header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
03 March 2016 / Simon Duncan
Issue: 7689 / Categories: Features , Banking
printer mail-detail

The hungry CAT fallacy

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
001_nlj_7689_duncan

Simon Duncan reports on class actions in the UK & LIBOR/FX claims

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 introduced a private right for consumers to bring proceedings attacking anti-competitive practices by businesses, such as price fixing. This has been effective since 1 October 2015. Will the new law encourage more class actions to be brought against banks for LIBOR and FX price fixing?

Under the pre-existing regime only a “specified body” could bring a claim to the Competition Appeal Tribunal (the CAT) and that claim restricted to goods or services received outside of the claimants’ business. Only one claim was brought in 12 years, it was The Consumers Association v JJB Sports PLC [2009] CAT 3. In that case Which? (the specified body) sought to recover losses suffered by victims of a replica football kit cartel. Only 130 claimants opted in, a fraction of those affected. Each claimant received compensation but the legal costs significantly outweighed this. Which? then stated that it would not bring any more claims.

New regime

The new regime includes any

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Renters’ Rights revolution begins—brace for tribunal chaos

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

NLJ this week: Civil procedure gets a spring overhaul
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
NLJ this week: Why GP complaints are going nowhere
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
NLJ this week: Prenups meet a jurisdictional brick wall
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
NLJ this week: Has Rylands v Fletcher come back from the dead?
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll