UK: Attention Class!

Last Updated: 26 July 2019
Article by Robert Bell

New life breathed into UK competition class actions?

Although well-established in the US, competition class actions have struggled to find their feet in the UK since being introduced by the UK Government some four years ago. They were seen as a revolutionary and more flexible way in our legal system for a large number of claimants to obtain full compensation for their loss from the anti-competitive behaviour of cartelists and others.

They were introduced in advance of the EU Damages Directive which sought to introduce in all Member States effective mechanisms for consumers to obtain redress for anti-competitive conduct.

Early signs have not been good. It looked like UK class actions might be slow to develop and have an uncertain future. However the recent Court of Appeal case in Walter Merricks v MasterCard Inc & Ors [2019] EWCA 674 ('the Mastercard case') has provided guidance regarding the application of the law to the UK's class action regime and has lowered the test for those wishing to advance class actions before the Courts in the future.

It has arguably breathed new life into the faltering UK class action system indicating that it could have a meaningful future.

Sowing Seeds

Competition class actions were first introduced into UK law by the Consumer Rights Act 2015 ('the Act') and are referred to in the Act as collective actions. The aim of these actions was to allow multiple claimants to be compensated for the anti-competitive conduct of the defendants who had engaged in cartel or other anti-competitive behaviour. It was anticipated they would be most used (but not exclusively so) in follow on actions. These are cases brought to recover damages following the finding of liability for anti-competitive conduct by a UK competition regulator or the EU Commission.

From a public policy point of view they were designed to ensure that those which caused damage through anti-competitive behaviour should have to pay full compensation for their unlawful behaviour. This mechanism was also represented as promoting the rights of the consumer. Hitherto, claims for damages in these types of cases had been the preserve of large corporate claimants but class actions were particularly attractive for consumer type claims where the individual amount claimed was small but in aggregate was a sizeable claim in damages.

The claims would be advanced by a representative on behalf of the class and, if and when, judgement was given and damages awarded, the representative would divide up the amount to the class. Any remaining funds not distributed would be paid to an organization designed to widen access to justice as defined by the Act, currently the Access to Justice Foundation. There were a number of pitfalls which were foreseen in bringing class actions. Among them were the identity and role of organisations which would provide the money to underwrite the litigation, the identity of who the appropriate representative should be as well as their exposure to costs in the event of an adverse judgement. Last, but by no means least was the problem of how the Courts were to certify who were the appropriate members of a class to bring a claim. It has been this last criterion that has caused much uncertainty.

Class Actions So Far

The class actions so far have not produced the star studded cast of the corporate world you might have expected. To date there have only been two applications to bring a class action (seeking what the Act calls collective proceedings orders) heard before the Competition Appeals Tribunal (the CAT).There are, however, three more awaiting a hearing. The first case was brought by Dorothy Gibson acting as representative for a class for purchasers against Pride Mobility Products Limited in relation to mobility scooters. That failed to achieve certification by the CAT and the action was ultimately discontinued. The second was the Mastercard case which was also rejected at the certification stage. However, the former financial ombudsman, Walter Merricks, who brought the Mastercard case, appealed this ruling to the Court of Appeal.

Mastercard Case

In 2007, the European Commission found that Mastercard had infringed EU competition law over a 15 year period effectively "setting a minimum price merchants must pay to their acquiring bank for accepting payment cards in the [EEA] by means of interchange fees". These interchange fees, it is alleged, were passed on to consumers. So, in 2016 Merricks applied for a collective proceedings order to act as the class representative on behalf of UK residents aged 16 years and above who had purchased goods and/or services over the relevant time period from businesses active in the UK accepting Mastercard cards. This was the first major class action brought under the Act. It would create a class of potentially 46 million consumers and be worth in excess of £14 billion. If allowed to proceed it would be the largest ever claim brought before the UK courts. Quantifying the exact value of each claimant's loss, however, would be impossible to assess. Therefore Mr. Merricks proposed a method of assessing the damages suffered by each class member. He proposed to make annualized distributions to all class members for the years that they were in the class. This involved working out:

  • the total volume and value of all relevant Mastercard transactions accepted by businesses selling in the UK during the infringement period (the "Volume of Commerce" or "VOC");
  • the extent to which the VOC was subject to the overcharge in respect of Mastercard domestic or EEA multilateral interchange fees; and
  • then calculating the proportion of the overcharge that was passed on to the proposed class.

Having considered Merrick's methodology the CAT dismissed the application for certification. They held that Mr. Merricks had failed to show that he could reasonably estimate damages in the aggregate for the class as a whole on the available data and, in particular, the level of the interchange fees passed on by merchants to consumers. Secondly, the CAT held it was impossible to realistically suggest that this methodology would have produced appropriate compensation for each class member as they would each receive the same for each year.

Court of Appeal

The Mastercard case came before the English Court of Appeal on appeal from the CAT. In a judgement which surprised many the Court of Appeal decided on 16 April 2019 that the CAT had been wrong in rejecting certification of the claim brought against Mastercard. The Court of Appeal used Canadian case law as a guide. This was because the class action regime there was an established part of their legal landscape and it had previously considered a number of issues relevant to this case. The Court held following its review that the CAT had been wrong to demand too much of the proposed class representative at the certification stage and in particular the availability of data which the CAT said the claimant should produce to ground their case.

The CAT should only have asked whether the proceedings had a realistic prospect of success. However, they had embarked upon a detailed consideration of the issues and had in effect conducted a mini-trial.

Significantly, the Court of Appeal went on to find that the CAT had wrongly held that an aggregate damages award had to be distributed on a compensatory basis to each individual claimant. It concluded that the rights of the individual claimants were adequately achieved by the aggregate award itself. In any event the CAT did not need to consider how damages would be distributed at the certification stage.

What Happens Next

Therefore, unless there was any application by Mastercard for the matter to be appealed to the Supreme Court the case was to be returned to the CAT with the direction to reconsider their decision on certification in light of the Court of Appeal's comments.

This is a watershed judgement for the future of class actions in the UK and is likely to be of significant influence in this and other future certification decisions. It sets out clear guidance for the CAT in the way they should look at key considerations/grounds for certification under the UK class action regime. Regardless of the eventual decision in the Merricks case against Mastercard the Court of Appeal's decision will provide clarity relating to the requirements for future certification applications. In particular it can be expected to influence the approach of the CAT in relation to the other pending cases awaiting certification.

The fact this case has been remitted back to the CAT for reconsideration does not necessarily mean that it will achieve certification. Nor is it in any way an indication of the eventual outcome of the trial itself, if the matter does proceed. But the Court of Appeal's decision has laid down clear guidelines as to how the CAT must consider this case for certification and lowered the bar for those wishing to bring class actions and achieve certification. 

Robert Bell is a partner at Bryan Cave leighton Paisner LLP

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 Mondaq.com.

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

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (UK) LLP
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom (UK) LLP
Related Articles
 
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

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 or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq 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 of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions