header-logo header-logo

17 February 2021 / Lucy Rigby
Issue: 7921 / Categories: Features , Competition , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Merricks: setting the standard

39783
Setting the standard for opt-out collective redress: the Supreme Court’s judgment in Merricks, reported by Lucy Rigby
  • The Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Merricks sets the standard which existing and future opt-out collective actions will be required to meet at the certification stage.
  • This judgment is a seminal one for the country’s young opt-out regime and a ringing endorsement of the principles behind the introduction of the Consumer Rights Act 2015.
  • The judgment is consumer-friendly and it is expected that more opt-out collective actions will now be filed.

What standard ought an opt-out collective claim be required to meet to proceed to trial? That, in essence, was the question before the Supreme Court in Mastercard Incorporated and others v Merricks [2020] UKSC 51, [2020] All ER (D) 67 (Dec). The Supreme Court’s answer, delivered in December of last year, constitutes a resounding endorsement of opt-out redress and the most significant ruling to date for the UK’s fledgling opt-out collective regime for infringements of competition law.

Justice delayed

Many judgments

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll