UK: Court Of Appeal Sets Aside Order For Disclosure Of Unredacted Commission Decision And Orders Strike Out Of Economic Tort-Based Claims

On 14 October 2015 the Court of Appeal (CoA) handed down its judgment on appeals against orders made by Peter Smith J arising out of an alleged cartel for airfreight services. First, the CoA said the High Court was not entitled to disclose the Commission's unredacted decision even into a confidentiality ring if the decision contained so called "Pergan" material. Second, the CoA struck out claims on economic torts amounting to approximately 60% of the claim. The CoA's reasoning will make it very difficult, if not impossible, for claimants to bring such claims in the future, substantially reducing potential damages in cartel damages claims.


The CoA's judgment concerns appeals against orders made by Peter Smith J in proceedings brought by some 565 claimants against British Airways plc ("BA").

The action brought by the claimants comprises the following: (1) a claim for breach of statutory duties owed to the claimants under Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ("TFEU") and/or Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area based on the European Commission's Airfreight Decision;1 (2) a claim based on the tort of unlawful interference; and (3) a claim based on the tort of conspiracy.

Whilst the claimants have only sued BA, BA has brought CPR Part 20 claims against all of the other addressee airlines as well as against some of the non-addressee airlines.2

At the time that the orders at issue were made the Airfreight Decision had not been published. In fact, the Commission only published the provisional version of the Decision on 8 May 2015.

The Appeals

The CoA addressed the following:

  • an appeal against orders directing that an "unredacted" version3 of the Airfreight Decision should be disclosed into a confidentiality ring ("the Pergan appeal"); and
  • an appeal against an order refusing to strike out claims based on the torts of conspiracy and unlawful interference and instead ordering that such application "should be adjourned until at the earliest after disclosure has taken place" ("the strikeout appeal").

The Pergan Appeal

The Airfreight Decision contains allusions to infringements by addressee and non-addressee airlines which are not part of the "operative part" of the decision4 and, hence, cannot be appealed to the EU courts. Pursuant to the judgment of the General Court in Pergan,5 there is an obligation on the Commission not to make those parts of the Decision available.

The CoA held that a national court must give the same "absolute" protection of the presumption of innocence under Pergan as is afforded by the Commission. According to the CoA there can be "no doubt" that European law requires a national court, in a damages action, to respect the protections afforded by the decision in Pergan.

Even if a national court had the discretion to strike a balance between preserving the Pergan protections and requiring disclosure of an unredacted copy of the Decision (which the CoA held was not the case), Peter Smith J had failed to determine where the correct balance lay.

In particular, the CoA found that Peter Smith J had failed "to give due recognition to the nature of the protection afforded by Pergan to the presumption of innocence" and "wrongly put in place a regime which was not sufficient to protect the rights which [the Appellants] enjoyed in respect of Pergan materials." Permitting disclosure within a confidentiality ring and subject to protective measures is "inconsistent with the approach of the General Court in Pergan."6

The Strikeout Appeal

The strikeout appeal concerns the causes of action based on the so-called "economic torts" of conspiracy and unlawful interference.

In determining the strikeout appeal, the CoA began by considering the question: "why pursue the economic torts at all?" The CoA observed that "competition law claims do not necessarily provide a remedy for the full range of the damage caused by the alleged cartel," noting that in the present case there are both geographic and temporal restrictions on the competition law claim and that approximately 60% of the overall damages sought will not be recoverable (unless the claimants can, as a matter of law, claim it in some other way).

Overturning Peter Smith J's refusal to strike out the claims based on the torts of conspiracy and unlawful interference, the CoA pointed to the "real advantages" in focusing the case on those claims which may be sustainable in law as soon as possible, and eliminating those which can properly, at a preliminary stage, be struck out. Ordering the strike out of the economic tort claims, the CoA noted that, given the potential to "pass on" any alleged price increase down the chain, "[t]he airlines will not know, and no doubt will be indifferent to, where the loss falls," which is "clearly not sufficient" to show requisite intention to harm the claimants.

The CoA noted that if these claims could be advanced, it would have two "undesirable" results. First, it would extend the effect of competition law by allowing the claimants to circumvent the geographic and temporal limitations and, second, it would "dilute the concept of intention and bring it unacceptably and perilously close to a concept of foreseeability."

Implications of the Judgment

The CoA's judgment has a number of likely implications for future damages actions.

The fact that the CoA has held that Pergan protection is "absolute" and that a national court is obliged to afford the same protection which is afforded at Community level, adds helpful clarity to parties on the limits of what can be disclosed in a Commission decision.

As regards the CoA's finding that disclosure within a confidentiality ring and subject to protective measures was insufficient to protect the rights enjoyed by Appellants in respect of Pergan materials, it should be noted that the Commission's opinion in William Morrison Supermarkets Plc v Master Card Incorporated & Ors7 confirms the need for "adequate protection" for business secrets and other confidential information where a confidential version of a Decision is disclosed to claimants "for example through a confidentiality ring or further redactions of the Decision" (emphasis added). It remains to be seen whether there are other categories of confidential information where a confidentiality ring does not provide adequate protection or whether Pergan material is unique in this regard.

The CoA's judgment on the Pergan appeal serves as an important reminder that the duty of sincere cooperation under Article 4(3) TEU is binding on all authorities of the Member States, including the national courts. Recognising that Peter Smith J was "understandably frustrated by the length of time which the Commission had taken to produce a non-confidential version of the Commission Decision," the CoA noted that "[d]elay by the Commission, even unconscionable delay, [...] does not relieve the English court of its mutual cooperation obligations under Article 4(3)." Frustrations, understandable or not, should not undermine the "full mutual respect" that duty requires. Referring to Peter Smith J's approach as "misguided," the CoA pointed to the "real risk" that the order providing for disclosure into the confidentiality ring would conflict with any future decisions by the Commission, which is bound to afford the full Pergan protections.

The implications of the strikeout appeal are more far reaching for the present case and for future damages actions.

As regards the present case, by striking out the claims based on the economic torts of conspiracy and unlawful interference, the CoA has removed approximately 60% of the total claim, limiting the potential exposure of BA and the Part 20 defendants substantially.

Whilst the CoA recognises the significant incentives for claimants to pursue economic torts, and reiterates that, in principle, claims could be brought on such a basis, in practice the judgment is a blow for claimants looking to recover losses beyond the geographic and temporal scope of an infringement decision.

The CoA's approach to intention—i.e. the need to show the requisite intention to injure a particular claimant / particular claimants—makes it extremely difficult to advance such a claim, particularly in circumstances where there is the ability to "pass on" any price increase, thus rendering it difficult, if not impossible, to predict where the loss will actually fall. In this context, it should be noted that price-fixing cartels are treated as infringements "by object" and thus it is not necessary for the Commission to consider the "state of mind" or "intention" of the participants in an alleged cartel, accordingly European Commission infringement decisions are unlikely to contain sufficient information for claimants to establish the requisite intention.

The CoA's willingness to strike out the economic tort claims is another blow for claimants. The fact that the CoA expressed that it was "not unhappy" to do so will likely encourage defendants to make similar applications in the future; arguing that it is desirable and in the interests of the expeditious handling of the litigation that the issue should be resolved at an early stage.

In any event, the judgment highlights the difficulty of advancing economic tort claims alongside follow-on damages claims before the English courts and, arguably, makes it more difficult for claimants to pursue such causes of action. It remains to be seen what impact the CoA's ruling will have on future damages actions, where (i) competition law claims will not necessarily be sufficient to the impugned conduct in the various decisions, including regulatory decisions, and the full range of the alleged damage caused, and (ii) geographic scope is likely to be an issue. Claimants will need to assess carefully the strength of any such claims, taking account of the need to show the requisite intention to injure.


1. Commission Decision C(2010)7694 final of 9 November 2010 relating to a procedure under Article 101 of the TFEU, Article 53 of the EEA Agreement and Article 8 of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on air transport (Case COMP/39.258 – Airfreight).

2. By way of disclosure, Shearman & Sterling represents Cargolux Airlines International SA, one of the Part 20 defendants.

3. Under the orders, the version of the Airfreight Decision to be disclosed into the confidentiality ring would be redacted for legal professional privilege and leniency, but not on the basis of Pergan (see below).

4. Two examples of such materials contained in the Airfreight Decision are: (1) findings of, or allusions to, infringement outside the temporal scope of the infringements in the operative part of its decision; and (2) findings of, or allusions to, infringement outside of the geographical scope of the infringements in the operative part of the Airfreight Decision.

5. Case T-474/04 Pergan Hilfsstoffe fur Industrielle Prozesse GmbH v Commission ECLI: EU: T: 2007: 306 ("Pergan").

6. In this context the CoA cites para. 80 of the General Court's judgment in Pergan, which, as the CoA observes, states "in categorical terms" that "there is [...] no public interest in publishing the disputed information that is capable of prevailing over the applicant's legitimate interest in having such information protected."

7. Commission Opinion C(2014) 3066 final of 5 May 2014.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.