header-logo header-logo

Merricks: setting the standard

17 February 2021 / Lucy Rigby
Issue: 7921 / Categories: Features , Competition , Commercial
printer mail-detail
39783
Setting the standard for opt-out collective redress: the Supreme Court’s judgment in Merricks, reported by Lucy Rigby
  • The Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Merricks sets the standard which existing and future opt-out collective actions will be required to meet at the certification stage.
  • This judgment is a seminal one for the country’s young opt-out regime and a ringing endorsement of the principles behind the introduction of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
  • The judgment is consumer-friendly and it is expected that more opt-out collective actions will now be filed.

What standard ought an opt-out collective claim be required to meet to proceed to trial? That, in essence, was the question before the Supreme Court in Mastercard Incorporated and others v Merricks [2020] UKSC 51, [2020] All ER (D) 67 (Dec). The Supreme Court’s answer, delivered in December of last year, constitutes a resounding endorsement of opt-out redress and the most significant ruling to date for the UK’s fledgling opt-out collective regime for infringements of competition law.

Justice delayed

Many judgments

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll