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

DWF—19 appointments

DWF—19 appointments

Belfast team bolstered by three senior hires and 16 further appointments

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Firm strengthens leveraged finance team with London partner hire

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Double hire marks launch of family team in Leeds

NEWS
Charlie Mercer and Astrid Gillam of Stewarts crunch the numbers on civil fraud claims in the English courts, in this week's NLJ. New data shows civil fraud claims rising steadily since 2014, with the King’s Bench Division overtaking the Commercial Court as the forum of choice for lower-value disputes
Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre makes the case for ‘General Practice Pro Bono’—using core legal skills to deliver life-changing support, without the need for niche expertise—in this week's NLJ
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve reports on Haynes v Thomson, the first judicial application of the Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland ruling in a discrimination claim, in this week's NLJ
Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Rylatt and Robyn Laye of Anthony Gold Solicitors examine recent international relocation cases where allegations of domestic abuse shaped outcomes
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement
back-to-top-scroll