header-logo header-logo

17 June 2026
Issue: 8166 / Categories: Legal News , Litigation funding , Competition , Collective action , Costs
printer mail-detail

Merricks funder loses settlement challenge

Litigation funder Innsworth Capital has lost its case over its share of the £200m settlement in former financial ombudsman Walter Merricks’ lengthy opt-out collective action against Mastercard

Merricks’ claim, launched in 2016, was initially valued at about £14bn but eventually settled for £200m. Innsworth argued for equal division, giving potential claimants £4.50 with the unclaimed amount (in practice, all of it) going to the funder.

However, the High Court held the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) was correct to allocate about £68m to Innsworth, representing its costs in the case plus a profit of about £22m, in R (on the application of Innsworth Capital) v CAT [2026] EWHC 1393 (Admin).

Merricks hailed the result ‘a complete vindication’. 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys—Maggie Kwok & George Weston

Harneys senior leadership appointments

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths—Keith Browne & Jim Jordan

Freeths strengthens London Construction and Engineering practice with two strategic senior hires

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins—Laura Moss

Anthony Collins announces strategic hire to deepen skills base in the social business sector

NEWS
Existing defamation law can respond to AI ‘hallucinations’, but allocating responsibility will prove harder where outputs reach users without human intervention
The High Court has upheld a rare successful serious-irregularity challenge after an arbitrator relied on an implied term neither party had advanced
Thirty years after The Future of Law shook a profession still using fax machines, its central forecast looks increasingly less like prophecy and more like description
More than 100 teams from the legal and financial services sectors competed in five sports at the 51st Law Society RFC Festival of Sport earlier this month
Part-time status need only be an effective cause of less favourable treatment, rather than the sole cause, the Supreme Court has held in Augustine v Data Cars
back-to-top-scroll