header-logo header-logo

07 January 2010 / Veronica Bailey
Issue: 7399 / Categories: Features , LexisPSL
printer mail-detail

Banking on competition

Is competition law the way forward for consumers? asks Veronica Bailey

The banks may have rejoiced at the Supreme Court decision in The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National plc & others [2009] EWCA Civ 116, [2009] All ER (D) 270 (Feb) that the OFT does not have power under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 (SI 2009/2083) (UTCCR) to assess the fairness of the banks charging terms, but this is unlikely to be the final chapter of this saga.

The banks’ appeal to the Supreme Court was confined to the narrow issue of deciding whether the OFT had power under the UTCCR to investigate whether the system of charging personal current account holders was fair. The unauthorised overdraft charges were part of the “price or remuneration” for the services and as such fell within the exemption of reg 6(2)(b) and could not be challenged by the OFT for fairness, the Supreme Court held.

In what has been described as a “reverse Robin Hood” approach, unauthorised overdraft or insufficient funds charges

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll