header-logo header-logo

Merricks v Mastercard: watch this space

20 May 2022 / Eleanor Leedham
Issue: 7979 / Categories: Features , Collective action
printer mail-detail
81950
Eleanor Leedham reports on lessons learned from Mr Merricks’ multi-billion-pound action against Mastercard: what could this mean for other collective proceedings?
  • The Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruled in March that Mr Merricks’s arguments on the domicile date and an amendment application in his ongoing action against Mastercard had been successful.
  • The UK landscape for opt-out actions continues to emerge, with five more opt-out collective claims certified by the CAT since Mr Merricks’s claim began in August 2021.

In March this year, the UK’s Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) determined that around three million deceased persons are automatically part of a class of 46 million on whose behalf Mr Walter Merricks, former head of the Financial Ombudsmen Service, is claiming paid higher prices because of excessive fees charged by Mastercard. Each member of the class could potentially receive around £300, should Mr Merricks succeed in the proceedings.

Getting up to date

The CAT’s judgment on consequential matters (1266/7/7/16 Walter Hugh Merricks v Mastercard Incorporated and Others [2022] CAT 13) follows

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

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll