header-logo header-logo

06 March 2026
Issue: 8152 / Categories: Case law , In Court , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Law digests: 6 March 2026

Competition

Stephan v Amazon.Com, Inc and others [2026] EWCA Civ 183

The Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal in both applications challenging decisions of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) to make two collective proceedings orders (CPOs) under s 47B of the Competition Act 1998 (CA 1998). The defendants, Amazon, sought permission to appeal CPOs granted to Robert Hammond on behalf of a class of consumers and to Professor Andreas Stephan on behalf of third-party sellers. Both claims alleged abuse of dominant position contrary to the Chapter II prohibition in s 18, CA 1998 and Art 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). In Mr Hammond’s case, Amazon challenged the CAT’s approach to the suitability of the class representative’s funding arrangements at certification stage, contending that the potential return to the funder was ‘wholly unreasonable’. The court held there was no arguable error of law; the CAT had not applied a default rule deferring consideration of funding reasonableness but exercised proper discretion, taking into account relevant factors.

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

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Robert Dransfield

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Robert Dransfield

London medical negligence practice strengthened by senior partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—seven appointments

DAC Beachcroft—seven appointments

Firm boosts professional risk practice with team hire in Manchester, led by partner Ben Parks

Doyle Clayton—Benedicte Perowne

Doyle Clayton—Benedicte Perowne

Workplace law firm appoints new head of regulatory team

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll