header-logo header-logo

JJB to pay fans over football shirt scam

17 January 2008
Issue: 7304 / Categories: Legal News , Regulatory , Competition
printer mail-detail

News

The legal battle between sports chain JJB Sports and Which? about overpriced football shirts has been settled out of court, with the retailer promising to return cash to consumers who were overcharged.

Fans who paid up to £39.99 for certain England and Manchester United football shirts during specific periods in 2000 or 2001 and joined the Which? case against JJB Sports will get £20 each. Those who bought affected shirts but didn’t join the case can claim £10.

JJB was part of a cartel of seven companies fined more than £16m in 2003 for fixing the price of the football shirts. Which? used its powers under the Enterprise Act 2002 to launch an action for damages.

Tom Morrison, an associate at Rollits, says JJB was always going to be in a weak position following the earlier finding of anti-competitive behaviour.
“In light of this, it seems that JJB has decided to settle rather than risking a dangerous test case with a potentially worse outcome which may set a precedent for the future.”

The Office of Fair Trading, he says, has indicated that it will now focus on high-profile competition law cases of economic significance and therefore wishes to reduce the pressure on the enforcement system by encouraging similar class actions in the future.

Issue: 7304 / Categories: Legal News , Regulatory , Competition
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll