antitrust laws in both jurisdictions. In the United States, the Seventh Circuit held in Motorola Mobility (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal adopts a ruling allowing plaintiffs in cartel damages actions to advance claims based on overcharges incurred outside of the EU (Iiyama)
Dentons (Brussels)
United States 3 contributions 2191 visits
,
Levi Strauss (Brussels)
France 2 contributions 1526 visits
On February 16, 2018, the UK Court of Appeal adopted its much awaited ruling in the iiyama case. Taking stock of the Court of Justice (CoJ) ruling in Intel last year, the Court of Appeal allows plaintiffs in civil cartel damages actions to advance claims based on overcharges incurred by their (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal refuses a £14 billion class action against a financial service company (Merricks / MasterCard)
Covington & Burling (Brussels)
Belgique 49 contributions 18206 visites
,
Peter Camesasca Advocaat (Brussels)
Belgique 34 contributions 13375 visites
,
Covington & Burling (London)
Royaume-Uni 6 contributions 1438 visites
On Friday, July 21, 2017, the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”) handed down its second class certification decision under the class actions regime introduced by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the “Act”). It dismissed the application for two reasons. First, the proposed representative (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal allows the first class action brought under the competition law collective redress regime and continues providing some clarifications on important aspects of the regime (Dorothy Gibson / Pride Mobility Products)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
France 12 contributions 3297 visites
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
Royaume-Uni 45 contributions 9502 visites
Already, 2017 has seen significant developments in the UK’s competition litigation landscape. Most recently, last Friday the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) allowed the first ’class action’ brought under the new competition law collective redress regime to continue, at least for now, (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal hands down its first-class certification judgment on concerted practices in the mobility scooter sector (Dorothy Gibson / Pride Mobility Products)
Covington & Burling (Brussels)
Belgique 49 contributions 18206 visites
After a wait of nearly 15 months from the introduction of class actions in the UK for antitrust damages claims, the first class certification hearing took place before the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”) between December 12 and 14. Having heard argument, the CAT is considering (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal hands down its first-class certification for entering into agreements and concerted practices aimed at prohibiting the online advertising of certain models of mobility scooter (Dorothy Gibson / Pride Mobility Products)
Covington & Burling (Brussels)
Belgique 49 contributions 18206 visites
,
Peter Camesasca Advocaat (Brussels)
Belgique 34 contributions 13375 visites
,
Covington & Burling (London)
Royaume-Uni 6 contributions 1438 visites
The UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”) has handed down its first class certification judgment in relation to the class actions regime introduced by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the “Act”). The result? The hearing has been adjourned, with the proposed representative allowed to file (...)

The England & Wales High Court concludes that multilateral interchange fees were not restrictive of competition and can be exempted under Article 101(3) (MasterCard)
DLA Piper (London)
Royaume-Uni 25 contributions 18447 visites
On 30 January 2017, the United Kingdom (UK) High Court handed down a judgment in favour of MasterCard in a damages claim brought by UK retailers (including Next, Acadia Group and Asda). The claimants alleged that MasterCard’s multilateral interchange fees (MIFs) were illegally restrictive of (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal awards £8.6 million damages and finds that an undertaking setting of national multilateral interchange fees for its payment cards infringed national and EU competition law on anticompetitive agreements (Sainsbury’s / MasterCard)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
France 12 contributions 3297 visites
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
Royaume-Uni 45 contributions 9502 visites
On 14 Jul the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) issued its judgment in the damages claim brought by Sainsbury’s against MasterCard. The CAT found that MasterCard’s setting of UK multilateral interchange fees (MIFs) for its payment cards infringed the Article 101 TFEU/Chapter I prohibition (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal awards competition damages in the country’s judgment on a standalone action (Sainsbury’s / MasterCard)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Rome)
Italy 9 contributions 3246 visits
The Competition Appeal Tribunal awards competition damages in UK’s first judgment on a stand-alone action* On 14 July 2016, the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ordered MasterCard to pay Sainsbury’s £68.6m plus interest for infringing competition law in the setting of UK multilateral (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal hears the first damages claim since the entry into force of the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (NCRQ)
Constantine Cannon (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 576 visits
On 22 December 2015, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”) announced the commencement of two damages actions which, according to its website , were only the second and third claims issued in the CAT since 1 October, when the Consumer Rights Act 2015 came into force seismically changing (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal strikes out two cartel damage claims based on the torts of conspiracy and economic interference and narrows the scope of other potential claims (Air Cargo)
Simmons & Simmons (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 480 visits
,
Simmons & Simmons (London)
United Kingdom 19 contributions 4855 visits
,
Agoda (Bangkok)
Thailand 12 contributions 4229 visits
In brief There were three significant developments in the air cargo cartel damages litigation in the UK in October 2015. First, on 14 October 2015, the English Court of Appeal significantly narrowed the scope of potential claims in the UK by striking out two claims based on the torts of (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal refuses to expand the qualification of victim down the chain to the ultimate consumer (Air Canada / Emerald Supplies)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
Royaume-Uni 11 contributions 3107 visites
Blown out of the water? Air Cargo and the future of extra-EU/EEA cartel damages claims* If the captain of a trading ship fires cannon on a canoe to prevent the canoeists trading with another boat vying for their trade, that boat’s owners can sue the captain: Tarleton v M’Gawley (1793) Peake (...)

The England & Wales High Court of Justice guides on the application of the limitation period in damages actions (Arcadia / Visa)
St John’s Chambers (Bristol)
United Kingdom 15 contributions 5655 visits
United Kingdom: High Court provides guidance on application of limitation periods in damages actions* The High Court has recently provided guidance on the application of limitation periods in competition damages actions. In Arcadia v Visa, it ruled that a substantial part of the claimant’s (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal rules that antitrust findings regarding the copper plumbing tubes cartel did not support the intent to injure required for a conspiracy claim brought under section 47A of the Competition Act (W.H. Newson / IMI)
London School of Economics and Political Science (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 1789 visits
Conspiracy, the CAT, and the Court of Appeal: “Here is a case unprecedented” (The Gondoliers, Act 2)* In W.H. Newson Holding Limited & ors v IMI plc & ors [2013] EWCA Civ 1377, the Court of Appeal has made some important new law regarding the scope of section 47A of the Competition (...)

The UK Supreme Court grants permission to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s judgment that struck out a cartel damages claim on the ground that they were out of time (Deutsche Bahn)
University of Manchester
United Kingdom 9 contributions 2044 visits
Introduction Deutsche Bahn v Morgan Crucible is a well-litigated case, with a judgment from the Court of Appeal and the granted permission to appeal to the Supreme Court. Taking into account the novel issues involved in this case, it appears reasonable that the Supreme Court wants to resolve (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal allows price-fixing damages claims brought by an Irish utility service provider against a British industrial bag manufacturer based on Article 5(3) of the Brussels I Regulation (Bord NA Mona)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 673 visits
Subsidiaries as “branches” for undertakings: a new route to jurisdiction under Article 5(5) of the Brussels Regulation?* Stand alone, follow on and hybrid damages claims arising out of multijurisdictional cartels are generating some of the most novel and interesting current problems in (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal refuses to revive private damages claims against a subsidiary of the addressee of the graphite cartel EC decision (Emerson Electric / Mersen)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 673 visits
Subsidiaries as “branches” for undertakings: a new route to jurisdiction under Article 5(5) of the Brussels Regulation?* Stand alone, follow on and hybrid damages claims arising out of multijurisdictional cartels are generating some of the most novel and interesting current problems in (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal dismisses an appeal against an action for damages arising from an Art. 101 TFEU violation on the market for the supply of industrial copper tubes (KME Yorkshire / Toshiba Carrier)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
Royaume-Uni 11 contributions 3107 visites
Special pleading? Toshiba Carrier and the industrial tubes cartel* The Court of Appeal’s judgment last Friday in KME Yorkshire Ltd & ors v Toshiba Carrier UK Ltd & ors [2012] EWCA Civ 1990 will gladden the hearts of Article 101 damages claimants. It confirms that the Court will be (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal dismisses an appeal seeking to strike out a damages claim brought against a company that was not the addressee of an EU Commission decision (Toshiba Carrier)
University of Leeds
United Kingdom 13 contributions 28280 visits
On 13 September 2012, the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) dismissed an appeal which sought to strike out a damages claim (or grant summary judgment) brought against a company that was not the addressee of a European Commission decision finding an infringement of EU competition law. In (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal paves the way for an ‘anchored’ follow-on claim against an industrial copper tube cartel liable under Art. 101 TFEU (Toshiba Carrier / KME Yorkshire)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 2584 visits
On 13th September 2012, the UK Court of Appeal turned down an appeal by KME Yorkshire Ltd (“KME UK”) to summarily dismiss a private damages claim by Toshiba Carrier UK Ltd and other claimants (“Toshiba UK”). The claim was in respect of losses that occurred during the operation of a cartel (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal clarifies the meaning of the term “decision” in Section 47A of the Competition Act 1998 (Deutsche Bahn / Morgan Crucible)
Utrecht University
Netherlands 5 contributions 1592 visits
The Court of Appeal, in its decision in Deutsche Bahn AG and others v Morgan Crucible plc, has clarified the meaning of the term “decision” in section 47A of the Competition Act 1998 for the purpose of applying the limitation period for bringing follow-on action claims for damages in the (...)

The England & Wales High Court rules in favour of partial disclosure of documents in an action for damages allegedly caused by the gas insulated switchgear cartel (National Grid Electricity)
Matrix Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 3612 visits
National Grid – shining Pfleiderer’s light on access to EU leniency documents* A while ago I blogged on an important development in the General Court relating to the ability of victims of cartels and other anti-competitive practices to get their hands on relevant evidence enabling them to (...)

The England & Wales High Court of Justice orders disclosure of parts for the unredacted version of the EU Commission’s switchgear cartel decision (National Grid / ABB)
Baker McKenzie (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 2996 visits
,
Linklaters (London)
United States 2 contributions 415 visits
,
Constantine Cannon (London)
United States 12 contributions 5948 visits
…
This article has been nominated for the 2013 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. *Antitrust Litigation: Access to Documents Held by Regulatory Authorities The English High Court has confirmed that the principles established by the (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal narrows the scope of follow-on claims (Emerson Electric / Carbone)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
Belgium 32 contributions 38516 visits
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (Brussels)
Belgium 11 contributions 2238 visits
This article has been nominated for the 2012 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. On March 21, 2011, the U.K. Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”) struck out a follow-on claim for damages brought by Emerson Electric and others (“Emerson”) (...)

The England & Wales High Court strikes out various competition law claims brought in relation to a landlords opposition to the granting of a new business tenancy under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (Humber Oil Terminals Trustee / Associated British Ports)
Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 1439 visits
I. Overview In February 2011, the Chancery Division of the UK High Court (the «Court») struck out various competition law related claims put forward by Humber Oil Terminal Trustee Limited («HOTT», the claimant) to resist Associated British Ports’ («ABP», the defendant) attempts to end HOTT‘s (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal upholds a decision of the Competition Appeals Tribunal denying a claimant follow-on damages (Enron Coal Services / English Welsh & Scottish Railway)
Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 1439 visits
I. Overview In January 2011, the UK Court of Appeal (the “Court”) dismissed an appeal against a ruling of the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) that Enron Coal Services Ltd (“Enron”) was not entitled to follow on damages against English Welsh and Scottish Railway Ltd (“EWS”). (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal upholds Chancellor’s order striking out "representative parts" of a class action claim (Emerald / British Airways)
Ropes & Gray (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 690 visits
,
Latham & Watkins (London)
Royaume-Uni 10 contributions 13059 visites
Class Actions in the U.K: Emerald Supplies Limited & Anr. v. British Airways plc* The U.K. Court of Appeal has recently rebuffed an attempt by Plaintiff’s firm, Hausfeld, to bring a collective “opt out” style action using Rule 19.6 of the CPR rules (Emerald Supplied Limited v. British (...)

The UK Parliament revokes land agreements’ exemption from competition law
Morgan Lewis (London)
United Kingdom 28 contributions 16465 visits
,
Squire Patton Boggs (London)
United Kingdom 11 contributions 4949 visits
The UK Competition Act prohibits agreements that have the object or effect of restricting competition within the UK. Currently, land agreements - such as freehold, leasehold and rental agreements - are exempt from the prohibition, but that is all about to change. With effect from 6 April 2011, (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal grants permission to appeal and proceed to a full trial on defence against trademark infringement allegations (Oracle / M-Tech)
Ashurst (Milan)
Italy 103 contributions 30050 visits
English Court of Appeal allows M-Tech’s appeal against Oracle* On 28 August 2010, the English Court of Appeal issued a judgment setting aside an order for summary judgment by the High Court of Justice, thus granting M-Tech permission to appeal and proceed to a full trial to defend itself (...)

The UK Competition Authority fines £28.6 million for price-fixing cartel in the bank industry (Royal Bank of Scotland)
University of East Anglia
United Kingdom 29 contributions 26496 visits
Reckless Bank Saved by the Taxpayer Will Now Pay Cartel Fine* British bank, Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), has agreed to pay a fine of £28.6 million for price fixing. RBS employees shared confidential pricing information concerning commercial loans, with their counterparts at Barclays, who (...)

The England & Wales High Court sees a way through public policy objections to the recovery of cartel fines from company executives (Safeway Stores)
Sanoma (Helsinki)
Finland 6 contributions 26921 visits
,
Clayton Utz (Sydney)
Australia 4 contributions 13989 visits
a. Background Since 2005, the UK’s Office of Fair Trading (“OFT”) has investigated an alleged cartel scheme arranged by certain supermarkets and dairy producers between 2002 and 2003. In 2007, Safeway (now owned by Wm Morrisons Supermarkets plc), one of the supermarket chains implicated in (...)

The England & Wales High Court opens the way for companies to pursue private damages actions against employees and directors who are involved in competition law infringements (Safeway Stores)
Shoosmiths (London)
United Kingdom 9 contributions 16051 visits
Background 1. Between 2002 and 2003, various employees and directors of the Safeway group ("Safeway"), a UK supermarket operator, were involved in the exchange of commercially sensitive retail pricing information with other UK supermarkets and dairy processors. As a consequence of this, (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal clarifies timing rules for follow-on private antitrust actions for damages against cartel participants (BCL / BASF)
Morgan Lewis (London)
United Kingdom 28 contributions 16465 visits
,
Wilberforce Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 1879 visits
,
DLA Piper (London)
Royaume-Uni 28 contributions 11475 visites
On 19 November 2009, the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”) confirmed the test it will apply when assessing whether to extend the time limit by which claimants may commence follow-on actions for damages before the CAT once there has been a finding of a breach of UK or EU competition law. (...)

The England & Wales High Court refuses to delay a jurisdiction hearing in a cartel case until after an Italian Court of Appeal rules on its part of the same cartel case (Cooper Tire & Rubber / Shell Chemicals)
Simmons & Simmons (London)
United Kingdom 19 contributions 4855 visits
As reported in our article Italian Torpedo defused? Tactical moves in private actions for damages, a number of claimants are seeking damages - possibly amounting to some tens of millions of pounds - in the Commercial Court of the High Court in a follow on action to the synthetic rubber cartel. (...)

The England & Wales High Court strikes out a representative claim brought on behalf of “all other direct or indirect purchasers of air freight services”, refusing to stretch the scope of the English civil procedure rules in order to encourage the bringing of private damages actions (Emerald Supplies / British Airways)
European Commission - Legal Service (Brussels)
Belgique 15 contributions 41650 visites
In striking out a representative claim brought on behalf of “all other direct or indirect purchasers of air freight services”, the English High Court has refused to stretch the scope of the English civil procedure rules in order to facilitate the bringing of such damages actions. Background (...)

The England & Wales High Court denies representative action statute for antitrust price-fixing claims in the air freight services market (Emerald / British Airways)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Washington)
United States 30 contributions 9638 visits
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 659 visits
,
Dentons (Brussels)
Belgium 17 contributions 9943 visits
…
On April 8, 2009, the English High Court of Justice, Chancery Division, granted British Airways’ request for an order striking two Plaintiffs’ representative claims. Though still subject to appeal, this decision potentially represents a significant obstacle to efforts underway to apply (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal holds that compensatory damages are adequate and that a restitutionary reward is not available in an action for damages resulting from a cartel (Devenish Nutrition / Sanofi-Aventis)
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer (Brussels)
Belgium 64 contributions 99210 visits
Introduction In view of the fact that Community law regulates competition, English law is required to provide remedies for violations to persons injured thereby. Indeed, as the European Court of Justice stated in Courage v. Crehan, "the full effectiveness of Article 81 of the Treaty and, in (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal decides on restitutionary damages in an action for damages resulting from a cartel (Devenish Nutrition / Sanofi-Aventis)
University of Exeter
United Kingdom 3 contributions 4031 visits
By its decision of 14 October 2008, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of the claimant, Devenish Nutrition Ltd, against the decision of Lewison J of 19 October 2007 . As a result, claimants seeking damages in a private action against a cartel, for losses based on a finding of an (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal denies permission to bring follow-on damages actions while appeals to the EU General Court are pending (Emerson Electric / Morgan Crucible)
Baker McKenzie (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 21429 visits
Background 1. On 3 December 2003, the European Commission (the “Commission”) adopted a decision finding that various undertakings had participated in a series of agreements and concerted practices within the meaning of Article 81 EC Treaty ( “Article 81”) in the market for carbon and (...)

The England & Wales High Court rules that restitution damages are not an available remedy in antitrust cases, nor will an account of a defendant’s profits be appropriate (Devenish / Sanofi-Aventis)
Baker McKenzie (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 21429 visits
Background The present case involves "follow on" claims for compensation in respect of damage suffered as a result of the vitamins cartel, which was famously subject to a Commission decision in 2001. The Commission found that notwithstanding the number of producers involved in eight (...)

The England & Wales High Court finds that following an infringement decision by the EU Commission, the appropriate claim is for compensatory and not exemplary or restitutionary damages (Devenish Nutrition / Sanofi-Aventis)
European Commission - Legal Service (Brussels)
Belgique 15 contributions 41650 visites
The High Court’s judgment is the first time that an English court has to consider what type of damages can be obtained in claims following from an infringement decision by the European Commission in competition cases. According to the judgment, a claimant is only entitled to compensatory (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal upholds the High Court’s finding that following an infringement decision by the EU Commission, the appropriate claim is compensatory and not restitutionary damages (Devenish Nutrition / Sanofi-Aventis)
European Commission - Legal Service (Brussels)
Belgique 15 contributions 41650 visites
The Court of Appeal of England and Wales has ruled that restitutionary damages are not generally available in antitrust cases and that, in most cases, compensatory damages provide adequate remedies. Background In 2001, the European Commission adopted a decision finding that a number of (...)

The England & Wales High Court makes a group litigation order in a competition case in the automobile sector (Prentice / DaimlerChrysler UK)
Reed Smith (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 2611 visits
Gerald Barling is a justice of the High Court and president of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT). He wrote an article “Collective Redress for Breach of Competition Law – A Case for Reform” published in Competition Law Journal Volume 10 Issue 1, 2011. In it he deals with Group Litigation (...)

Unilateral Practices

 The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal receives a class action claim for £7B in damages against an online search giant for allegedly exploiting its market dominance to charge higher prices (Google / Nikki Stopford)
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 2094 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 157 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 1764 visits
…
A collective claim against Google was filed in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) arguing that the business has used its search engine dominance to shut out competition in mobile search. It is alleged that Google uses its market dominance to raise the prices paid by advertisers for (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal set to hear the first environmental class action claim brought under the domestic collective action regime against a water company (Severn Trent Water)
Baker McKenzie (London)
United States 3 contributions 501 visits
A claim against one of the UK’s largest water companies for allegedly misleading regulators about the number of times it discharged sewage into waterways has been brought in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) on behalf of the company’s eight million customers. It is the first time the “opt (...)

The UK Competition Authority grants a claim for damages against a railway company (Achilles / Network Rail Infrastructure)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 3233 visits
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
Royaume-Uni 27 contributions 8811 visites
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 13 contributions 3479 visits
…
The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has granted a claim for damages by Achilles Information Limited (“Achilles”) against Network Rail Infrastructure Limited (“Network Rail”). The Judgment is the CAT’s first damages award arising from a standalone claim since 2016, and follows the CAT’s (...)

The UK Competition Authority publishes a notice of a standalone competition damages claim against a trade association for abusing its dominant position and engaging in anti-competitive agreements (International Tin Association)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
France 12 contributions 3297 visites
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
Royaume-Uni 45 contributions 9502 visites
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
United Kingdom 60 contributions 21565 visits
On 26 January 2021 the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) published a notice of a standalone competition damages claim (brought under section 47A of the Competition Act 1998) by Kerilee Investments, a metal trader, against the International Tin Association, a UK based trade association. The (...)

The England & Wales High Court dismisses a claim for abuse of dominance brought against a Big Tech firm by an online map provider and holds that an alleged harmful effect of a pro-competitive innovation by a dominant company must be significant in the market to constitute an abuse (Streetmap / Google)
Osborne Clarke (London)
Royaume-Uni 28 contributions 787 visites
Brief summary of facts Streetmap alleged that Google abused its dominant position in the online search and/or online search advertising markets by bundling Google Search with Google Maps, thereby depriving users of an undistorted choice of online mapping services; giving Google Maps an (...)

The England & Wales High Court throws out a private claim for damages based on abuse of dominance in the online mapping sector (Streetmap / Google)
Phillips Auctioneers (London)
5 contributions 3174 visits
,
Constantine Cannon (London)
United States 12 contributions 5948 visits
Google wins court battle against StreetMap in the UK*Google won a big victory Friday in the High Court of England and Wales, which ruled that Google did not abuse its dominant position to the detriment of the now-defunct UK online mapping provider, Streetmap.The Court’s ruling against (...)

The England & Wales High Court finds an airport abused its dominant position by awarding coach concession (Luton airport)
DLA Piper (London)
Royaume-Uni 25 contributions 18447 visites
Following a private enforcement action in the English High Court, Luton Airport was found to have abused its dominant position in awarding a coach concession to National Express following a tendering process. Arriva The Shire Ltd (Arriva) brought the action against London Luton Airport (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal refuses interim injunction against the alleged refusal to deal as the claimant failed to identify any market on which the defendant could conceivably be dominant (Chemistree Homecare / Abbvie)
St John’s Chambers (Bristol)
United Kingdom 15 contributions 5655 visits
United Kingdom: interim injunctions in competition litigation* Private competition litigation is continuing to develop in the United Kingdom. The courts and the Competition Appeal Tribunal are seeing an increase in the number and complexity of follow-on damages actions, often between foreign (...)

The England & Wales High Court grants interim injunctions to a bank for continuing to provide financial services despite threats of irreparable harm to claimants (Dahabshiil Transfer Services / Barclays Bank)
St John’s Chambers (Bristol)
United Kingdom 15 contributions 5655 visits
United Kingdom: interim injunctions in competition litigation* Private competition litigation is continuing to develop in the United Kingdom. The courts and the Competition Appeal Tribunal are seeing an increase in the number and complexity of follow-on damages actions, often between foreign (...)

The England & Wales High Court refuses interim injunction against the refusal to grant access to the airport coach terminal even though an arguable case of abuse made out as damages would be an adequate remedy if abuse established at trial (Arriva The Shires / London Luton Airport Operations)
St John’s Chambers (Bristol)
United Kingdom 15 contributions 5655 visits
United Kingdom: interim injunctions in competition litigation* Private competition litigation is continuing to develop in the United Kingdom. The courts and the Competition Appeal Tribunal are seeing an increase in the number and complexity of follow-on damages actions, often between foreign (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal awards damages in a follow-on claim arising from the abuse of dominance on the market for transportation and partial treatment of water (Albion Water / Dŵr Cymru Cyfyngedig)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 5909 visits
Albion v Dwr Cymru: Incompetence and counterfactuals* The Competition Appeal Tribunal today delivered that rarest of beasts: a judgment awarding damages in a follow-on claim. After its decade-long fight, Albion Water has been awarded around £2 million for Dŵr Cymru’s abuse of dominant (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal awards the highest damages ever in a case involving an abuse of dominant position in the water sector (Albion Water)
One Essex Court (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 1648 visits
There are approximately 45 private actions for damages pending in the United Kingdom Courts. Some are stayed pending final decisions of the Commission and the European Courts; some are at the disclosure stage; some are setting up “confidentiality rings” prior to disclosure; and others are lost (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal dismisses the claim for exemplary damages against a water management company (Albion Water / Dŵr Cymru Cyfyngedig)
Dnes & Felver (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 754 visits
Exemplary Damages in Competition Litigation* Much ink has been spilt following 2 Travel v. Cardiff Bus and Albion Water v. Dŵr Cymru Cyfyngedig on the subject of competition litigation in Europe. An axiom with varying justification is that European competition litigation must not embrace (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal imposes exemplary damages in a predatory pricing case in the bus services market (2 Travel / Cardiff Bus)
Sidley Austin (London)
United Kingdom 6 contributions 4510 visits
2 Travel v Cardiff Bus – Making Commitments in Dominance Cases Less Attractive?* In early July 2012, the UK’s specialist competition court, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”), adopted a judgment (“Judgment”) in which it awarded a claimant (2 Travel) exemplary damages in relation to (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal awards exemplary damages for breach of competition law (2 Travel / Cardiff Bus)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 1615 visits
Summary The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has awarded damages to 2 Travel Group plc (2 Travel) for breach of the Competition Act 1998 Chapter II prohibition on abuse of dominance, ordering Cardiff City Transport Services Limited (Cardiff Bus) to pay compensatory damages for loss of (...)

The England & Wales High Court grants an interim injunction against the use by private hire vehicles of bus lanes marked for taxis (Transport for London)
Matrix Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 3612 visits
Taxi wars in London – does EU law have a role to play?* On Thursday of last week the High Court granted Transport for London (TfL) an interim injunction relating to the high-profile raising of the stakes in its battle with Addison Lee (AL), the largest “private hire” (ie minicab) operator (...)

The UK Department of Health seeks antitrust damages after abuse of dominant position in the pharmaceutical sector (Reckitt Benckiser)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
Belgium 163 contributions 55978 visits
According to press reports, the UK Department of Health, together with 10 health authorities and 144 primary care trusts, has launched an action for damages against Reckitt Benckiser in the High Court. This follows the OFT’s decision to fine Reckitt Benckiser £ 10.2 million for abusing its (...)

The England & Wales High Court declines to issue a stay against a damage claim brought by tire manufacturers seeking redress from members of an alleged Butadiene Rubber and Emulsion Styrene Butadiene Rubber cartel (Cooper Tire & Rubber Company / Shell Chemicals)
European Commission - Legal Service (Brussels)
Belgique 15 contributions 41650 visites
The High Court of England and Wales has declined to issue a stay against a damage claim brought by tyre manufactures seeking redress from members of an alleged Butadiene Rubber and Emulsion Styrene Butadiene Rubber cartel. Background The damage claim brought by the tyre manufacturers (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal rejects a rival newspaper publishers complaint of alleged abusive anti-competitive practices (Brannigan)
London Borough of Barking and Dagenham
United Kingdom 3 contributions 9299 visits
On July 26th 2007 the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”) unanimously dismissed an appeal brought by Mr. Brannigan, who challenged the OFT’s refusal to investigate the complaint under the Competition Act 1998. Mr. Brannigan was a proprietor of two local newspapers in East Sussex. He alleged (...)

The England & Wales High Court rejects a claim of predatory behavior on a local bus transport services market (Chester City Transport / Arriva)
King’s College (London)
United Kingdom 20 contributions 81574 visits
Introduction and Background to the Claim In Chester City Council and Chester City Transport Limited v. Arriva Plc, Arriva Cymru Limited and Arriva North West Limited [2007] EWHC 1373 (Ch), the High Court of Justice had to consider a claim brought by Chester City Council (‘the Council’) and (...)

The England & Wales High Court rules that, although Art. 82 EC does not contain a declaration of nullity equivalent to Art. 81 EC, the effects are the same (English Welsh & Scottish Railway / E.ON)
King’s College (London)
United Kingdom 20 contributions 81574 visits
This note considers antitrust private enforcement in the UK; it should be read together with other cases recently heard by the “ordinary” courts (the High Court and Court of Appeal) and two follow-on damages’ claims which have been lodged before the specialist Competition Appeal Tribunal (...)

The England & Wales High Court rules on interim injunction for an alleged unlawful refusal to supply in the pharmaceutical sector (AAH Pharmaceuticals / Pfizer-UniChem)
King’s College (London)
United Kingdom 20 contributions 81574 visits
This note considers one of the two cases recently heard by the “ordinary” courts (the High Court and Court of Appeal) (See also A. Jones, The UK Court of Appeal rejects an allegation of unreasonable refusal to supply and unlawful discriminatory pricing (Attheraces/British Horseracing Board), (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal overturns the finding by the High Court of an abuse of dominance in litigation between private parties (Attheraces / British Horseracing Board)
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 34988 visits
,
Reed Smith (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 8282 visits
Background A recent decision of the Court of Appeal has reversed the first ever High Court finding of an Article 82 infringement in litigation between private parties. Attheraces v British Horseracing Board was an appeal from the High Court decision of Justice Etherton. The Judge who had (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal grants interim damages in a case of abusive drugs price setting (Healthcare at Home / Genzyme)
Hogan Lovells (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 22239 visits
Background GenzymeLimited ("Genzyme”) is the manufacturer of Ceredase and Cerezyme, drugs used in the treatment of Gaucher disease. Genzyme also provided home care services to administer its drugs. The home care services were initially subcontracted, firstly to Caremark and then to (...)

The England & Wales High Court gives important guidelines as to the standard of proof for claiming damages in competition cases (Arkin)
Reed Smith (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 2611 visits
Arkin v. Borchard Lines Ltd., [2003] All E.R. (D) 173, [2003] EWHC 687 (Comm) (10 April 2003), is important as one of the first damages claims brought in a United Kingdom court for breach of Articles 81 and 82 of the Rome Treaty involving private enforcement of competition law. It was decided (...)

The England & Wales High Court deals with the issue of whether a party could, in national proceedings, rely on conclusions of facts and issues reached by the Commission, the CFI, and the EU Court of Justice in related proceedings (Iberia UK / Bpb Industries / British Gypsum)
European Commission - DG COMP (Brussels)
Belgium 2 contributions 650 visits
"The English High Court’s Judgment In Iberia U.K. Ltd V (1) Bpb Industries Plc And (2) British Gypsum Ltd"* The facts The defendants (BPB Industries Plc and British Gypsum Ltd) are major suppliers of plasterboard to the UK and for the purposes of Article 86, occupy a dominant position in (...)

Procedures

 The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal clarifies the applicability of EU law on claims accrued before Brexit being litigated post-Brexit (Umbrella Interchange Fee)
Harcus Parker (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 2502 visits
The basis on which the European Court of Justice (CJEU) determined the start of the limitation period in Volvo AB and DAF Trucks NV v. RM (“Volvo”) was the question for determination before the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT or the Tribunal”) in the Umbrella (“UM”) Merchant Interchange (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal issues a landmark decision and finds against arguments that it was required to follow post-Brexit EU case law developments where a competition law infringement took place before the completion of Brexit (Umbrella Interchange Fee)
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 1180 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 650 visits
In July 2023, the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal ruled that the European Court of Justice’s 2022 Volvo judgment on limitation periods did not change the Tribunal’s interpretation of English limitation rules. The Tribunal also found against arguments that it was required to follow post-Brexit (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal rules on the carriage of competition disputes at the CAT, affirming the CAT’s specialist role in competition class actions (Evans / O’Higgins)
Harcus Parker (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 524 visits
,
Harcus Parker (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 2502 visits
Introduction The UK Court of Appeal recently ruled on a carriage dispute in competition collective proceedings at the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT or Tribunal). The CAT had ruled on 31 March 2022 in Evans v Barclays PLC & Ors / O’Higgins which, amongst other issues on appeal, raised (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal overturns the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s judgment and holds that collective action against six banking groups over alleged foreign exchange manipulation can proceed as ‘opt-out’ collective proceedings (Evans / O’Higgins)
Hausfeld (London)
United States 11 contributions 5141 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 807 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 357 visits
…
London, 25 July 2023 – The Court of Appeal ruled today that FX Claim UK, the collective action brought by Phillip Evans against six banking groups over alleged foreign exchange manipulation, can proceed as ‘opt out’ collective proceedings. This ruling overturns the Competition Appeal (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal in its recent FX judgment demonstrates willingness to strike out poorly pleaded claims and deny opt-out certification (Evans / O’Higgins)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 98 visits
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
Belgium 61 contributions 27487 visits
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 3690 visits
…
Takeaways The CAT is willing to consider strike-out seriously at the certification stage. The CAT considered striking out the claims of its own motion, and warned the proposed class representatives that they should consider ‘significant amendment and revision’ of their claims to avoid (...)

The English Court of Appeal clarifies the threshold for raising ‘off-setting’ defences in competition and other breach-of-duty claims (NTN / Stellantis)
Shearman & Sterling (London)
United Kingdom 6 contributions 1269 visits
,
Shearman & Sterling (Brussels)
Belgium 21 contributions 10349 visits
,
UK Competition & Markets Authority - CMA (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 3420 visits
…
English Court of Appeal Clarifies Threshold for Raising ‘Off-Setting’ Defences in Competition and Other Breach of Duty Claims Introduction and Summary The recent decision of the English Court of Appeal in NTN Corporation v. Stellantis concerned an appeal against a successful application to (...)

The UK Supreme Court dismisses a single claimant’s class action attempt against a Big Tech company for alleged contraventions of data protection law but lowers the bar for future representative actions (Google / Lloyd)
Covington & Burling (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 353 visits
,
Covington & Burling (Brussels)
Belgium 1 contribution 353 visits
,
Covington & Burling (London)
Royaume-Uni 6 contributions 1438 visites
…
On 10 November 2021, the UK Supreme Court ruled in favour of Google in a landmark judgment against an attempt by a single claimant, Mr Richard Lloyd, to bring a representative action on behalf of a class of 4 million iPhone users relating to Google’s alleged contraventions of data protection (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal approves second and third ever collective proceedings applications for two stand-alone claims of abuse of dominance (Gutmann / South Western Trains) (Le Patourel / BT)
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 2094 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 879 visits
The first Collective Proceedings Order (“CPO”) was made in the United Kingdom in opt-out collective competition proceedings in Merricks v Mastercard Inc. and Others] on 18 August 2021 (a practical inevitability after the Supreme Court’s judgment in that case). Hot on the heels of that (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal approves a class representative for opt-out collective proceedings on behalf of train travellers in a landmark stand-alone claim for abuses of dominance by two rail franchises (Gutmann / South Western Trains)
Hausfeld (London)
United States 11 contributions 5141 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 2094 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 3336 visits
…
In great news for train travellers today, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has approved our client, Mr Justin Gutmann, as class representative in his landmark standalone claim for abuses of dominance by the South Western and Southeastern rail franchises. The claims aim to put a stop to (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal certifies a well-publicized class action litigation against a financial services company (Merricks / Mastercard)
Shearman & Sterling (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 14262 visits
,
Shearman & Sterling (London)
United Kingdom 30 contributions 14278 visits
,
Shearman & Sterling (Brussels)
Belgium 21 contributions 10349 visits
…
The U.K. Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) last week certified the well-publicized Mastercard class action litigation. In our previous article (See Chris Collins, Elvira Aliende Rodriguez, Jonathan Swil, Ozlem Fidanboylu, The UK Supreme Court gives guidance on collective proceedings in (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal grants its first collective proceedings order in a class action (Merricks / Mastercard)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 548 visits
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
Belgium 61 contributions 27487 visits
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 3690 visits
After protracted challenges to class certification status, in Merricks v Mastercard the U.K. Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) granted its first collective proceedings order (CPO). The claim remains huge, comprising 46.2 million consumers, but Mastercard successfully persuaded the CAT to (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal approves the first application for a collective proceedings order under the competition class action regime (Merricks / Mastercard)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
Royaume-Uni 45 contributions 9502 visites
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
France 12 contributions 3297 visites
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
United Kingdom 60 contributions 21565 visits
On 18 August 2021 the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) approved the first application for a collective proceedings order (CPO) under the UK’s competition class action regime introduced in 2015, in Walter Hugh Merricks CBE v Mastercard Incorporated and Others. The application was initially (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal dismisses a request for appeal as the Tribunal’s funding judgment does not fall within the ambit of section 49(1A) of the Competition Act (Trucks Cartel)
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 1292 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 11 contributions 1642 visits
Following a rolled-up hearing comprising a panel of three judges sitting as both the Court of Appeal and the Divisional Court, a judgment earlier this month has provided helpful clarity on two important aspects relating to the collective proceedings regime: (i) the extent to which litigation (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal confirms that collective proceedings’ funding arrangements are not damages-based agreements (Trucks Cartel)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 2577 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 1406 visits
On 5 March 2021, the Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the Competition Appeal Tribunal ("CAT") that the funding arrangements in place in two collective proceedings arising from the Trucks cartel are not damages-based agreements ("DBAs"). What you need to know - key takeaways The decision (...)

The UK Supreme Court hands down an important judgment, allowing a £14 billion opt-out collective proceeding (Merricks / Mastercard)
Oxera (Oxford)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 1925 visits
,
Oxera (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 260 visits
The long-awaited UK Supreme Court judgment in Mastercard v Merricks (‘the Judgment’) was handed down last Friday morning. The Judgment allows a £14bn opt-out collective proceeding to proceed. The application for a collective proceeding, launched by Walter Hugh Merricks CBE in 2016, is the (...)

The UK Supreme Court dismisses the appeal of a financial services company in a class action related to an alleged overcharging of interbank fees (Merricks / Mastercard)
Covington & Burling (London)
Royaume-Uni 6 contributions 1438 visites
,
Covington & Burling (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 498 visits
,
Covington & Burling (Brussels)
Belgique 49 contributions 18206 visites
…
The UK Supreme Court has today ruled in favour of Walter Merricks, the former head of the UK Financial Ombudsman Service., in a hotly-anticipated judgment in the first opt-out competition class action brought in the UK. Background Mr Merricks is the proposed class representative for 46.2 (...)

The UK Supreme Court receives actions from consumers and small businesses to seek redress for price-fixing and abuses of dominant power in the financial services sector (Merricks / Mastercard)
Hausfeld (London)
United States 11 contributions 5141 visits
In 2015, the legislation introducing a UK collective litigation procedure for competition claims came into force – enabling consumers and small businesses to seek redress for the anti-competitive behaviours of price fixing and abuses of dominant power. Five years later, and such a collective (...)

The UK Supreme Court dismisses a credit card company’s appeal against the Court of Appeal’s granting of a collective proceedings order (Merricks / Mastercard)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
Royaume-Uni 45 contributions 9502 visites
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
France 12 contributions 3297 visites
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 559 visits
…
Earlier today the Supreme Court handed down its hotly-anticipated judgment regarding the certification of an opt-out competition collective action brought by Walter Merricks against Mastercard. The claim is seeking £14bn in damages on behalf of some 46.2 million UK consumers, in respect of (...)

The UK Supreme Court dismisses the appeal of a financial services company, by upholding the decision of the Court of Appeal which in turn has a significant impact on future national collective proceedings (Merricks / Mastercard)
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 27 contributions 13738 visits
,
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 12 contributions 2930 visits
In a landmark judgment (and in unusual circumstances), the UK Supreme Court has held that the ongoing Merricks v Mastercard case should be referred back to the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT). Not only is this a step towards Merricks’ claim that interchange fees were "an invisible tax on UK (...)

The UK Supreme Court hands down a significant judgment relating to the certification of a £14bn opt-out competition collective action brought against a credit card company (Merricks / Mastercard)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 184 visits
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
Royaume-Uni 45 contributions 9502 visites
,
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
France 12 contributions 3297 visites
…
On 11 December 2020 the Supreme Court handed down a very significant judgment relating to the certification of a £14bn opt-out competition collective action brought by Walter Merricks against Mastercard, in respect of losses alleged to have resulted from the use of anti-competitive (...)

The UK Supreme Court gives guidance on collective proceedings in competition appeal tribunal in the financial services sector (Merricks / Mastercard)
Shearman & Sterling (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 477 visits
,
Shearman & Sterling (Brussels)
Belgium 21 contributions 10349 visits
,
Shearman & Sterling (London)
United Kingdom 6 contributions 1269 visits
…
The Supreme Court has handed down its judgment in the case which concerned the test for the certification of collective proceedings within the context of a follow-on damages claim in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT). The Supreme Court has dismissed Mastercard’s appeal; the case will now (...)

The UK Supreme Court lowers the bar for certification of class actions when giving its judgment against a financial services company (Merricks / Mastercard)
Hogan Lovells (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 144 visits
,
Hogan Lovells (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 144 visits
,
Addleshaw Goddard (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 144 visits
In a key decision, the UK Supreme Court has given guidance on the threshold for certifying a class action for breach of competition law. The Court’s judgment in Mastercard v Merricks will make it easier to obtain class certification and will likely encourage a significant increase in class (...)

The UK Supreme Court hands down a landmark judgment, finding that the Competition Appeal Tribunal incorrectly rejected an application for certification to bring collective proceedings (Merricks / Mastercard)
Bird & Bird (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 141 visits
,
Bird & Bird (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 141 visits
,
Bird & Bird (London)
United Kingdom 28 contributions 3541 visits
The UK Supreme Court has handed down a landmark judgment, finding that the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) incorrectly rejected an application for certification to bring collective proceedings. This decision sets out important clarifications on the framework to be applied by the CAT when (...)

The UK Supreme Court remands a £14 billion class-action lawsuit against a credit card company back to the Competition Appeal Tribunal (Merricks / Mastercard)
Government Legal Department (London)
United Kingdom 18 contributions 2511 visits
On 11 December 2020, the UK’s Supreme Court sent a planned £ 14 billion class action lawsuit against Mastercard back to the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”) for review. This is the first collective proceedings case of this kind to reach the Supreme Court and it addresses important questions (...)

The UK Supreme Court clarifies the low bar for class action certification (Merricks / Mastercard)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
Belgium 61 contributions 27487 visits
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 3690 visits
,
Steptoe & Johnson (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 898 visits
…
On 11 December 2020, the U.K. Supreme Court (the Court) handed down its much-awaited ruling in Merricks v Mastercard, dismissing Mastercard’s appeal against the English Court of Appeal’s April 2019 decision in a 3-2 ruling. The main aspects of the decision are explained below: This ruling (...)

The UK Supreme Court lowers the bar on certification for collective actions by dismissing a credit card company’s appeal (Merricks / Mastercard)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 2577 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 1406 visits
In a highly anticipated ruling, the UK Supreme Court has dismissed Mastercard’s appeal against the principles established by the Court of Appeal (on appeal from the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal ("CAT")) in relation to the approval of class actions by the CAT. The case will now be remitted (...)

The UK Supreme Court rules that a prominent collective proceedings case should be referred back to the Competition Appeal Tribunal (Merricks / Mastercard)
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 27 contributions 13738 visits
,
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 12 contributions 2930 visits
,
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 50 visits
This article has been nominated for the 2021 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. In a landmark judgment (and in unusual circumstances), the UK Supreme Court has held that the ongoing Merricks v Mastercard case should be referred back to the (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal dismisses an appeal relating to the evidential weight to be given to recitals in EU Commission infringement decisions issued under the settlement procedure (Trucks Cartel)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 2577 visits
,
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 1406 visits
On 11 November 2020, the Court of Appeal emphatically dismissed an appeal brought by five truck manufacturers against a judgment of the Competition Appeal Tribunal ("CAT") handed down in March 2020 relating to the evidential weight to be given to recitals to a European Commission infringement (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal clarifies the ability of parties that settle EU Commission antitrust investigations to challenge the Commission’s findings in follow-on damages actions (Trucks Cartel)
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 3233 visits
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
Belgium 32 contributions 38516 visits
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
Royaume-Uni 27 contributions 8811 visites
…
The Court of Appeal has handed down an important judgment clarifying the ability of parties that settle European Commission (Commission) antitrust investigations to challenge the Commission’s findings in follow-on damages actions. The judgment concerns an appeal relating to a preliminary (...)

The UK Supreme Court hands down a judgment in a competition damages lawsuit and makes key observations on when a judicial decision of the EU courts is binding in other proceedings (Secretary of State for Health / Servier Laboratories)
Shearman & Sterling (Brussels)
Belgium 21 contributions 10349 visits
,
Shearman & Sterling (London)
United Kingdom 30 contributions 14278 visits
,
Financial Conduct Authority (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 580 visits
…
Holds Findings Made by European Courts Cannot Be Relied on in Different Context in Other Proceedings On November 6, 2020 the U.K. Supreme Court handed down a judgment relating to the Servier U.K. competition damages litigation, in which it made key observations on when a judicial decision of (...)

The England & Wales High Court provides guidance on balancing conflicting interests in cases involving the protection of a Big Tech company’s confidential and technical information on its search algorithms (Foundem / Google)
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 676 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 2057 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 7 contributions 1764 visits
…
Introduction There is an emerging trend in competition damages cases in England for the majority of documents to be disclosed into so-called “confidentiality rings.” These restrictive confidentiality procedures can result, in certain instances, in the parties themselves being precluded from (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal overturns a Competition Appeal Tribunal’s decision in landmark collective action (Merricks / Mastercard)
Court of First Instance of Namur (Namur)
Belgium 224 contributions 47330 visits
On 16 April 2019, the UK Court of Appeal ruled that the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”) had incorrectly refused to certify a major collective action brought against Mastercard. The collective action seeks approximately GBP 14 billion in damages on behalf of an estimated 46.2 million (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal clarifies the collective proceeding regime in a private action against a credit card company (Merricks / MasterCard)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 5909 visits
Merricks v MasterCard: Collective Actions Reinvigorated* The Court of Appeal today gave its much-anticipated judgment in the application to bring collective proceedings against MasterCard: see Merricks v MasterCard Incorporated and others [2019] EWCA Civ 674. It is a major victory for the (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal confirms that the first claim under the UK’s flagship "opt-out" regime can proceed (Merricks / Mastercard)
Simmons & Simmons (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 2089 visits
The action is based on the EU Commission’s finding that MasterCard’s EEA multilateral interchange fees (MIFs) breached Article 101(1) TFEU (see here for further details). That finding was upheld by the European Court of Justice (on appeal by MasterCard) on 11 September 2014 (see our further (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal overturns a Competition Appeal Tribunal’s decision in favour of consumers in collective proceedings against a credit card company (Merricks / Mastercard)
Allegro Consulting (Brussels)
Belgium 3 contributions 795 visits
Walter Merricks v. Mastercard, Paving the Way for Economic Analysis in Class Actions* The England and Wales Court of Appeal has overturned the Decision of the United Kingdom Competition Appeals Tribunal (CAT) in the collective proceedings Walter Merricks v MasterCard, where final consumers (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal grants the appeal by over 46 million consumers against a financial company in relation to alleged overcharging of interbank fees (Merricks / MasterCard)
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
Belgium 61 contributions 27487 visits
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 3690 visits
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
Belgium 79 contributions 60314 visits
…
This article has been nominated for the 2020 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. A recent Court of Appeal decision has reignited the prospects of a £14 billion class action against Mastercard. In a much-anticipated ruling, the court has (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal overturns a Competition Appeal Tribunal’s decision refusing a £14 billion class action against a credit card company (Merricks / Mastercard)
Hausfeld (Washington)
United States 8 contributions 9366 visits
,
Hausfeld (New York)
United States 12 contributions 2987 visits
Introduction Few would argue with the proposition that antitrust indirect purchaser class actions in the U.S. raise more difficult questions of commonality, impact, and manageability than direct purchaser class actions, even though there may have been harm sustained at both levels. (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal overturns a decision refusing a £14 billion class action against a financial services company (Merricks / MasterCard)
Hausfeld (London)
United States 6 contributions 1081 visits
,
Hausfeld (London)
United Kingdom 11 contributions 1642 visits
On 16 April 2019, the UK Court of Appeal handed down what is undoubtedly the most significant ruling to date for the UK’s young collective actions regime. The Judgment in Merricks v Mastercard overturned the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s prior ruling refusing certification of Walter Merricks’ (...)

The High Court of England and Wales provides guidance determining the applicable law in competition actions (Deutsche Bahn / Mastercard)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 115 visits
Applicable law in competition infringements: Deutsche* The recent judgment of Barling J in Deutsche Bahn AG v MasterCard offers important guidance on determining applicable law in competition actions. Practitioners dealing with competition infringements which stretch back prior to the entry (...)

The England & Wales High Court renders a judgment significantly restricting the temporal scope of the claims in four air cargo cartel damages actions (Emerald Supplies)
Shearman & Sterling (Brussels)
Belgium 21 contributions 10349 visits
,
UK Competition & Markets Authority - CMA (London)
Belgium 12 contributions 13153 visits
On 4 October 2017, the High Court gave a judgment on a preliminary issue significantly restricting the temporal scope of the claimants’ claims in four air cargo cartel damages actions. This judgment is the last in a series of adverse judgments for the claimants in these proceedings. (...)

The UK Parliament implements the EU antitrust damages directive
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 13 contributions 3479 visits
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
Royaume-Uni 27 contributions 8811 visites
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
Royaume-Uni 41 contributions 40115 visites
…
The Damages Directive seeks to promote private enforcement of EU competition law before national courts across the European Union (the “EU”). The UK Regulations implementing the Directive were laid before Parliament on 20 December 2016 but will not come into force until after they have (...)

The England & Wales High Court allows a plaintiff to amend its claim and introduces a plea on the counterfactual which were not originally included in the complaint to the EU Commission (Deutsche Bahn / MasterCard)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 751 visits
Illegal counterfactuals: bringing in new claims by the backdoor?*It is fairly well-established in competition cases that the hypothetical counterfactual – which, for the purposes of causation, posits what the situation would have been absent any breach of competition law – cannot contain (...)

The England & Wales High Court decides that a standalone claim issued in the High Court could be transferred to the Competition Appeal Tribunal (Sainsbury Supermarkets / MasterCard)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 5909 visits
Standalone claims in the CAT: bypassing the transitional rules* We have written before about the problems inherent in the transitional provisions of the new Consumer Rights Act 2015 (see Tom de la Mare QC’s blog here). A recent decision from Mr Justice Barling in the Mastercard litigation (...)

The UK Parliament adopts the Consumer Rights Act to boost private enforcement of competition law
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 2061 visits
,
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 550 visits
Introduction The Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the Act) will enter into force on October 1, 2015. It contains some significant reforms which aim to boost private enforcement of competition law in England and Wales and will increase the exposure of companies found to have infringed competition (...)

The UK Parliament introduces reforms to facilitate private actions in antitrust cases
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 2719 visits
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
Royaume-Uni 27 contributions 8811 visites
,
Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton (London)
United Kingdom 13 contributions 3479 visits
UK Introduces Reforms to Facilitate Private Actions in Antitrust Cases From October 1, 2015, new rules will make it easier for claimants to pursue antitrust damages claims in the UK. These reforms, introduced under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the “Act”), are the final piece of the (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal confirms that the six years limitation period standard in tort or breach of statutory duty cases applies to competition cases (Arcadia / Visa)
Crowell & Moring (London)
United Kingdom 16 contributions 9823 visits
English Court of Appeal limits retailers’ Visa MIF claim to standard six years, dismissing arguments that concealment meant that time had not yet begun to run. On 05 August 2015, three English Court of Appeal judges confirmed in Arcadia Group Brands Limited and others v Visa [2015] EWCA Civ (...)

The UK Secretary of State issues regulations and guidance governing the approval of voluntary redress schemes to compensate persons injured by antitrust infringements
Simmons & Simmons (London)
United Kingdom 19 contributions 4855 visits
,
Crowell & Moring (London)
United Kingdom 16 contributions 9823 visits
On 05 August 2015, the UK Secretary of State issued the Competition Act 1998 (Redress Scheme) Regulations 2015 governing the approval of voluntary redress schemes under the Act. One of the radical elements of the UK’s package of 2015 collective redress measures takes shape as regulations and (...)

The England & Wales High Court renders a judgment regarding a cartel damages settlement exploring what “collateral defence” means (W.H. Newson Holding / IMI)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 5909 visits
Settling cartel damages actions: contribution defendants beware* Anyone who has ever tried to settle a cartel damages case will know that the law relating to settlements is fraught with difficulty. The recent judgment of the High Court in IMI Plc v Delta Ltd [2015] EWHC 1676 (Ch) highlights (...)

The UK Supreme Court decides on the recovery of penalties from directors and employees, setting the scene for a fresh challenge to the Safeway Stores decision (Jetivia / Bilta)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 5909 visits
Recovering penalties from directors and employees: Safeway revisited* Can a company which has been fined for anticompetitive conduct seek to recover the fine from the directors and employees responsible by suing them for damages? The question is moot in light of last week’s Supreme Court (...)

The UK Parliament allows opt-out antitrust class actions with strong safeguards
University of East Anglia
United Kingdom 14 contributions 26579 visits
Collective actions after the Consumer Rights Act 2015* On 30 March 2015 the Consumer Rights Act 2015 received Royal assent, introducing opt-out collective actions into UK competition law enforcement. The UK system of private enforcement has long being criticised for being ineffective in (...)

The UK Parliament provides powers for the Competition Authority to approve voluntary redress schemes
University of East Anglia
United Kingdom 14 contributions 26579 visits
Why harmed consumers may be more satisfied in the future – the CMA’s new redress scheme* In an earlier blog post I wrote about the new opt-out collective action regime introduced by the Consumer Rights Act 2015. This is not the only measure that is to help consumers and other injured parties (...)

The England & Wales High Court of Justice holds that the trigger for the running of time for limitation purposes in a competition claim is not the discovery of every potentially relevant fact in the broadest sense (Arcadia / Visa)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 1903 visits
“It’s too late baby, now it’s too late”: limitation, competition claims and knowledge* How much knowledge does a potential claimant need before time begins to run against a competition claim against a party alleged to have breached competition law? This was the key question addressed by Mr (...)

The UK Supreme Court rules in relation to a follow-on claim for civil damages that any appeal against the finding of infringement by any other addressee is irrelevant to a non-appealing addressee (Deutsche Bahn / Morgan Advanced Materials)
Clerksroom Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 302 visits
Deutsche Bahn AG and others (Respondents) v Morgan Advanced Materials Plc (formerly Morgan Crucible Co Plc) (Appellant)* The Facts Morgan Advanced Materials Plc (‘Morgan’) participated in an illegal cartel in the sector of electrical and mechanical carbon and graphite products. Morgan, as (...)

The UK Supreme Court rules that non-appealing parties to a cartel, the existence of which has been negatived on appeal, remain liable to civil damages actions (Deutsche Bahn / Morgan Advanced Materials)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 5909 visits
Non-Appealing Cartelists Beware* Tucked away at the back of last week’s Supreme Court decision on time-limits for follow-on claims is a very important development for private competition actions. The context is section 47A of the Competition Act 1998, a provision which has generated an (...)

The UK House of Commons amends the proposed bill on consumer rights which brings forward reform of the civil litigation procedures to facilitate follow-on damages actions in competition cases
St John’s Chambers (Bristol)
United Kingdom 15 contributions 5655 visits
Changes to the private litigation regime in the UK: are more collective damages actions on the way?* Private damages litigation is an important complement to public enforcement of UK and EU competition law by the European Commission and national competition authorities (“NCAs”), such as the (...)

The UK Parliament adopts a proposal for an opt-out regime from contingency fees in collective actions
Willkie Farr & Gallagher (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 5291 visits
,
William Roberts Lawyers
1 contribution 224 visits
Sharing Risk in Collective Actions* With legislation to introduce collective actions currently making its way through Parliament (see our previous blog here), we are pleased to welcome a guest blog from Elaine Whiteford of King & Wood Mallesons LLP and Oliver Gayner of Burford Capital (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal rules that a cartelist cannot avoid the jurisdiction of a national court on the basis that the victim of the cartel had purchased the relevant product or service via a subsidiary or other third party (Deutsche Bahn / Morgan Advanced Materials)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 1251 visits
The Court of Appeal on Cartels and Conflicts* The Court of Appeal handed down two important decisions last week on the application of conflict of law principles to cartel follow-on damages claims: Deutsche Bahn AG & Ors v Morgan Advanced Materials plc & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 1484 and (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal rules that the making of an order for further information against a French litigant is in the English Court’s discretion, and is not precluded by French Law No. 68-678 or the Council Regulation No 1206/2001 (Secretary of State for Health / Servier Laboratories)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
Royaume-Uni 11 contributions 3107 visites
Curtains for the French Blocking Statute?* Never the most celebrated actor on the stage of English litigation, the French Blocking Statute nonetheless has its fans, particularly among competition lawyers. The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Secretary of State for Health v Servier (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal rules that the making of a disclosure order against a French litigant is in the English Court’s discretion, and is not precluded by French Law No. 68-678 or the Council Regulation No 1206/2001 (National Grid Electricity Transmission / ABB)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
Royaume-Uni 11 contributions 3107 visites
Curtains for the French Blocking Statute?* Never the most celebrated actor on the stage of English litigation, the French Blocking Statute nonetheless has its fans, particularly among competition lawyers. The recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Secretary of State for Health v Servier (...)

The England & Wales High Court opts for targeted disclosure in a private stand-alone claim against a web search engine provider (Foundem / Google)
Ashurst (London)
United Kingdom 8 contributions 2584 visits
Background On 30 November 2010, the EU Commission (the “Commission”) announced that it had opened an investigation into allegations that Google has abused its dominant position, contrary to Article 102 TFEU, following multiple complaints. On 21 May 2012, the Commission published its (...)

The England & Wales High Court dismisses defendants’ stay application in long term interchange fee litigation (Morrison Supermarkets / MasterCard)
University of Manchester
United Kingdom 9 contributions 2044 visits
On 4 May 2013, Mr Justice Field handed in a judgment in WM Morrison Supermarkets, dismissing an application by a number of the defendants within the MasterCard group for an immediate stay of the proceedings until a related appeal which is currently pending before the Court of Justice of the (...)

The England & Wales High Court refuses stay of proceedings despite ongoing EU appeal in an interchange fees case (Morrison Supermarkets / MasterCard)
University of Leeds
United Kingdom 13 contributions 28280 visits
The High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) has refused to grant a stay of proceedings against Mastercard defendants in WM Morrison Supermarkets plc and others v MasterCard Incorporated and others [2013] EWHC 1071 (Comm). In this case, Morrisons and other major high street retailers claimed (...)

The UK Government opts into class actions
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 34988 visits
,
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 348 visits
This article has been nominated for the 2014 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. Government proposals in brief The Government’s proposals are contained in its response to the consultation on options for reform of private competition (...)

The UK Government makes collective legal actions against price-fixing easier
European Commission - DG COMP (Brussels)
Belgium 714 contributions 220031 visits
United Kingdom: New Help for Consumers and Businesses to take Action against Price-Fixing* Groups of consumers and companies will find it easier to take collective legal action against businesses acting in an anti-competitive way under new proposals announced by the Department for Business, (...)

The UK Supreme Court grants permission to appeal against a decision concerning the time limits for bringing follow-on claims before the Competition Appeal Tribunal (Deutsche Bahn / Morgan Crucible)
Hausfeld (London)
United States 11 contributions 5141 visits
CAT limitation rules: the saga continues* On 21st December 2012, the Supreme Court granted permission to Morgan Crucible to appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, delivered in July, concerning the time limits for bringing follow-on claims in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (...)

The England & Wales High Court refuses to strike out the conspiracy claim relying upon a cartel infringement on the market for copper plumbing tubes (WH Newson / IMI)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
Royaume-Uni 11 contributions 3107 visites
Conspiracy in the CAT: the scope of section 47A* What kinds of “follow-on” claims may be brought in the CAT? ‘[A]ny claim for damages, or any other claim for a sum of money which a person who has suffered loss or damage as a result of the infringement of a relevant prohibition may make in (...)

The UK Supreme Court clarifies limitation period for follow-on damages actions in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (BCL / BASF)
DLA Piper (London)
Royaume-Uni 25 contributions 18447 visites
The Supreme Court, in its decision in BCL Old Co v BASF, has clarified the limitation period for bringing follow-on action claims for damages in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (the “CAT”). The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeal’s earlier ruling that: An action for follow-on damages in (...)

The UK Supreme Court rules on the matter of time limits as regards follow-on claims arising from the vitamin cartel (BCL / BASF)
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 5909 visits
BCL No.2: The Supreme Court addresses time limits in follow-on claims* The White Paper which first proposed follow-on damages claims promised a “swift” and “streamlined” procedure. The idea was that when a regulator had made an infringement finding, there would be a simple way for victims to (...)

The UK Competition Authority welcomes the proposals for reforms in private enforcement of competition law advanced by the Government
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 138 visits
OFT welcomes DBIS proposals for reforms in private enforcement of competition law* Many readers will now be familiar with the proposals for the reform of private competition claims launched by the Department for Business Innovation and Skills (‘DBIS’) in April 2012 (‘Private actions in (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal allows the claimants to proceed with an action for damages under Section 47A in consideration of price fixing of electrical and mechanical carbon and graphite products (Deutsche Bahn / Morgan Crucible)
London School of Economics and Political Science (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 1789 visits
CAT unlimited: the Deutsche Bahn decision* Where the Commission has issued a decision finding several addressees liable for the same infringement, amongst the more important tactical questions for a claimant in the UK are: where to sue the addressees and when? The decision of the Court of (...)

The UK Government launches consultation implementing alternative remedies to reform private actions in competition law
University of East Anglia
United Kingdom 14 contributions 26579 visits
Article published on Centre for Competition Policy blog. Breaking the deadlock? Private antitrust enforcement in the UK* Private antitrust enforcement in the UK has never got off the ground, even after the Competition Act of 1998 introduced enforceable antitrust provisions. Plaintiffs (...)

The UK Government is consulting on reforms aimed at making it easier to bring private actions for antitrust damages
University of East Anglia
United Kingdom 29 contributions 26496 visits
Article published on Centre for Competition Policy blog. An Unpopular Solution to the Private Enforcement Problem* The UK’s Department for Business is currently consulting on a package of reforms aimed at making it easier to bring private actions for damages against firms engaged in (...)

The UK Government publishes a consultation on private actions in competition law proposing a rebuttable presumption of 20% price rise for damages against proven cartels
University of East Anglia
United Kingdom 2 contributions 347 visits
This article has been nominated for the 2013 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. A Rebuttable Presumption of 20% Price Rise for Damages against Proven Cartels?* The UK Government yesterday published a consultation on private actions in (...)

The England & Wales High Court grants disclosure of documents obtained by access to the EU Commission’s file in a follow-on damages action in the switchgear cartel (GIS)
Ariga (Brussels)
Belgium 2 contributions 1253 visits
In its judgment of 4 July 2011 the English High Court of Justice granted the application for disclosure of documents obtained by access to the Commission’s file in a follow-on damages action for breach of Article 101 TFEU in the Gas Insulated Switchgear (“GIS”) cartel. However, considering the (...)

The UK Competition Authority gives guidance for businesses and directors on competition law compliance
Allen & Overy (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 8290 visits
,
Allen & Overy (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 208 visits
This article has been nominated for the 2012 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. The OFT has published a package of materials aimed at helping companies establish a culture of compliance with UK competition law, and considering the specific (...)

The UK Government consults on wide-ranging reforms to the competition regime, including a proposal to merge the Office of Fair Trading and the Competition Authority into a single competition and markets authority
Nokia (Brussels)
United States 4 contributions 3236 visits
I. Background On 14 October 2010, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (“BIS”) announced the intention to bring together the Competition Commission (“CC”) and the competition functions of the Office of Fair Trading (“OFT”) to form a single Competition and Markets Authority (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal holds its judgment on representative action in a claim against air cargo cartel (Emerald Supplies / British Airways)
Shoosmiths (London)
United Kingdom 9 contributions 16051 visits
1. Summary 1.1. On 18 November 2010, the English Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal by Emerald Supplies Ltd («Emerald«) and Southern Glass House Produce Limited against a High Court judgment that the representative element of their claim against British Airways («BA«) should be struck out (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal confirms strike-out of the representative element in cartel damages claim (Emerald Supplies / British Airways)
University of Southampton
United Kingdom 2 contributions 1233 visits
Court striking out representative proceeding for damages against British Airways (BA). This follows a decision earlier in the month by the European Commission that BA had engaged in price-fixing of fuel and security surcharges between 1999 and 2006 in breach of Article 101 of the Treaty on the (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal rules that English court procedures do not allow representative actions on behalf of a class of direct and indirect purchasers of the air-freight cartel (Emerald Supplies / British Airways)
Volvo (Brussels)
Belgium 1 contribution 730 visits
On 18 November 2010, the English Court of Appeal ruled in favour of BritishAirways Plc. in an appeal brought by Emerald Supplies Ltd. and Southern Glass House Produce Ltd. The appeal was launched against a High Court (Chancery Division) decision to strike out the representative element of an (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal rejects representative element of private damages action (Emerald Supplies / British Airways)
DLA Piper (London)
Royaume-Uni 25 contributions 18447 visites
The Court of Appeal in England issued a judgment denying the appellants the ability to bring a representative action on behalf of a further 178 or more possible claimants seeking to obtain damages against British Airways plc (BA) for its alleged involvement in the air cargo cartel. The first (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal rejects attempted ’opt-out’ class action (Emerald Supplies / British Airways)
Herbert Smith Freehills (London)
United Kingdom 17 contributions 5690 visits
The English Court of Appeal has rejected a creative attempt to use existing English civil procedure rules to craft an ‘opt-out’ style class-action. The matter concerned an action for damages arising from the international air freight cartel, in which the European Commission has recently fined (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal dismisses appeal against High Court ruling in cartel damages claim (Cooper Tire and Rubber / Dow Deutschland)
Shoosmiths (London)
United Kingdom 9 contributions 16051 visits
1. Summary 1.1. On 23 July 2010, the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against a judgement by the High Court where it declined to suspend proceedings based on a European Commission (the "Commission") cartel decision, where related proceedings based on the same decision were already taking (...)

The UK Competition Authority publishes a guide on private litigation in competition cases
European Commission - DG COMP (Brussels)
Belgium 714 contributions 220031 visits
United Kingdom: The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) publishes Guide to Private Litigation On 1 April 2010, the OFT published a guide aimed at individuals and businesses who might be considering engaging in private court actions in the UK courts for breaches of competition law. The guide (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal denies the claimant damages in the first English follow-on damages case to reach trial (Enron Coal Services / English Welsh and Scottish Railway)
Emirates NBD (Dubai)
United Arab Emirates 2 contributions 3002 visits
Overview In December 2009, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“Tribunal”) dismissed the follow on damages claim brought by Enron Coal Services Limited (“Enron”) against English Welsh and Scottish Railway Limited (“EWS”). The Tribunal held that Enron had failed to make its case against the (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal rules that damages cannot be recovered through the medium of Sec. 47A simply by identifying findings of fact by a regulator that could have amounted to a competition infringement, i.e., claimant’s right of action exists only if the regulator has actually decided that such conduct would constitute an infringement of competition provision (EW&S Railways / Enron)
Talwar, Thakore & Associates (New Delhi)
India 13 contributions 7393 visits
In 2006, the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) had concluded that English Welsh & Scottish Railway Limited (EW&S) infringed the prohibition contained in the Chapter II prohibition of the Competition Act 1998 and Article 82, EC Treaty . EW&S infringed the said provisions as it (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal overturns the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s decision in a pro-defendant judgment on follow-on damages actions (BCL / BASF)
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 34988 visits
,
Emirates NBD (Dubai)
United Arab Emirates 2 contributions 3002 visits
On 22 May 2009, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in BCL v BASF , ruling that the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”), had erred in allowing what was, in the opinion of the Court of Appeal, a time-barred damages claim to proceed. The judgment will provide welcome legal certainty (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal clarifies the application of the time limits relating to damages actions based on competition law violation (BCL / BASF)
Van Bael & Bellis (Brussels)
Belgium 389 contributions 94710 visits
In a judgment given on 22 May 2009, the Court of Appeal clarified the application of the time limits relating to damages actions brought under section 47A of the Competition Act. Section 47A allows parties that have suffered damages, as a result of a competition law violation to claim (...)

The England & Wales High Court High Court allows a defendant’s application to strike out the representative element of the claim in an action seeking relief from damages (Emerald Supplies / British Airways)
King’s College London
United Kingdom 16 contributions 22270 visits
Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways Plc considered the availability of representative proceedings under the English and Welsh Civil Procedure Rules (’CPR’) . Before setting out the facts of the case and the decision of the High Court, which is currently being appealed, it may be useful (...)

The England & Wales High Court dismisses novel class action claim for alleged antitrust damages arising out of agreements or concerted practices relating to the supply of air freight services (Emerald Supplies / British Airways)
Linklaters (London)
United Kingdom 6 contributions 703 visits
,
A&L Goodbody (Dublin)
Ireland 2 contributions 405 visits
The High Court today dealt a serious blow to claimants seeking to bring damages claims on a representative basis (which are, in substance, akin to "opt-out" class actions) by confirming that existing rules cannot be "stretched" to allow such claims in the English courts. In September 2008 (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal refuses permission to initiate follow-on claims for damages while an appeal is pending in the public enforcement case (Emerson Electric / Morgan Crucible)
University of East Anglia
United Kingdom 14 contributions 26579 visits
Background The claimants (Emerson Electric Co, Valeo S.A., Robert Bosch GmbH, Visteon Corporation and Rockwell Automation) seek damages for the violation of Article 81(1) EC from the defendant (Morgan Crucible Company Plc) and the proposed defendants (Schunk GmbH, Schunk Kohlenstofftechnik (...)

The UK Competition Authority recommends far-reaching changes to private enforcement of competition law
Linklaters (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 10642 visits
,
Linklaters (London)
United Kingdom 6 contributions 703 visits
,
Linklaters (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 451 visits
…
On 26 November 2007, the OFT published its recommendations to the Government on measures to improve the effectiveness of redress for consumers and businesses for breaches of competition law. The recommendations followed the OFT’s informal consultation on private actions in competition law, (...)

The England & Wales High Court of Justice rejects a claim for exemplary damages following an infringement decision by the EU Commission (Devenish / Sanofi-Aventis)
DWF (London)
2 contributions 3377 visits
Introduction and Background to the claim In November 2001 the European Commission adopted a decision that held that a number of vitamin manufacturers had entered into worldwide price-fixing agreements (cartels) in respect of various vitamins in breach of Article 81 EC Treaty and therefore (...)

The England & Wales High Court rules that exemplary damages are not available to claimants bringing actions against cartellists that have already been fined by the EU Commission, even if their fine has been commuted due to an immunity or leniency application (Devenish Nutrition / Sanofi-Aventis)
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 10759 visits
Exemplary damages are not available to claimants bringing actions against cartelists that have already been fined by the European Commission, even if their fine has been commuted due to an immunity or leniency application. Similarly, restitutionary relief or an account of profits are most (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal clarifies limitation period for follow-on claims lodged with the Tribunal (Emerson Electric / Morgan Crucible)
University of East Anglia
United Kingdom 14 contributions 26579 visits
I. Background On 09 February 2007 a claim for damages under section 47A Competition Act (follow-on action) was lodged with the Competition Appeal Tribunal (hereafter CAT). The defendant Morgan Crucible Company plc (“Morgan Crucible”) and the proposed defendants Schunk GmbH and Schunk (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal rules on two follow-on damages’ claims (Emerson Electric / Morgan Crucible)
King’s College (London)
United Kingdom 20 contributions 81574 visits
Introduction This note considers antitrust private enforcement in the UK ; it should be read together with two other recent cases (A. Jones, The UK Court of Appeal rejects an allegation of unreasonable refusal to supply and unlawful discriminatory pricing (Attheraces/British Horseracing (...)

The UK Competition Authority publishes discussion paper on private enforcement
Secretary of State for the Home Department (London)
United Kingdom 17 contributions 35107 visits
,
Linklaters (London)
United Kingdom 6 contributions 703 visits
,
Linklaters (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 451 visits
The OFT have published (on 18 April 2007) a Discussion Paper entitled "Private actions in competition law: effective redress for consumers and business", launching an informal consultation process on how to encourage private actions by consumers and businesses for breaches of competition law. (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal rejects an allegation of unreasonable refusal to supply and unlawful discriminatory pricing (Attheraces / British Horseracing Board)
King’s College (London)
United Kingdom 20 contributions 81574 visits
Introduction This note considers one of the two cases recently heard by the “ordinary” courts (the High Court and Court of Appeal) (See also A. Jones, The UK Hight Court rules on interim unjunction for an alleged unlawful refusal to supply in the pharmaceutical sector (AAH (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal grants interim relief in ’follow on’ damages claim (Healthcare at Home / Genzyme)
King’s College (London)
United Kingdom 20 contributions 81574 visits
The Competition Appeal Tribunal’s (the “CAT”) judgment in Healthcare at Home Ltd v Genzyme Limited, 15 November 2006, concerned a claim for “interim payment” in proceedings brought by Healthcare at Home (the “claimant”) against Genzyme Limited (“Genzyme”). Under section 47A of the UK (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal awards interim damages in an abuse of dominant position case on the drugs market (Healthcare at Home / Genzyme)
Sanoma (Helsinki)
Finland 6 contributions 26921 visits
Introduction On 15 November 2006, the UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) awarded an interim payment of £ 2 millions to Healthcare at Home Limited (HH) in respect of its damages claim against Genzyme Limited (Genzyme) for infringement of the Chapter II prohibition (abuse of a dominant (...)

The UK Parliament puts in doubt the extent to which findings in previous decisions of the EU Commission can be relied on (Crehan)
Ashurst (Brussels)
Belgium 2 contributions 8602 visits
,
Willkie Farr & Gallagher (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 5291 visits
,
Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 10759 visits
Introduction The House of Lords recently handed down its judgment in Inntrepreneur Pub Company and others v Crehan a judgment dealing with the extent to which a national court is bound by previous decisions of the European Commission. The case has important implications for businesses (...)

The UK Competition Appeals Tribunal receives the first claim for damages based on abuse of dominant position (Healthcare at Home / Genzyme)
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 34988 visits
,
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 9439 visits
Healthcare at Home Limited (“HH”) has brought a claim for damages before the Competition Appeals Tribunal (“CAT”) against Genzyme Limited (“GL”) pursuant to section 47A of the Competition Act 1998. This is the third claim for damages to have been brought before the CAT pursuant to section (...)

The England & Wales High Court holds that Article 101 and 102 TFEU claims are arbitrable (Eurotunnel)
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 34988 visits
,
Pinsent Masons (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 4832 visits
Background In 1994, Eurotunnel (a joint venture operated by the eighth and ninth defendants, Channel Tunnel Group Limited and France Manche SA, respectively) entered into a contractual relationship with Transferry SPA and ET Plus Lux SA (the sixth and seventh claimants) whereby the claimants (...)

The UK Competition Appeal Tribunal decides for the first time on claims for damages breaching Article 101 TFEU under national competition provision (Vitamins)
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 34988 visits
,
RenaissanceRe (London)
United Kingdom 1 contribution 4292 visits
Background These two cases, heard concurrently before the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT” or “Tribunal”) were the first (and so far the only) claims for damages to be brought pursuant to Section 47A of the Competition Act 1998 (the “Act”). Section 47A of the Act is a significant (...)

The England & Wales High Court emphasises the need for claimants to ensure that they have robust evidence of an alleged breach to avoid being thrown out on summary judgment (Wireless / RAJAR)
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 34988 visits
Mr. Justice Lloyd’s recent judgment in the Wireless / RAJAR case (handed down on 16 December 2004), demonstrates certain of the procedural and evidential difficulties faced by private litigants seeking damages for alleged breaches of competition law before the English Courts. The Claimant, (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal holds that beer distribution agreements containing ties were contrary to Article 101.1 TFEU and upholds an appeal for damages (Crehan)
London School of Economics
Belgium 37 contributions 156712 visits
In this well-known case, published for the seek of completness (See J. Derenne and T. Seidenspinner, “The English Court of appeal applies Art. 81 EC and award damages for breach of EC law (Crehan)”, e-Competitions, April 2005, n° 204) , the claimant, Mr. B. Crehan, appealed against the (...)

The England & Wales Court of Appeal applies Article 101.1 TFEU and awards damages for breach of EU law (Crehan)
Sheppard Mullin (Brussels)
France 400 contributions 676325 visits
,
Law Office of Tim Seidenspinner
1 contribution 4043 visits
According to the Court of appeal judgement dated 21 May 2004, national court is obliged under its duty of sincere cooperation to give a great deal of deference to the Commission and is not entitled to reconsider the Commission’s previous decisions even if it thinks that they are wrong. Damages (...)

The EU Court of Justice issues preliminary ruling in case from the England & Wales High Court on the use of allegations of breach of competition law in order to avoid honouring obligations under a commercial contract (Sunag)
Reed Smith (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 2611 visits
This was a commercial private arbitration case which ended up before the English High Court, Queen Bench Division (Case C-339/95), and was referred to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling. A unanimous arbitration award to enforce the agreement was appealed in the commercial (...)

General antitrust

 The UK Competition Authority publishes a new Green Claims Code and announces that it will start carrying out a full review of misleading sustainability and environmental claims
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 27 contributions 13738 visits
,
White & Case (Brussels)
Belgium 21 contributions 24753 visits
,
White & Case (Brussels)
Belgium 35 contributions 13475 visits
UK clampdown on greenwashing As the importance of sustainability and eco-friendliness grows among consumers worldwide, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has concerns that an increasing number of businesses misleadingly market their products and services as environmentally (...)

The UK Government publishes consultations on far-reaching reforms to competition and consumer laws which would substantially expand the powers of the Competition Authority and reduce procedural protections
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
Belgium 61 contributions 27487 visits
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
Belgium 69 contributions 33034 visits
,
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (Brussels)
Belgium 79 contributions 60314 visits
…
The U.K. government is consulting on far-reaching reforms to U.K. competition and consumer laws, which would substantially expand the powers of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and reduce procedural protections. Key proposals include: Merger control jurisdiction enlarged: The CMA (...)

The UK Parliament’s Consumer Rights Act 2015 enters into force
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 34988 visits
,
White & Case (Brussels)
Belgium 57 contributions 58251 visits
,
White & Case (Brussels)
Belgium 50 contributions 38616 visits
The entry into force of the UK Consumer Rights Act 2015 (the “CRA”) on 1 October 2015 marks the introduction of opt-out class actions in the UK, further transforming the legal landscape for private damages claims in the UK. Together with further changes as a result of the UK’s implementation (...)

The UK Parliament introduces a class action mechanism for antitrust damages
Covington & Burling (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 498 visits
,
Peter Camesasca Advocaat (Brussels)
Belgique 34 contributions 13375 visites
,
7 contributions 1828 visits
…
The UK has introduced a class action mechanism that could lead to an increase in antitrust litigation. Most significantly, the new mechanism will enable opt-out class actions, which are potentially effective in aggregating individually low value claims, into a single high value, and (...)

The UK Parliament adopts the Consumer Rights Act to boost private enforcement of competition law
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
United Kingdom 4 contributions 2061 visits
,
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 550 visits
,
Norton Rose Fulbright (London)
United Kingdom 5 contributions 1359 visits
This article has been nominated for the 2016 Antitrust Writing Awards. Click here to learn more about the Antitrust Writing Awards. Introduction On 1 October 2015 the Consumer Rights Act 2015 entered into force. This reforms and consolidates consumer protection laws in the UK but also - (...)

The UK Parliament implements a regime issued from the Consumer Right Act extending the powers of the Competition Appeal Tribunal
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 3 contributions 673 visits
Private Actions: The CRA 2015 giveth; and the 2015 CAT Rules taketh away Introduction* Today, on the 1st October 2015, when we are supposed to be celebrating the brave new world of the Competition Act 1998 (“CA”) as amended by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (“CRA”), cartelists and other (...)

The UK Parliament extends the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s jurisdiction and powers to hear competition damages cases
St John’s Chambers (Bristol)
United Kingdom 15 contributions 5655 visits
United Kingdom: Consumer Rights Act 2015 introduces new procedures for competition litigation, including collective follow-on damages actions* On 1 October 2015, the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (“CRA 2015”) entered into force. The CRA 2015 makes numerous changes to consumer rights laws in the (...)

The UK Government announces plans to introduce an opt-out class action regime in its consultation paper on options for reforming the private enforcement system
Blackstone Chambers (London)
United Kingdom 23 contributions 5909 visits
Collective Actions: loss in complex cases* The big news from last week’s UK announcement on reforming private competition enforcement is that the government plans to introduce opt-out class actions for competition claims. The proposals incorporate various “safeguards” designed to ensure (...)

The UK Government shares proposals for consumers and businesses to bring collective damages claims against competition law infringers
McDermott Will & Emery (Brussels)
Belgium 43 contributions 7976 visits
,
Norton Rose Fulbright (Brussels)
Belgium 20 contributions 5667 visits
UK GOVERNMENT ANNOUNCES PROPOSALS FOR AN "OPT-OUT" COLLECTIVE COMPETITION DAMAGES ACTION * On 29 January 2013, the UK Government’s Department for Business, Innovation & Skills announced new proposals designed to improve the ability for consumers and businesses to bring collective damages (...)

The UK Government publishes a consultation document on how best to encourage private sector challenges to anticompetitive behaviour
Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer (Brussels)
Belgium 64 contributions 99210 visits
,
Milbank (London)
United Kingdom 21 contributions 12359 visits
,
McDermott Will & Emery (Paris)
France 136 contributions 68321 visits
PRIVATE ACTIONS IN COMPETITION LAW: UK GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION* On April 24, 2012, the UK government took a significant step towards private antitrust actions by publishing a consultation document on how best to encourage private sector challenges to anticompetitive behavior. This (...)

The UK Government announces proposals for reform of the private competition damages regime
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 14 contributions 34988 visits
,
White & Case (London)
United Kingdom 2 contributions 348 visits
As widely expected, earlier this week the Government announced proposals for reform of the private competition damages regime in the UK, proposing to increase the Competition Appeal Tribunal’s (CAT) power and introduce an opt-out “collective action” scheme before the CAT . The proposed (...)