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

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Head of corporate promoted to director

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Firm strengthens international arbitration team with key London hire

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

FCA contentious financial regulation lawyer joins the team as of counsel

NEWS
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ
The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024—once heralded as a breakthrough—has instead plunged leaseholders into confusion, warns Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke in this week’s NLJ
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now confirmed that offering a disabled employee a trial period in an alternative role can itself be a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010: in this week's NLJ, Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve analyses the evolving case law
Caroline Shea KC and Richard Miller of Falcon Chambers examine the growing judicial focus on 'cynical breach' in restrictive covenant cases, in this week's issue of NLJ
Ian Gascoigne of LexisNexis dissects the uneasy balance between open justice and confidentiality in England’s civil courts, in this week's NLJ. From public hearings to super-injunctions, he identifies five tiers of privacy—from fully open proceedings to entirely secret ones—showing how a patchwork of exceptions has evolved without clear design
back-to-top-scroll