header-logo header-logo

25 July 2025
Issue: 8126 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 25 July 2025

Competition

Christine Riefa Class Representative Ltd v Apple Inc and others [2025] CAT 34

The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruled on costs following its earlier decision to refuse an application by Christine Riefa Class Representative Ltd (the PCR) for a collective proceedings order in a case involving multiple proposed defendants from the Apple and Amazon groups. The CAT determined that Apple and Amazon, being successful in their defence, are entitled to recover reasonable costs linked to the unsuccessful certification application by the PCR. The CAT also held that Amazon was required to remit reasonable costs incurred by the PCR in responding to Amazon’s unsuccessful disclosure application. The CAT ruled that costs incurred in preparing substantive defences, utilised for the certification application, should be recoverable and not reserved for potential future proceedings. The CAT adjusted solicitor and expert fees to align them with proportionality and guideline hourly rates, awarding interim payments on account of costs at 65% of the revised total costs claimed by the respective parties.


Conflict of laws

Al

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