header-logo header-logo

Mastercard class action could end with claimant & funder at odds

11 December 2024
Issue: 8098 / Categories: Legal News , Collective action , Competition , Compensation , Litigation funding
printer mail-detail
Former financial services ombudsman Walter Merricks’ class action against Mastercard has entered unprecedented territory after the litigation funder opposed a potential settlement.

The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) will decide whether to approve the settlement, which allows Mastercard customers to recover £40-£50 each, at a short hearing either before the end of this month or in early 2025.

Merricks was acting as class representative on behalf of 46 million customers in a claim previously valued at more than £16bn against Mastercard over multilateral interchange fees. He said he believes the settlement ‘will deliver meaningful compensation to class members’.

However, funder Innsworth Capital said last week it will challenge the settlement, which it says was struck without its agreement and is ‘both too low and premature’. In a statement, it accused Merricks and his solicitor, Willkie Farr & Gallagher partner Boris Bronfentrinker, of having rushed to settle for a reported £200m.

Bronfentrinker, representing Merricks, retorted that Innsworth’s accusation was ‘frankly absurd’.

‘To the contrary, based on the actual evidence that has now come to light and that was not previously publicly available, the realistic value of the claim has now become much clearer,’ he said.

‘This will all be set out in the application and supporting evidence that will be filed with the tribunal.’ Bronfentrinker accused Innsworth of wanting Merricks to ‘continue with risky litigation that could result in UK consumers recovering significantly less, or even nothing—simply because Innsworth is unhappy that the settlement that has now been agreed may not allow it to recover the hundreds of millions it considers it should receive.’

Since its launch in 2016, the mammoth claim has involved numerous hearings before the CAT, multiple appeals before the Court of Appeal, and a visit to the Supreme Court. It was the first to be granted an ‘opt-out’ collective proceedings order, in 2021.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Declan Goodwin & Elinor Owen

Clarke Willmott—Declan Goodwin & Elinor Owen

Corporate and commercial teams in Cardiff boosted by dual partner hire

Hill Dickinson—Joz Coetzer & Marc Naidoo

Hill Dickinson—Joz Coetzer & Marc Naidoo

London hires to lead UK launch of international finance team

Switalskis—11 promotions

Switalskis—11 promotions

Firm marks start of year with firmwide promotions round

NEWS
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The next generation is inheriting more than assets—it is inheriting complexity. Writing in NLJ this week, experts from Penningtons Manches Cooper chart how global mobility, blended families and evolving values are reshaping private wealth advice
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming sport, from recruitment and training to officiating and fan engagement. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dr Ian Blackshaw of Valloni Attorneys at Law explains how AI now influences everything from injury prevention to tactical decisions, with clubs using tools such as ‘TacticAI’ to gain competitive edges
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll