header-logo header-logo

14 May 2021 / Jack Castle , Henry Warwick KC
Issue: 7932 / Categories: Features , Competition , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Collective actions: better together?

48972
Mastercard v Merricks—Henry Warwick QC & Jack Castle report on an important year for collective proceedings & representative actions
  • In December 2020, the Supreme Court clarified the approach for assessing suitability for collective competition proceedings.
  • The approach may encourage wider use of such procedures in cases where the quantification of loss presents a challenge in underlying individual claims.

In Mastercard v Merricks [2020] UKSC 51, [2020] All ER (D) 67 (Dec), the Supreme Court has clarified the requirements for certification of collective proceedings in competition cases. This is a significant decision, likely to be relied upon by claimants seeking to recover follow-on damages for competition law infringements where difficult questions arise as to the quantification of loss and proposals for the distribution of any award of damages to the certified class.

But the careful analysis of the common law as to quantification of loss, and the principled approach of the majority of the court to assessing suitability for collective proceedings, may encourage wider use of collective action

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
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
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
back-to-top-scroll