header-logo header-logo

CAT advice when calculating costs

30 July 2025
Issue: 8127 / Categories: Legal News , Costs , Collective action , Litigation funding , Competition
printer mail-detail
People bringing collective actions should always instruct costs specialists to help them scrutinise their lawyers’ fees, the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) has declared

The CAT gave the guidance while approving two collective actions against Amazon worth nearly £4bn in total. It made instructing independent costs specialists a condition of that approval, adding that this should become the ‘standard approach in collective proceedings’, in Robert Hammond v Amazon.com, Inc & Others; Professor Andreas Stephan v Amazon.com Inc & Others [2025] CAT 42, handed down last week.

Both class representatives, Stephan and Hammond, committed to having a costs professional review their future interim invoices.

David Bailey-Vella, chair of the Association of Costs Lawyers, said: ‘Class representatives are understandably heavily reliant on their lawyers in cases as big and complex as these, but with so much money on the line, the tribunal recognised the importance of them having independent advice to ensure that their costs—which ultimately come out of the class’s damages in the event of success—are rigorously policed.

‘Costs lawyers are the people to do this.’

Stephan is bringing a £2.7bn opt-out claim, arguing Amazon abused its dominant position when supplying marketplace services to third-party sellers. The funder is providing backing of up to £33m. Hammond’s £1bn claim, which has a litigation budget of £20m, alleges Amazon used its ‘Buy Box’ to suppress competition. Amazon disputes the allegations.

The CAT panel, chaired by Mr Justice Roth, noted Stephan’s funding agreement provided he would ‘review’ invoices and, at the reasonable request of the funder, seek to have them assessed.

‘We recognise that these provisions provide some protection against unreasonable fees,’ it said. ‘However, we think it is important that [Stephan], independently, should be in a position to subject claims for costs to proper scrutiny. The funder’s interests are not identical to those of the class because, if the action results in recovery for the class, the funder’s expenditure on costs will be reimbursed out of the sum recovered, potentially at the expense of the class.’

The CAT said it was similarly ‘concerned that there should be effective control of costs’ in Hammond’s case.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Fieldfisher Ireland LLP—Dermot McEvoy

Fieldfisher Ireland LLP—Dermot McEvoy

Dublin disputes team announces strategic partner appointment

DWF—four appointments

DWF—four appointments

Firm strengthens in-house advocacy with four new pupil appointments

Shakespeare Martineau—Fergus Spowart & Fin Campbell

Shakespeare Martineau—Fergus Spowart & Fin Campbell

Scottish practice expands with new solicitor hire and trainee qualification

NEWS
MPs have expressed disappointment after the government confirmed it will not consider updating the parental leave system until at least 2027
In July, the Supreme Court quashed the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, ruling that trial judges had wrongly directed juries to treat profit-motivated Libor submissions as inherently dishonest. In this week’s NLJ, David Stern and James Fletcher of 5 St Andrew’s Hill reflect on the decision
Lord Neuberger, former president of the Supreme Court, shares his views on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in this week's NLJ with William Raven
Sophie Wells, childcare law paralegal at Reading Borough Council, has scooped Paralegal of the Year at the National Paralegal Awards, held this week in Birmingham
In this week's issue of NLJ, Emma Brunning and Dharshica Thanarajasingham of Birketts unpack the high-conflict financial remedy case TF v SF [2025] EWHC 1659 (Fam). The husband’s conduct—described by the judge as a ‘masterclass in gaslighting’—included hiding a £9.5m deferred payment from the sale of a port acquired post-separation. Despite his claims that the port was non-matrimonial, the court found its value rooted in marital assets and efforts
back-to-top-scroll