header-logo header-logo

11 February 2022 / Caroline Harbord , Candice Johnson
Issue: 7966 / Categories: Features , Collective action
printer mail-detail

Collective proceedings orders: the story so far…

71831
With the floodgates beginning to open, Caroline Harbord & Candice Johnson examine the first collective competition claims under the opt-out regime
  • An overview of the opt-out group litigation regime, and a summary of the key practical takeaways arising from each of the recent decisions on collective proceedings orders, from the perspective of claimants, lawyers and litigation funders.

2021 heralded a period of unprecedented excitement in the sphere of collective competition claims.

In August 2021, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) certified the first ever collective proceedings order (CPO), permitting Walter Merricks to pursue an opt-out group claim against Mastercard for established breaches of competition law. Mr Merricks is now authorised as class representative on behalf of 46.2 million potential claimants in a claim valued at a whopping £13.8bn.

In the weeks that followed, the CAT certified two further CPOs in multi-million-pound claims against both BT and two train operating companies (namely First MTR and Stagecoach). These decisions had been put on hold pending the Merricks judgment, and represent

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